WLC 2023 : ROUND 20: 2023 Mar 11

place holder

LAST ROUND FOR WLC 2023.
GOOD LUCK TO ALL PARTICIPANTS

Jerome Fandor

2023-03-09 09:24:34 UTC

Post by NN
place holder
LAST ROUND FOR WLC 2023.
GOOD LUCK TO ALL PARTICIPANTS

Cheers NN.

I'll submit all the entries on one email

Elton:
14 11 34 47 10 26 8 19 13 20 52 56 58 55 45 25 2 42 9 37 27 23 3 46

Jerome:
53 31 40 5 13 12 29 41 2 21 8 1 23 59 37 55 17 34 47 43 3 11 7 19

Jinks
32 7 24 44 29 53 6 50 5 31 49 28 16 39 35 48 57 30 33 22 45 36 59 41

Good luck everyone

:-)
Jerome

王乾懿 Wang Qianyi (Nan)

2023-03-09 13:00:32 UTC

I am so nervous that I can't make any prediction at the moment!~~I may end with a zero to ten, which is very likely to happen....
Nan

2023-03-11 14:15:01 UTC

Random : [45, 5, 53, 49, 50, 52, 48, 39, 6, 15, 33, 34, 9, 29, 31, 17, 10, 21, 16, 58, 4, 28, 46, 25]

Nigel : [5, 53, 49, 50, 52, 48, 39, 6, 15, 33, 34, 9, 29, 31, 17, 10, 21, 16, 58, 4, 28, 46, 25, 45]

2023-03-11 14:35:25 UTC

NN: [5, 20, 49, 11, 53, 50, 23, 16, 57, 44, 15, 3, 17, 33, 48, 22, 31, 34, 4, 39, 47, 27, 9, 52]

王乾懿 Wang Qianyi (Nan)

2023-03-11 16:22:33 UTC

nan 13 57 16 50 49 27 9 37 55 17 52 2 19 8 47 34 11 53 26 5 10 14 41 20
leela 53 26 5 10 14 27 9 37 55 17 52 2 19 8 47 34 11 41 20 29 12 40 13 57
az 41 20 29 12 40 27 9 37 55 17 52 2 19 8 47 34 11 13 57 16 50 49 53 26

END!

2023-03-12 00:15:48 UTC

Result = [1, 19, 27, 28, 41, 50] + bonus= 49

RANDOM caught: {50, 28} +b ==> score: 23 [20, 3]
NIGEL caught: {50, 28} +b ==> score: 25 [21, 4]
NN caught: {50, 27} +b ==> score: 22 [19, 3]
Nan caught: {27, 41, 50, 19} +b ==> score: 54 [21, 19, 12, 2]
Leela caught: {27, 41, 19} ==> score: 38 [19, 12, 7]
Alphazero caught: {27, 41, 50, 19} +b ==> score: 59 [24, 19, 12, 4]
Elton caught: {27, 19} ==> score: 21 [17, 4]
Jerome caught: {1, 19, 41} ==> score: 31 [17, 13, 1]
Jinks caught: {41, 50, 28} +b ==> score: 31 [17, 13, 1]
--------------------

Nan [36, 18, 33, 55, 24, 38, 61, 32, 26, 25, 31, 19, 2, 44, 25, 27, 52, 27, 50, 54] = 679
Jerome [23, 10, 2, 24, 37, 29, 37, 56, 57, 48, 28, 60, 5, 15, 69, 24, 16, 0, 79, 31] = 650
NN [23, 59, 72, 79, 28, 40, 45, 0, 9, 52, 40, 14, 13, 38, 19, 20, 29, 27, 19, 22] = 648
Alphazero [29, 1, 16, 49, 24, 20, 62, 29, 15, 20, 30, 19, 2, 50, 24, 19, 28, 54, 35, 59] = 585
Leela [28, 4, 43, 30, 19, 48, 64, 30, 20, 22, 33, 19, 4, 34, 32, 35, 20, 0, 61, 38] = 584
Random [28, 14, 47, 67, 31, 35, 43, 40, 40, 7, 22, 2, 45, 31, 26, 31, 25, 5, 12, 23] = 574
Elton [56, 51, 15, 23, 12, 38, 18, 6, 25, 17, 17, 51, 9, 31, 45, 18, 54, 40, 22, 21] = 569
Jinks [39, 11, 12, 54, 39, 68, 59, 51, 21, 13, 21, 21, 28, 38, 16, 0, 13, 0, 28, 31] = 563
Nigel [32, 17, 51, 46, 10, 39, 46, 43, 19, 8, 24, 3, 48, 33, 28, 33, 27, 6, 13, 25] = 551

Congratulations Nan you win WLC 2023 with a wide margin.
Well done to Jerome for coming second. You picked some good winners.
Well done to NN for coming third, maybe next year will be his year

Thanks to everyone else involved.

王乾懿 Wang Qianyi (Nan)

2023-03-12 01:07:01 UTC

Thank you NN for hosting a wonderful WLC 2023 and all participants!
Nan

Jerome Fandor

2023-03-12 09:35:09 UTC

Post by çä¹¾æ¿ Wang Qianyi (Nan)
Thank you NN for hosting a wonderful WLC 2023 and all participants!
Nan

Thank you NN for hosting and congratulations to Nan for winning.

It went down to the wire :-)

Jerome

王乾懿 Wang Qianyi (Nan)

2023-03-12 10:36:51 UTC

在 2023年3月12日星期日 UTC+8 17:34:17，<Jerome Fandor> 写道：

Post by Jerome Fandor

Post by çä¹¾æ¿ Wang Qianyi (Nan)
Thank you NN for hosting a wonderful WLC 2023 and all participants!
Nan

Thank you NN for hosting and congratulations to Nan for winning.
It went down to the wire :-)
Jerome

I will take a 5-day trip to West Lake to celebrate my improvement of WLC performance.

Nan

nigel

2023-03-13 12:24:18 UTC

Thank you for running this so well.

Interesting how the scores of the two random entries differed.

Evil Nigel

Post by NN
Result = [1, 19, 27, 28, 41, 50] + bonus= 49
RANDOM caught: {50, 28} +b ==> score: 23 [20, 3]
NIGEL caught: {50, 28} +b ==> score: 25 [21, 4]
NN caught: {50, 27} +b ==> score: 22 [19, 3]
Nan caught: {27, 41, 50, 19} +b ==> score: 54 [21, 19, 12, 2]
Leela caught: {27, 41, 19} ==> score: 38 [19, 12, 7]
Alphazero caught: {27, 41, 50, 19} +b ==> score: 59 [24, 19, 12, 4]
Elton caught: {27, 19} ==> score: 21 [17, 4]
Jerome caught: {1, 19, 41} ==> score: 31 [17, 13, 1]
Jinks caught: {41, 50, 28} +b ==> score: 31 [17, 13, 1]
--------------------
Nan [36, 18, 33, 55, 24, 38, 61, 32, 26, 25, 31, 19, 2, 44, 25, 27, 52, 27, 50, 54] = 679
Jerome [23, 10, 2, 24, 37, 29, 37, 56, 57, 48, 28, 60, 5, 15, 69, 24, 16, 0, 79, 31] = 650
NN [23, 59, 72, 79, 28, 40, 45, 0, 9, 52, 40, 14, 13, 38, 19, 20, 29, 27, 19, 22] = 648
Alphazero [29, 1, 16, 49, 24, 20, 62, 29, 15, 20, 30, 19, 2, 50, 24, 19, 28, 54, 35, 59] = 585
Leela [28, 4, 43, 30, 19, 48, 64, 30, 20, 22, 33, 19, 4, 34, 32, 35, 20, 0, 61, 38] = 584
Random [28, 14, 47, 67, 31, 35, 43, 40, 40, 7, 22, 2, 45, 31, 26, 31, 25, 5, 12, 23] = 574
Elton [56, 51, 15, 23, 12, 38, 18, 6, 25, 17, 17, 51, 9, 31, 45, 18, 54, 40, 22, 21] = 569
Jinks [39, 11, 12, 54, 39, 68, 59, 51, 21, 13, 21, 21, 28, 38, 16, 0, 13, 0, 28, 31] = 563
Nigel [32, 17, 51, 46, 10, 39, 46, 43, 19, 8, 24, 3, 48, 33, 28, 33, 27, 6, 13, 25] = 551
Congratulations Nan you win WLC 2023 with a wide margin.
Well done to Jerome for coming second. You picked some good winners.
Well done to NN for coming third, maybe next year will be his year
Thanks to everyone else involved.

王乾懿 Wang Qianyi (Nan)

2023-03-13 15:26:10 UTC

In my proposal, I propose 10 extra rounds of competition, with each participant having three groups, and only points will be awarded to the group with the best performance.
Nan

2023-03-13 23:46:03 UTC

Post by nigel
Thank you for running this so well.
Interesting how the scores of the two random entries differed.
Evil Nigel

Result = [1, 19, 27, 28, 41, 50] + bonus= 49
RANDOM caught: {50, 28} +b ==> score: 23 [20, 3]
NIGEL caught: {50, 28} +b ==> score: 25 [21, 4]
NN caught: {50, 27} +b ==> score: 22 [19, 3]
Nan caught: {27, 41, 50, 19} +b ==> score: 54 [21, 19, 12, 2]
Leela caught: {27, 41, 19} ==> score: 38 [19, 12, 7]
Alphazero caught: {27, 41, 50, 19} +b ==> score: 59 [24, 19, 12, 4]
Elton caught: {27, 19} ==> score: 21 [17, 4]
Jerome caught: {1, 19, 41} ==> score: 31 [17, 13, 1]
Jinks caught: {41, 50, 28} +b ==> score: 31 [17, 13, 1]
--------------------
Nan [36, 18, 33, 55, 24, 38, 61, 32, 26, 25, 31, 19, 2, 44, 25, 27, 52, 27, 50, 54] = 679
Jerome [23, 10, 2, 24, 37, 29, 37, 56, 57, 48, 28, 60, 5, 15, 69, 24, 16, 0, 79, 31] = 650
NN [23, 59, 72, 79, 28, 40, 45, 0, 9, 52, 40, 14, 13, 38, 19, 20, 29, 27, 19, 22] = 648
Alphazero [29, 1, 16, 49, 24, 20, 62, 29, 15, 20, 30, 19, 2, 50, 24, 19, 28, 54, 35, 59] = 585
Leela [28, 4, 43, 30, 19, 48, 64, 30, 20, 22, 33, 19, 4, 34, 32, 35, 20, 0, 61, 38] = 584
Random [28, 14, 47, 67, 31, 35, 43, 40, 40, 7, 22, 2, 45, 31, 26, 31, 25, 5, 12, 23] = 574
Elton [56, 51, 15, 23, 12, 38, 18, 6, 25, 17, 17, 51, 9, 31, 45, 18, 54, 40, 22, 21] = 569
Jinks [39, 11, 12, 54, 39, 68, 59, 51, 21, 13, 21, 21, 28, 38, 16, 0, 13, 0, 28, 31] = 563
Nigel [32, 17, 51, 46, 10, 39, 46, 43, 19, 8, 24, 3, 48, 33, 28, 33, 27, 6, 13, 25] = 551
Congratulations Nan you win WLC 2023 with a wide margin.
Well done to Jerome for coming second. You picked some good winners.
Well done to NN for coming third, maybe next year will be his year
Thanks to everyone else involved.

I was disappointed your strategy failed. I assumed the only time it would
go wrong is when random picked a number who's position was 1st in the list.
( So for you that number would appear at the end of the list )
It happenned once which would be chance. But more than twice is
unlucky.

Marmaduke Jinks

2023-03-14 12:43:51 UTC

Post by NN

Post by nigel
Thank you for running this so well.
Interesting how the scores of the two random entries differed.
Evil Nigel

Result = [1, 19, 27, 28, 41, 50] + bonus= 49
RANDOM caught: {50, 28} +b ==> score: 23 [20, 3]
NIGEL caught: {50, 28} +b ==> score: 25 [21, 4]
NN caught: {50, 27} +b ==> score: 22 [19, 3]
Nan caught: {27, 41, 50, 19} +b ==> score: 54 [21, 19, 12, 2]
Leela caught: {27, 41, 19} ==> score: 38 [19, 12, 7]
Alphazero caught: {27, 41, 50, 19} +b ==> score: 59 [24, 19, 12, 4]
Elton caught: {27, 19} ==> score: 21 [17, 4]
Jerome caught: {1, 19, 41} ==> score: 31 [17, 13, 1]
Jinks caught: {41, 50, 28} +b ==> score: 31 [17, 13, 1]
--------------------
Nan [36, 18, 33, 55, 24, 38, 61, 32, 26, 25, 31, 19, 2, 44, 25, 27, 52,
27, 50, 54] = 679
Jerome [23, 10, 2, 24, 37, 29, 37, 56, 57, 48, 28, 60, 5, 15, 69, 24,
16, 0, 79, 31] = 650
NN [23, 59, 72, 79, 28, 40, 45, 0, 9, 52, 40, 14, 13, 38, 19, 20, 29,
27, 19, 22] = 648
Alphazero [29, 1, 16, 49, 24, 20, 62, 29, 15, 20, 30, 19, 2, 50, 24,
19, 28, 54, 35, 59] = 585
Leela [28, 4, 43, 30, 19, 48, 64, 30, 20, 22, 33, 19, 4, 34, 32, 35,
20, 0, 61, 38] = 584
Random [28, 14, 47, 67, 31, 35, 43, 40, 40, 7, 22, 2, 45, 31, 26, 31,
25, 5, 12, 23] = 574
Elton [56, 51, 15, 23, 12, 38, 18, 6, 25, 17, 17, 51, 9, 31, 45, 18,
54, 40, 22, 21] = 569
Jinks [39, 11, 12, 54, 39, 68, 59, 51, 21, 13, 21, 21, 28, 38, 16, 0,
13, 0, 28, 31] = 563
Nigel [32, 17, 51, 46, 10, 39, 46, 43, 19, 8, 24, 3, 48, 33, 28, 33,
27, 6, 13, 25] = 551
Congratulations Nan you win WLC 2023 with a wide margin.
Well done to Jerome for coming second. You picked some good winners.
Well done to NN for coming third, maybe next year will be his year
Thanks to everyone else involved.

Jerome's strategy, like last time, was to take all the Prime and Fibonacci
numbers (plus 2 randoms) up to 59 and sort them by an excel random number.
No
favourites per se.

I like the Prime and Fibonacci's as a set/group. I suspect that keeping the
same 24 numbers and then dropping one (and adding a new one) if it's won
might produce a similar result.

Jink's strategy was to take the last 4 draws (add in a number or two to make
it to 24) and then randomly sort it. That "variable" did win one year, but
crashed badly this.

Elton took the next 24 after the Jink's set.

Thanks again for a great compie :-)

MJ
Jerome's set: 1 2 3 5 7 8 11 13 17 19 21 23 29 31 34 37 41 43 47 53 55 59

2023-03-16 12:45:16 UTC

For the curious,

Random used random python generator. It took the 1st sequence of 24 numbers generated without collisions.

I used the module "secrets". And the only difference with random was that I picked evenly from each decade.

Initially it was working well. After round 10 I did squeeze the sets to reduce the number to choose from. This is where it gets interesting ; I did pick good numbers but I didnt gain any advantage. Neither for me or Random

Random has done well in every contest and remains the best strategy.

王乾懿 Wang Qianyi (Nan)

2023-03-16 14:45:54 UTC

Since Nan performed poorly in the first 10 rounds of releasing three sets of numbers, I adopted the number reorganization system, which resulted in better predictions in the subsequent rounds.

In this system, there is no concept of weight for numbers, nor does it select numbers; it reorganizes, picks, and merges numbers through wheeling.

Firstly, I select three combinations of other predictors that have been published by other better performers, and programmatically find numbers that repeat two or more times.

Keeping these numbers, I added the remaining numbers plus the remaining one-time numbers in a certain group of numbers, and set it as x.

As a result of several observations, I determined that x does not provide the best performance, so I fine-tuned the algorithm again.

After arranging the numbers completely in reverse order, let x remove the numbers in the 15-21 position decisively, and only keep the numbers in the 1-14 and 22-24 positions, and set it to y.

Since seven numbers were deleted, I took the remaining seven numbers directly from the beginning of either two groups. If a number appears twice, I will take the numbers in positions 8-12 in turn until there are 24 completely different numbers.

The number processed in this way shows a difference of more than 20 points compared with the original 3 groups of numbers (numbers of other predictors) through repeated comparison, number deletion and superimposition of the beginning number, and therefore is considered to be a better prediction model.

Nan

王乾懿 Wang Qianyi (Nan)

2023-03-16 14:49:46 UTC

Since Nan performed poorly in the first 10 rounds of releasing three sets of numbers, I adopted the number reorganization system, which resulted in better predictions in the subsequent rounds.

In this system, there is no concept of weight for numbers, nor does it select numbers; it reorganizes, picks, and merges numbers through wheeling.

Firstly, I select three combinations of other predictors that have been published by other better performers, and programmatically find numbers that repeat two or more times.

Keeping these numbers, I obtained the final numbers plus the remaining one-time numbers in a certain group of numbers, and set it as x.

As a result of several observations, I determined that x does not provide the best performance, so I fine-tuned the algorithm again.

After arranging the numbers (x) completely in reverse order, remove x's numbers in the 15-21 position decisively, and only keep the numbers in the 1st-14th and 22nd-24th positions, and set it to y.

Since seven numbers were deleted, I took the remaining seven numbers directly from the beginning of either two groups. If a number appears twice, I will take the numbers in the 8th-12nd positions, until there are 24 completely different numbers.

The number processed in this way shows a score difference of more than 15-20 points compared with the original 3 groups of numbers (numbers of other predictors) through repeated comparison, number deletion and superimposition of the beginning number, and therefore is considered to be a better prediction model so far.

Nan

王乾懿 Wang Qianyi (Nan)

2023-03-16 14:54:00 UTC

I hold no objection to test this model once again and do not object any else to test my model, which has been published.
If you are interested in my model or have any questions, don't hesitate to ask me, or hold new rounds for verification.
I am so far confident that my model is performing systematically and logically but I would be delighted to see anyone who makes further improvements to outweigh my model and achieve an even better result (the average score of each round to be improved to more than 35 points within 10-20 rounds).
Nan

Jerome Fandor

2023-03-16 18:28:46 UTC

"??? Wang Qianyi (Nan)" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message news:19b59fa0-0260-4bb9-8c3e-***@googlegroups.com...
I hold no objection to test this model once again and do not object any else
to test my model, which has been published.
If you are interested in my model or have any questions, don't hesitate to
ask me, or hold new rounds for verification.
I am so far confident that my model is performing systematically and
logically but I would be delighted to see anyone who makes further
improvements to outweigh my model and achieve an even better result (the
average score of each round to be improved to more than 35 points within
10-20 rounds).
Nan

~~~~

Always fascinating to hear of other strategies :-)

Jerome/MJ

2023-03-17 23:01:03 UTC

Post by çä¹¾æ¿ Wang Qianyi (Nan)
I hold no objection to test this model once again and do not object any else to test my model, which has been published.
If you are interested in my model or have any questions, don't hesitate to ask me, or hold new rounds for verification.
I am so far confident that my model is performing systematically and logically but I would be delighted to see anyone who makes further improvements to outweigh my model and achieve an even better result (the average score of each round to be improved to more than 35 points within 10-20 rounds).
Nan

Lets do 10 rounds starting 1st April which falls on a saturday.

Jerome Fandor

2023-03-18 13:47:19 UTC

Post by çä¹¾æ¿ Wang Qianyi (Nan)
I hold no objection to test this model once again and do not object any
else to test my model, which has been published.
If you are interested in my model or have any questions, don't hesitate to
ask me, or hold new rounds for verification.
I am so far confident that my model is performing systematically and
logically but I would be delighted to see anyone who makes further
improvements to outweigh my model and achieve an even better result (the
average score of each round to be improved to more than 35 points within
10-20 rounds).
Nan

Lets do 10 rounds starting 1st April which falls on a saturday.

~~~

So will this be 24 selections again?

JF

2023-03-19 19:45:15 UTC

Post by NN

Post by çä¹¾æ¿ Wang Qianyi (Nan)
I hold no objection to test this model once again and do not object any
else to test my model, which has been published.
If you are interested in my model or have any questions, don't hesitate to
ask me, or hold new rounds for verification.
I am so far confident that my model is performing systematically and
logically but I would be delighted to see anyone who makes further
improvements to outweigh my model and achieve an even better result (the
average score of each round to be improved to more than 35 points within
10-20 rounds).
Nan

Lets do 10 rounds starting 1st April which falls on a saturday.
~~~
So will this be 24 selections again?
JF

i am okay with 24 if thats the concensus. after all we are just testing strategies.

I shall resist the temptation to tweek as that was my undoing and i am interested
to see what happens

王乾懿 Wang Qianyi (Nan)

2023-03-22 04:40:02 UTC

Maybe Chat GDP can help

王乾懿 Wang Qianyi (Nan)

2023-03-22 04:48:02 UTC

Here is ChatGDP's analysis:

The given sets represent the scores of different players or algorithms, with each set containing 20 data points. The total score for each set is provided as well. To describe the overall trend of these sets, we can compare their total scores and examine the distribution of scores within each set.

Total Scores (in descending order):

Nan: 679
Jerome: 650
NN: 648
Alphazero: 585
Leela: 584
Random: 574
Elton: 569
Jinks: 563
Nigel: 551
The overall trend suggests that Nan has the highest total score, followed by Jerome, NN, Alphazero, Leela, Random, Elton, Jinks, and finally, Nigel.

Upon examining the scores within each set, we can observe the following trends:

The scores seem to be dispersed across a wide range, with some sets having scores close to 0 and others having scores above 60.
Most sets have a mix of low and high scores, indicating variability in performance across the 20 data points.
Some sets, such as Nan, Alphazero, and Leela, have a relatively balanced distribution of scores, while others, like Jerome, NN, and Nigel, have a more uneven distribution, with a few particularly high or low scores.
In summary, the overall trend shows a range of total scores among the sets, with Nan having the highest and Nigel the lowest. The distribution of scores within each set varies, with some sets displaying a more balanced distribution and others showing more uneven performance.

Predicting future performance based solely on past data can be challenging, as many factors can influence future outcomes. However, we can attempt to make an informed prediction by considering the past performance in the given sets.

Based on the total scores, Nan has the highest score, which might suggest that it has performed consistently well in the past. However, it is essential to consider the distribution of the scores within the set as well.

Looking at the distribution of scores in each set, we can make the following observations:

Nan has a relatively balanced distribution of scores, with many scores in the 30s and above.
Jerome has a more uneven distribution, but with some high scores such as 69 and 79.
NN has a mix of low and high scores, with some particularly high scores like 72 and 79.
Taking both the total scores and the distribution of scores into account, Nan seems to have the most consistent performance and might be considered more likely to win in the future.

However, it is important to note that this prediction is based solely on the given data and does not account for any external factors that may influence future performance. It is also worth considering that other sets, like Jerome and NN, have had occasional high scores and could potentially outperform Nan in future events if they can maintain those high scores consistently.

王乾懿 Wang Qianyi (Nan)

2023-03-22 13:47:11 UTC

Re-summary:
The text describes a number prediction system used to improve the performance of an initial approach that had been unsuccessful. The system, called the number reorganization system, involves selecting and reorganizing numbers rather than assigning weights or choosing specific numbers. Here is a simplified explanation of the process:

Choose three sets of numbers from better-performing predictors.
Identify numbers that appear at least twice in these sets.
Combine the frequently occurring numbers with a selected group of unique numbers to create a new set, called "x."
Observe that "x" doesn't yield optimal results, so modify the algorithm.
Rearrange the numbers in "x" in reverse order, remove certain numbers, and keep others to create a new set, called "y." ( modify the set of numbers "x" by removing the numbers in positions 15 to 21 and retaining only the numbers in positions 1 to 14 and 22 to 24. This process narrows down the original set of numbers, eliminating some elements to improve the prediction model.)
Fill in the gaps in "y" by selecting additional numbers from the original groups, avoiding duplicates.
The final set of numbers, created through comparison, deletion, and overlaying, results in a significantly improved prediction model, showing a 15-20 point difference compared to the initial three sets of numbers.

nigel

2023-05-25 12:37:38 UTC

Hi MJ,

I understand you've experimented quite a bit with numbers of past draws
and how likely they are to contain all the balls drawn in the next draw.

Have you ever tried looking at it from a different angle, studying
combinations to see whether some are more likely to lead to repeat
numbers than others?

Nigel

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
Jink's strategy was to take the last 4 draws (add in a number or two to make
it to 24) and then randomly sort it. That "variable" did win one year, but
crashed badly this.

Marmaduke Jinks

2023-05-30 11:54:44 UTC

Hi Nigel

I haven't looked at combinations in that way. I'm sort of drifting away
from looking at the Lotto too deeply.

My last big idea was to look at the Lotto like it was a Connect 4 board
(10*6 though). Plot the last 4 or 5 draws on it and see where the missing
hole was. I won some money using the Hotpicks Pick 2 - (combinations here
though like you said?). Then the next time I wasn't so sure and did my 11
as Hotpick1s and won £6 but a loss overall.

Having downloaded the Nick Koutras spreadsheet and adapted it for the 6/59
game this tells me what pairs are low. But I have the attention span of a
gnat these days.

The Nick spreadsheet shows these as only having come up once (6/59 game)
43.50
2.26
4.25
24.54
6.18
33.38
21.55
53.55
10.43
28.28
19.25
15.28
24.59
2.24

But the top combo 2&54 has come up 18 times and we've had 797 draws of the
6/59 game.

Is there any mileage in it?

MJ

Post by nigel
Hi MJ,
I understand you've experimented quite a bit with numbers of past draws
and how likely they are to contain all the balls drawn in the next draw.
Have you ever tried looking at it from a different angle, studying
combinations to see whether some are more likely to lead to repeat numbers
than others?
Nigel

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
Jink's strategy was to take the last 4 draws (add in a number or two to make
it to 24) and then randomly sort it. That "variable" did win one year, but
crashed badly this.

nigel

2023-05-31 12:29:29 UTC

Hi MJ,

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
Hi Nigel
I haven't looked at combinations in that way. I'm sort of drifting away
from looking at the Lotto too deeply.
My last big idea was to look at the Lotto like it was a Connect 4 board
(10*6 though). Plot the last 4 or 5 draws on it and see where the missing
hole was. I won some money using the Hotpicks Pick 2 - (combinations here
though like you said?). Then the next time I wasn't so sure and did my 11
as Hotpick1s and won £6 but a loss overall.
Having downloaded the Nick Koutras spreadsheet and adapted it for the 6/59
game this tells me what pairs are low. But I have the attention span of a
gnat these days.
The Nick spreadsheet shows these as only having come up once (6/59 game)
43.50
2.26
4.25
24.54
6.18
33.38
21.55
53.55
10.43
28.28

I must be misunderstanding - I thought you meant pairs in the same draw.

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
19.25
15.28
24.59
2.24

Most of those aren't close to totalling 60, whereas 2&54 are. Do other
popular pairs sum to close to 60?

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
But the top combo 2&54 has come up 18 times and we've had 797 draws of the
6/59 game.
Is there any mileage in it?
MJ

Given that the new lottery operators are allegedly planning to junk 6/59
and go back to 6/49, probably not :-(

Nigel

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
Jink's strategy was to take the last 4 draws (add in a number or two to make
it to 24) and then randomly sort it. That "variable" did win one year, but
crashed badly this.

Marmaduke Jinks

2023-06-01 09:00:21 UTC

Post by nigel
Hi MJ,

I must be misunderstanding - I thought you meant pairs in the same draw.

No that's overall

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
19.25
15.28
24.59
2.24

Most of those aren't close to totalling 60, whereas 2&54 are. Do other
popular pairs sum to close to 60?

No. The 60 is 59 numbers and a space, it's not a sum. Imagine a mix of
Connect 4 and Battleships. Play where there are gaps. This newsgroup
doesn't do Binaries otherwise I'd upload a picture. The gaps, where a
Connect 4 counter might have gone, gave 19 and 33 last night. The player
could have made a Hotpicks2 success with that last night.

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
But the top combo 2&54 has come up 18 times and we've had 797 draws of
the 6/59 game.
Is there any mileage in it?
MJ

Given that the new lottery operators are allegedly planning to junk 6/59
and go back to 6/49, probably not :-(

I'd not heard that.

Post by nigel
Nigel

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
Jink's strategy was to take the last 4 draws (add in a number or two to make
it to 24) and then randomly sort it. That "variable" did win one year, but
crashed badly this.

nigel

2023-06-05 10:39:59 UTC

I knocked off a quick system which I hoped might indicate whether any
repeat numbers could be expected in the next draw. The first four draws
(not all on UK Lotto) it predicted one repeat each time and was correct.

Sadly, that was just a case of new system syndrome. Predictions since
have been poor.

For Wednesday, no repeats are predicted in the UK Lotto, 1 repeat is
predicted in the NY Lotto.

Meh!

Nigel

Post by nigel
Hi MJ,

I must be misunderstanding - I thought you meant pairs in the same draw.

No that's overall

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
19.25
15.28
24.59
2.24

Most of those aren't close to totalling 60, whereas 2&54 are. Do other
popular pairs sum to close to 60?

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
But the top combo 2&54 has come up 18 times and we've had 797 draws of
the 6/59 game.
Is there any mileage in it?
MJ

Given that the new lottery operators are allegedly planning to junk 6/59
and go back to 6/49, probably not :-(

I'd not heard that.

Post by nigel
Nigel

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
Jink's strategy was to take the last 4 draws (add in a number or two to make
it to 24) and then randomly sort it. That "variable" did win one year, but
crashed badly this.

Marmaduke Jinks

2023-06-05 21:34:02 UTC

Interestingly the mode for repeating numbers shows as 1 (i.e. the last
draw).

61% of the time a number from the last draw will repeat. The Jinks WLC
chose the last 4 draws in order to get his selections. The mode for numbers
repeating from the last 4 is 3 (i.e. 3 numbers from the last 4 will
re-occur).

MJ

Post by nigel
I knocked off a quick system which I hoped might indicate whether any
repeat numbers could be expected in the next draw. The first four draws
(not all on UK Lotto) it predicted one repeat each time and was correct.
Sadly, that was just a case of new system syndrome. Predictions since have
been poor.
For Wednesday, no repeats are predicted in the UK Lotto, 1 repeat is
predicted in the NY Lotto.
Meh!
Nigel

Post by nigel
Hi MJ,

I must be misunderstanding - I thought you meant pairs in the same draw.

No that's overall

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
19.25
15.28
24.59
2.24

Most of those aren't close to totalling 60, whereas 2&54 are. Do other
popular pairs sum to close to 60?

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
But the top combo 2&54 has come up 18 times and we've had 797 draws of
the 6/59 game.
Is there any mileage in it?
MJ

Given that the new lottery operators are allegedly planning to junk 6/59
and go back to 6/49, probably not :-(

I'd not heard that.

Post by nigel
Nigel

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
Jink's strategy was to take the last 4 draws (add in a number or two
to
make
it to 24) and then randomly sort it. That "variable" did win one
year,
but
crashed badly this.

nigel

2023-06-06 12:05:38 UTC

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
Interestingly the mode for repeating numbers shows as 1 (i.e. the last
draw).

I think that's deceptive.

For a 6/59 lottery, Hypgeomdist(0,6,6,59) = 0.5095, so most draws will
not contain a ball from the previous draw.

Nigel

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
61% of the time a number from the last draw will repeat. The Jinks WLC
chose the last 4 draws in order to get his selections. The mode for numbers
repeating from the last 4 is 3 (i.e. 3 numbers from the last 4 will
re-occur).
MJ

Post by nigel
Hi MJ,

I must be misunderstanding - I thought you meant pairs in the same draw.

No that's overall

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
19.25
15.28
24.59
2.24

Most of those aren't close to totalling 60, whereas 2&54 are. Do other
popular pairs sum to close to 60?

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
But the top combo 2&54 has come up 18 times and we've had 797 draws of
the 6/59 game.
Is there any mileage in it?
MJ

Given that the new lottery operators are allegedly planning to junk 6/59
and go back to 6/49, probably not :-(

I'd not heard that.

Post by nigel
Nigel

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
Jink's strategy was to take the last 4 draws (add in a number or two
to
make
it to 24) and then randomly sort it. That "variable" did win one
year,
but
crashed badly this.

Marmaduke Jinks

2023-06-06 17:20:11 UTC

Nigel, yes, you're right.

I recalculated it at 0.495 (49.5%).

The cell in my Excel sheet, containing the number of draws, was stuck in the
wrong position.

I shall now go and have a cup of tea ;-)

MJ

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
Interestingly the mode for repeating numbers shows as 1 (i.e. the last
draw).

I think that's deceptive.
For a 6/59 lottery, Hypgeomdist(0,6,6,59) = 0.5095, so most draws will not
contain a ball from the previous draw.
Nigel

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
61% of the time a number from the last draw will repeat. The Jinks WLC
chose the last 4 draws in order to get his selections. The mode for
numbers repeating from the last 4 is 3 (i.e. 3 numbers from the last 4
will re-occur).
MJ

Post by nigel
I knocked off a quick system which I hoped might indicate whether any
repeat numbers could be expected in the next draw. The first four draws
(not all on UK Lotto) it predicted one repeat each time and was correct.
Sadly, that was just a case of new system syndrome. Predictions since
have been poor.
For Wednesday, no repeats are predicted in the UK Lotto, 1 repeat is
predicted in the NY Lotto.
Meh!
Nigel

Post by nigel
Hi MJ,

I must be misunderstanding - I thought you meant pairs in the same draw.

No that's overall

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
19.25
15.28
24.59
2.24

Most of those aren't close to totalling 60, whereas 2&54 are. Do other
popular pairs sum to close to 60?

No. The 60 is 59 numbers and a space, it's not a sum. Imagine a mix of
Connect 4 and Battleships. Play where there are gaps. This newsgroup
doesn't do Binaries otherwise I'd upload a picture. The gaps, where a
Connect 4 counter might have gone, gave 19 and 33 last night. The
player could have made a Hotpicks2 success with that last night.

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
But the top combo 2&54 has come up 18 times and we've had 797 draws of
the 6/59 game.
Is there any mileage in it?
MJ

Given that the new lottery operators are allegedly planning to junk
6/59 and go back to 6/49, probably not :-(

I'd not heard that.

Post by nigel
Nigel

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
Jink's strategy was to take the last 4 draws (add in a number or two
to
make
it to 24) and then randomly sort it. That "variable" did win one
year,
but
crashed badly this.

nigel

2023-06-08 10:43:07 UTC

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
Nigel, yes, you're right.
I recalculated it at 0.495 (49.5%).
The cell in my Excel sheet, containing the number of draws, was stuck in the
wrong position.
I shall now go and have a cup of tea ;-)
MJ

How very English of you ;-)

Nigel

Marmaduke Jinks

2023-06-09 07:37:17 UTC

& a crumpet ;-)

MJ

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
Nigel, yes, you're right.
I recalculated it at 0.495 (49.5%).
The cell in my Excel sheet, containing the number of draws, was stuck in
the wrong position.
I shall now go and have a cup of tea ;-)
MJ

How very English of you ;-)
Nigel

nigel

2023-06-09 10:53:44 UTC

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
& a crumpet ;-)
MJ

You omitted barmaid: & a crumpet barmaid.

I've found the TV Series 'Brush Strokes' but I can't for the life of me
the name of the actress who played the 'crumpet barmaid' :-(

Nigel

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
Nigel, yes, you're right.
I recalculated it at 0.495 (49.5%).
The cell in my Excel sheet, containing the number of draws, was stuck in
the wrong position.
I shall now go and have a cup of tea ;-)
MJ

How very English of you ;-)
Nigel

nigel

2023-06-08 10:42:04 UTC

Post by nigel
I knocked off a quick system which I hoped might indicate whether any
repeat numbers could be expected in the next draw. The first four draws
(not all on UK Lotto) it predicted one repeat each time and was correct.
Sadly, that was just a case of new system syndrome. Predictions since
have been poor.
For Wednesday, no repeats are predicted in the UK Lotto, 1 repeat is
predicted in the NY Lotto.

The midweek UK and New York Lottos each had one number repeat from the
previous draw.

For Saturday, no repeats are predicted for the UK Lotto, 1 repeat is
predicted for the NY Lotto.

Post by nigel
Meh!
Nigel

Marmaduke Jinks

2023-06-09 07:39:29 UTC

I'll bite. If you add in the bonus numbers on the 6/59 game then one of the
7 I think will re-appear.

MJ

Post by nigel
I knocked off a quick system which I hoped might indicate whether any
repeat numbers could be expected in the next draw. The first four draws
(not all on UK Lotto) it predicted one repeat each time and was correct.
Sadly, that was just a case of new system syndrome. Predictions since
have been poor.
For Wednesday, no repeats are predicted in the UK Lotto, 1 repeat is
predicted in the NY Lotto.

The midweek UK and New York Lottos each had one number repeat from the
previous draw.
For Saturday, no repeats are predicted for the UK Lotto, 1 repeat is
predicted for the NY Lotto.

Post by nigel
Meh!
Nigel

Marmaduke Jinks

2023-06-10 22:56:39 UTC

3 and 56 were repeats (although 3 was a bonus ball).

MJ

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
I'll bite. If you add in the bonus numbers on the 6/59 game then one of
the 7 I think will re-appear.
MJ

Post by nigel
I knocked off a quick system which I hoped might indicate whether any
repeat numbers could be expected in the next draw. The first four draws
(not all on UK Lotto) it predicted one repeat each time and was correct.
Sadly, that was just a case of new system syndrome. Predictions since
have been poor.
For Wednesday, no repeats are predicted in the UK Lotto, 1 repeat is
predicted in the NY Lotto.

The midweek UK and New York Lottos each had one number repeat from the
previous draw.
For Saturday, no repeats are predicted for the UK Lotto, 1 repeat is
predicted for the NY Lotto.

Post by nigel
Meh!
Nigel

nigel

2023-06-12 11:51:36 UTC

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
3 and 56 were repeats (although 3 was a bonus ball).
MJ

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
I'll bite. If you add in the bonus numbers on the 6/59 game then one of
the 7 I think will re-appear.
MJ

Post by nigel
I knocked off a quick system which I hoped might indicate whether any
repeat numbers could be expected in the next draw. The first four draws
(not all on UK Lotto) it predicted one repeat each time and was correct.
Sadly, that was just a case of new system syndrome. Predictions since
have been poor.
For Wednesday, no repeats are predicted in the UK Lotto, 1 repeat is
predicted in the NY Lotto.

The midweek UK and New York Lottos each had one number repeat from the
previous draw.
For Saturday, no repeats are predicted for the UK Lotto, 1 repeat is
predicted for the NY Lotto.

100% wrong :-(

For Wednesday, no repeats are predicted for the UK Lotto or the NY Lotto.

Nigel

Marmaduke Jinks

2023-06-12 14:05:19 UTC

Good Luck with that Mystic...Nigel ;-)

MJ

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
3 and 56 were repeats (although 3 was a bonus ball).
MJ

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
I'll bite. If you add in the bonus numbers on the 6/59 game then one of
the 7 I think will re-appear.
MJ

Post by nigel
I knocked off a quick system which I hoped might indicate whether any
repeat numbers could be expected in the next draw. The first four draws
(not all on UK Lotto) it predicted one repeat each time and was correct.
Sadly, that was just a case of new system syndrome. Predictions since
have been poor.
For Wednesday, no repeats are predicted in the UK Lotto, 1 repeat is
predicted in the NY Lotto.

The midweek UK and New York Lottos each had one number repeat from the
previous draw.
For Saturday, no repeats are predicted for the UK Lotto, 1 repeat is
predicted for the NY Lotto.

100% wrong :-(
For Wednesday, no repeats are predicted for the UK Lotto or the NY Lotto.
Nigel

nigel

2023-06-15 14:44:38 UTC

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
Good Luck with that Mystic...Nigel ;-)
MJ

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
3 and 56 were repeats (although 3 was a bonus ball).
MJ

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
I'll bite. If you add in the bonus numbers on the 6/59 game then one of
the 7 I think will re-appear.
MJ

Post by nigel
I knocked off a quick system which I hoped might indicate whether any
repeat numbers could be expected in the next draw. The first four draws
(not all on UK Lotto) it predicted one repeat each time and was correct.
Sadly, that was just a case of new system syndrome. Predictions since
have been poor.
For Wednesday, no repeats are predicted in the UK Lotto, 1 repeat is
predicted in the NY Lotto.

The midweek UK and New York Lottos each had one number repeat from the
previous draw.
For Saturday, no repeats are predicted for the UK Lotto, 1 repeat is
predicted for the NY Lotto.

100% wrong :-(
For Wednesday, no repeats are predicted for the UK Lotto or the NY Lotto.

100% wrong again, each getting one repeated main number.

Nigel

nigel

2023-06-16 11:17:07 UTC

My repeats-predictor has gone a bit nuts for Saturday.

It predicts three repeats for UK Lotto and two repeats for NY Lotto.

Given the predictor's near-perfect record of failure, I'll be taking a
keen interest in the results.

Nigel

Marmaduke Jinks

2023-06-16 11:48:58 UTC

My guess is 0.

This is the sort of betting I used to do on MarathonBet. Start with a small
wager and then chase it when it loses. Remember the times when it doesn't
repeat is currently showing at 7 and 11 when it does. (but that is including
the bonus). I was betting on the Canadian Lottery when the "repeats" went
past the historical bench mark. My Martingale became unaffordable. But I
liked it but didn't have the patience to re-start.

MJ

Post by nigel
My repeats-predictor has gone a bit nuts for Saturday.
It predicts three repeats for UK Lotto and two repeats for NY Lotto.
Given the predictor's near-perfect record of failure, I'll be taking a
keen interest in the results.
Nigel

nigel

2023-06-17 11:56:37 UTC

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
My guess is 0.

Since real-life seems to do the opposite of what my system predicts, if
I were to place a bet I too would choose 0. Or buy a Lotto ticket
omitting the numbers from the previous draw. Although reducing the odds
to 6 from 53 is far short of overcoming the 'house edge' :-(

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
This is the sort of betting I used to do on MarathonBet. Start with a small
wager and then chase it when it loses. Remember the times when it doesn't
repeat is currently showing at 7 and 11 when it does. (but that is including
the bonus). I was betting on the Canadian Lottery when the "repeats" went
past the historical bench mark. My Martingale became unaffordable. But I
liked it but didn't have the patience to re-start.

That seems a reasonable approach, although it won't make you rich.

Nigel

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
MJ

nigel

2023-06-19 12:12:22 UTC

Post by nigel
My repeats-predictor has gone a bit nuts for Saturday.
It predicts three repeats for UK Lotto and two repeats for NY Lotto.

1 UK repeat (which is actually a shame) and zero NY repeats.
Predictions for Wednesday: UK 1, NY 0.

Nigel

nigel

2023-06-23 15:32:15 UTC

Post by nigel
Predictions for Wednesday: UK 1, NY 0.

Result: UK 0. NY 0

Predictions for Saturday: UK 1, NY 0.

Nigel

nigel

2023-06-26 11:38:16 UTC

Post by nigel
Predictions for Saturday: UK 1, NY 0.

Result: UK 0, NY 1.

100% wrong!

Predictions for Wednesday: UK 0, NY 0.

Nigel

nigel

2023-06-30 12:21:45 UTC

Post by nigel
Predictions for Saturday: UK 1, NY 0.

Result: UK 0, NY 1.
100% wrong!
Predictions for Wednesday: UK 0, NY 0.

Result: UK 0, NY 2.

Only 50% wrong.

Predictions for Saturday: UK 0, NY 0.

Nigel

nigel

2023-07-03 11:27:22 UTC

Post by nigel
Predictions for Saturday: UK 1, NY 0.

Result: UK 0, NY 1.
100% wrong!
Predictions for Wednesday: UK 0, NY 0.

Result: UK 0, NY 2.
Only 50% wrong.
Predictions for Saturday: UK 0, NY 0.

Result: UK 0, NY 1.

Only 50% wrong

Predictions for Wednesday: UK 0, NY 1.

Nigel

nigel

2023-07-06 15:32:43 UTC

Post by nigel
Predictions for Saturday: UK 1, NY 0.

Result: UK 0, NY 1.
100% wrong!
Predictions for Wednesday: UK 0, NY 0.

Result: UK 0, NY 2.
Only 50% wrong.
Predictions for Saturday: UK 0, NY 0.

Result: UK 0, NY 1.
Only 50% wrong
Predictions for Wednesday: UK 0, NY 1.

Result: UK 0, NY 0.

Only 50% wrong

Predictions for Saturday: UK 1, NY 1.

Nigel

nigel

2023-07-10 12:12:59 UTC

Post by nigel
Predictions for Saturday: UK 1, NY 0.

Result: UK 0, NY 1.
100% wrong!
Predictions for Wednesday: UK 0, NY 0.

Result: UK 0, NY 2.
Only 50% wrong.
Predictions for Saturday: UK 0, NY 0.

Result: UK 0, NY 1.
Only 50% wrong
Predictions for Wednesday: UK 0, NY 1.

Result: UK 0, NY 0.
Only 50% wrong
Predictions for Saturday: UK 1, NY 1.

Result: UK 1, NY 0.

Only 50% wrong

Predictions for Wednesday: UK 1, NY 1.

Nigel

nigel

2023-07-14 14:57:07 UTC

Post by nigel
Predictions for Saturday: UK 1, NY 0.

Result: UK 0, NY 1.
100% wrong!
Predictions for Wednesday: UK 0, NY 0.

Result: UK 0, NY 2.
Only 50% wrong.
Predictions for Saturday: UK 0, NY 0.

Result: UK 0, NY 1.
Only 50% wrong
Predictions for Wednesday: UK 0, NY 1.

Result: UK 0, NY 0.
Only 50% wrong
Predictions for Saturday: UK 1, NY 1.

Result: UK 1, NY 0.
Only 50% wrong
Predictions for Wednesday: UK 1, NY 1.

Result: UK 0, NY 1.

Only 50% wrong

Predictions for Saturday: UK 1, NY 0.

Nigel

nigel

2023-07-17 15:01:16 UTC

Post by nigel
Predictions for Saturday: UK 1, NY 0.

Result: UK 0, NY 1.
100% wrong!
Predictions for Wednesday: UK 0, NY 0.

Result: UK 0, NY 2.
Only 50% wrong.
Predictions for Saturday: UK 0, NY 0.

Result: UK 0, NY 1.
Only 50% wrong
Predictions for Wednesday: UK 0, NY 1.

Result: UK 0, NY 0.
Only 50% wrong
Predictions for Saturday: UK 1, NY 1.

Result: UK 1, NY 0.
Only 50% wrong
Predictions for Wednesday: UK 1, NY 1.

Result: UK 0, NY 1.
Only 50% wrong
Predictions for Saturday: UK 1, NY 0.

Result: UK 0, NY 1.

100% wrong

Predictions for Wednesday: UK 2, NY 0.

Nigel

nigel

2023-07-21 12:44:34 UTC

Post by nigel
Predictions for Saturday: UK 1, NY 0.

Result: UK 0, NY 1.
100% wrong!
Predictions for Wednesday: UK 0, NY 0.

Result: UK 0, NY 2.
Only 50% wrong.
Predictions for Saturday: UK 0, NY 0.

Result: UK 0, NY 1.
Only 50% wrong
Predictions for Wednesday: UK 0, NY 1.

Result: UK 0, NY 0.
Only 50% wrong
Predictions for Saturday: UK 1, NY 1.

Result: UK 1, NY 0.
Only 50% wrong
Predictions for Wednesday: UK 1, NY 1.

Result: UK 0, NY 1.
Only 50% wrong
Predictions for Saturday: UK 1, NY 0.

Result: UK 0, NY 1.
100% wrong
Predictions for Wednesday: UK 2, NY 0.

Result: UK 0, NY 0.

Only 50% wrong

Predictions for Saturday: UK 0, NY 0.

Marmaduke Jinks

2023-07-24 06:52:00 UTC

<snip>

Post by nigel
Result: UK 0, NY 0.
Only 50% wrong
Predictions for Saturday: UK 0, NY 0.

One has to admire your resilience in carrying on with this.

Saturday's draw was unusual in that the main numbers were drawn in the last
6 draws.

MJ

nigel

2023-07-24 11:34:45 UTC

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
<snip>

Post by nigel
Result: UK 0, NY 0.
Only 50% wrong
Predictions for Saturday: UK 0, NY 0.

One has to admire your resilience in carrying on with this.

Perhaps 'silly' rather than 'sili' ;-)

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
Saturday's draw was unusual in that the main numbers were drawn in the last
6 draws.
MJ

That baffled me until I found 14 was drawn as the bonus ball in that
timescale.

Without any calculations, my best strategy ought to be to pick nil nil
every draw. That has a theoretical probability of being correct for each
draw (main numbers only) 50.95% of the time. But using my simplistic
calculations, it seems that the better the rating for a prediction, the
more likely it is to be wrong, a sort of active regression to the mean.
It's probably a short-term fluke but it's fun to monitor. And it helps
foster the illusion that rec.gambling.lottery isn't totally dead.

Marmaduke Jinks

2023-07-24 17:36:04 UTC

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
<snip>

Post by nigel
Result: UK 0, NY 0.
Only 50% wrong
Predictions for Saturday: UK 0, NY 0.

One has to admire your resilience in carrying on with this.

Perhaps 'silly' rather than 'sili' ;-)

Post by Marmaduke Jinks
Saturday's draw was unusual in that the main numbers were drawn in the
last 6 draws.
MJ

That baffled me until I found 14 was drawn as the bonus ball in that
timescale.
Without any calculations, my best strategy ought to be to pick nil nil
every draw. That has a theoretical probability of being correct for each
draw (main numbers only) 50.95% of the time. But using my simplistic
calculations, it seems that the better the rating for a prediction, the
more likely it is to be wrong, a sort of active regression to the mean.
It's probably a short-term fluke but it's fun to monitor. And it helps
foster the illusion that rec.gambling.lottery isn't totally dead.

reports of its death etc etc (Marcus Twainus). ;-)

nigel

2023-07-24 11:24:13 UTC