1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. REC.GAMBLING.LOTTERY

  • Attn Nigel

    From Marmaduke Jinks@21:1/5 to All on Sun Sep 24 09:31:55 2023
    Congrats for keeping it up ;-)

    Did you learn much? Did you find a bias?

    MJ
    (I have post here, can't post further down the thread)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From nigel@21:1/5 to Marmaduke Jinks on Mon Sep 25 12:15:25 2023
    Marmaduke Jinks wrote:

    Congrats for keeping it up ;-)

    Did you learn much? Did you find a bias?


    Frayed knot, nothing remotely approaching significance. It was
    right/wrong too often to offer any pecuniary advantages.

    I've shifted my attention to a tiddly little system that's so simple
    even Parpacluck might think of it in a couple of lifetimes. It might
    just be a decent run of good luck or it might be the basis of a
    competitive WLC system this year. Fingers crossed.

    MJ
    (I have post here, can't post further down the thread)

    Evil Nigel

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Marmaduke Jinks@21:1/5 to All on Tue Sep 26 10:38:12 2023
    "nigel" <useweb@nospam.com> wrote in message news:ueednSvx4oxX9oz4nZ2dnZfqnPSdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk...
    Marmaduke Jinks wrote:

    Congrats for keeping it up ;-)

    Did you learn much? Did you find a bias?


    Frayed knot, nothing remotely approaching significance. It was right/wrong too often to offer any pecuniary advantages.

    I've shifted my attention to a tiddly little system that's so simple even Parpacluck might think of it in a couple of lifetimes. It might just be a decent run of good luck or it might be the basis of a competitive WLC
    system this year. Fingers crossed.

    MJ
    (I have post here, can't post further down the thread)

    Evil Nigel

    Thanks for keeping us entertained :-)

    MJ

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From nigel@21:1/5 to Marmaduke Jinks on Sat Sep 30 12:11:16 2023
    Marmaduke Jinks wrote:
    "nigel" <useweb@nospam.com> wrote in message news:ueednSvx4oxX9oz4nZ2dnZfqnPSdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk...

    Marmaduke Jinks wrote:


    Congrats for keeping it up ;-)

    Did you learn much? Did you find a bias?


    Frayed knot, nothing remotely approaching significance. It was right/wrong >>too often to offer any pecuniary advantages.

    I've shifted my attention to a tiddly little system that's so simple even >>Parpacluck might think of it in a couple of lifetimes. It might just be a >>decent run of good luck or it might be the basis of a competitive WLC >>system this year. Fingers crossed.


    MJ
    (I have post here, can't post further down the thread)

    Evil Nigel


    Thanks for keeping us entertained :-)

    MJ

    My system's run of 'good luck' came to a resounding crash with the
    midweek draws.

    Oh well, back to the drawing board :-(

    Nigel

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From nigel@21:1/5 to Marmaduke Jinks on Fri Nov 10 11:54:00 2023
    Marmaduke Jinks wrote:

    Congrats for keeping it up ;-)

    Did you learn much? Did you find a bias?

    MJ
    (I have post here, can't post further down the thread)


    I've been accumulating (at a very leisurely pace) further analysis.

    Comparing the 'best match' predictions with the actual outcomes had a
    -9.5% correlation.
    Comparing an average of the best 10 predictions with the actual outcomes
    had a +11% correlation!
    Comparing an average of the 2nd to 9th best predictions with the actual outcomes had a +15.1% correlation.

    That's over a six week time period so none of those correlations are significant. In any case, a profitable lottery system would probably
    need something like a 90% correlation.

    Fun, innit!

    Nigel

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From nigel@21:1/5 to nigel on Mon Nov 13 11:51:08 2023
    nigel wrote:

    Marmaduke Jinks wrote:

    Congrats for keeping it up ;-)

    Did you learn much? Did you find a bias?

    MJ
    (I have post here, can't post further down the thread)


    I've been accumulating (at a very leisurely pace) further analysis.

    Comparing the 'best match' predictions with the actual outcomes had a
    -9.5% correlation.
    Comparing an average of the best 10 predictions with the actual outcomes
    had a +11% correlation!
    Comparing an average of the 2nd to 9th best predictions with the actual outcomes had a +15.1% correlation.

    That's over a six week time period so none of those correlations are significant. In any case, a profitable lottery system would probably
    need something like a 90% correlation.

    Fun, innit!

    Nigel

    After Saturday's results:
    Comparing the 'best match' predictions with the actual outcomes had a
    -16.4% correlation.
    Comparing an average of the best 10 predictions with the actual outcomes
    had a +9.9% correlation!
    Comparing an average of the 2nd to 9th best predictions with the actual outcomes had a +16.2% correlation.

    :-)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)