Repeat analysis

[ido]

(10-28-2010 12:04 AM)Frank Wrote:  Anyway I thought Fibonacci was 1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,34,55,89,144 (the previous 2 added together, the previous 2 added together, the previous 2 added together........................................) not 2x another ????

Hi Frank,you are absolutely right -that's oficially known as
The numerical serie of Fibonaci but Fibonaci in his career did a lot
of work and he as well studied numerous problems of "Theories of
games based on numbers" and probabilities in every meaning.

I admit that this may be a case of "national" lottery jargon but here
in the Italy the trebles "numberA,numberAx2,numberAx2x2" are
named the Trebles of Fibonaci and are 22 trebles(as the Lotto has 90
numbers).
Even if go to eliminate the Fibonaci's name that trebles are what they
are and time ago(after the draw 1511 when the amaising quad
4,8,32_BB 16 appeared ) I started a research witch snould be not finnished yet if
you not pushed me (you can visit the thread opened)
.............
About your repeat analysis I meant that if such a high number of "lines predicted to contain a repeat number" did contain two repeated numbers
so may be hipotysed that the same draws will continue its activity.

From 25 lines there was 7 did contain two repeated numbers and I did
the 7 residual groups (4 number each) escluding the repeated numbers.

24-27-44-49
4-34-35-37
8-13-28-36
21-41-42-43
8-14-43-48
11-14-21-42
15-18-42-48

For example the pair 14,42 appeared on draw 1548 takes part of
line 645(grey) of your table and takes part of a pool of 42 pairs .
There's no profit yet but if wait for some time eliminating the residual quads one by one maybe will be possible winning a Pick2 playing a few such a quads.
Now there are 5 restant:

4-34-35-37
8-13-28-36
21-41-42-43
8-14-43-48
15-18-42-48

If we only can be sure that a pair will appear on next Draw 1550
so there is 33.33% net win .

[Frank]

Just to show how repeat analysis can also get it wrong, this time it failed spectacularly.



Out of the 18 rows of possible repeats only 7 were correct and worse still, the ones I might have used but didn't (in grey) contained lines that would have matched 3 - and skipping from 8 and 10 years ago.
The net result was that the whole result and the bonus ball were listed in my last 29 lowest scoring balls, appearing more at the eliminated end of my list rather than the bankers end. Ah well

[ido]

(11-08-2010 02:48 AM)Frank Wrote:  Just to show how repeat analysis can also get it wrong, this time it failed spectacularly.

....................

Out of the 18 rows of possible repeats only 7 were correct and worse still, the ones I might have used but didn't (in grey) contained lines that would have matched 3 - and skipping from 8 and 10 years ago.
The net result was that the whole result and the bonus ball were listed in my last 29 lowest scoring balls, appearing more at the eliminated end of my list rather than the bankers end. Ah well

Hi Frank,
isn't it possible to be a kind of "swich to.." allert?Maybe will start a grey period and as David wrote ones it's a time to play "the oposite of wath one
think may appear"?

This time everyone and everything failed spectacularly (we all included),symply appeared the second quin in the History of UK Lotto from the decade 30-39 but this time BB included.
And somehow maybe the decade gave some signs ,there was 3 trebles from the group in the last 5 last previous draws - in 5 draws 3 trebles
from all 135 since the Lotto start.

Now theoreticaly(one theory of the thousands) a pair at least from the quin should repeat quite immediately,more probable a treble having else number from the decade(not appeared in the quin)...and this means a pool of 50 trebles from the 30-39 group.

It's out of place,sorry, but it is possible for you to update your file
of the missing trebles ,maybe from that list one treble from the group
30-39 will have its first appearance just in the next few draws?

[Frank]

Ido, please see the updated missing triples in its own thread.

[ido]

(11-09-2010 01:16 AM)Frank Wrote:  Ido, please see the updated missing triples in its own thread.

Hi Frank,
thanks a lot ,sorry for having asked you for this
here in this your thread