Re: Unbelievable ... how to hit a jackpot.
Posted: Wed Jul 17, 2019 5:59 pm
Hi edymurph
Thank you very much for explaining the alterations of position 9, I can see clearly what you mean by the 543 alterations down the column of data (as the other positions also have each draw)
Thank you very much for sending the sum’s for draws 1787-1840. I did the power2 inverse calculations for you on the attached spreadsheet.
Interestingly, these numbers were around 1.2 , 1.3 sometimes 1.4 which is a bit lower than the sample of 10 for draws 1640-1650
Do you mean you did these power2 inverse calculations also??
With the sum’s for draws 1787-1840, would you be able to get the draw sums for 1650 - 1787, to have a data file that runs from draw 1639-1840 (200 draws) to see how a longer term pattern would be over 200 draws?
(I’m not sure if that is a lot of work for you or not to get those missing 127 draw sums)
Direction Predictions
With the decimal series 1.43,1.46,1.48, I tried the median of 1.46 as a direction forecast which seemed to work for 7/9 accuracy. Eg if under 1.46 next prediction up, if over 1.46 next prediction down. If it is equal to 1.46, predict up as the real median is 1.462 (at 3 decimal places), so 1.46 is just under it.
This median is found over 10 results, so you’d have to see if the next 10 results seem to follow this median direction forecast also.
I had a look at the draw results from 1787-1840 (on the 3 decimal input figure), but I couldn’t see any clear median figure for a direction prediction that the decimal numbers respected.
I tried if latest was higher than the average of the last 2, then go down, if latest higher than average of last 2 go up (basically a moving average of 2) . It had about 60% accuracy as a trend prediction (the other 1.46 median prediction over the sample of 9 draws was about 75% accurate, (which is the same as the latest draw 500 ish number against it’s median which is about 75% accurate also)).
With the decimal pattern of 1,4,7, 0,4,7
I think this is because you are raising the input number by the power of 2 each time, naturally this number goes up by a certain amount. When it was 4 and 7, the 1 was next, there seemed to be a pattern of about + 3.3 . Later when it went from 7 to 0, it still seems to be going up by about 3.2 or 3.3 and it starts with 0 (like how 7 +3 = 10 (the zero), before it was like 7.5 + 3.5) is 11))
Thanks
Thank you very much for explaining the alterations of position 9, I can see clearly what you mean by the 543 alterations down the column of data (as the other positions also have each draw)
Thank you very much for sending the sum’s for draws 1787-1840. I did the power2 inverse calculations for you on the attached spreadsheet.
Interestingly, these numbers were around 1.2 , 1.3 sometimes 1.4 which is a bit lower than the sample of 10 for draws 1640-1650
I just did it here ... it's not like yours, but it works.
Thank you
Do you mean you did these power2 inverse calculations also??
With the sum’s for draws 1787-1840, would you be able to get the draw sums for 1650 - 1787, to have a data file that runs from draw 1639-1840 (200 draws) to see how a longer term pattern would be over 200 draws?
(I’m not sure if that is a lot of work for you or not to get those missing 127 draw sums)
Direction Predictions
With the decimal series 1.43,1.46,1.48, I tried the median of 1.46 as a direction forecast which seemed to work for 7/9 accuracy. Eg if under 1.46 next prediction up, if over 1.46 next prediction down. If it is equal to 1.46, predict up as the real median is 1.462 (at 3 decimal places), so 1.46 is just under it.
This median is found over 10 results, so you’d have to see if the next 10 results seem to follow this median direction forecast also.
I had a look at the draw results from 1787-1840 (on the 3 decimal input figure), but I couldn’t see any clear median figure for a direction prediction that the decimal numbers respected.
I tried if latest was higher than the average of the last 2, then go down, if latest higher than average of last 2 go up (basically a moving average of 2) . It had about 60% accuracy as a trend prediction (the other 1.46 median prediction over the sample of 9 draws was about 75% accurate, (which is the same as the latest draw 500 ish number against it’s median which is about 75% accurate also)).
With the decimal pattern of 1,4,7, 0,4,7
I think this is because you are raising the input number by the power of 2 each time, naturally this number goes up by a certain amount. When it was 4 and 7, the 1 was next, there seemed to be a pattern of about + 3.3 . Later when it went from 7 to 0, it still seems to be going up by about 3.2 or 3.3 and it starts with 0 (like how 7 +3 = 10 (the zero), before it was like 7.5 + 3.5) is 11))
Thanks