Lotto history buffs read a whole lot more into the significance of a Lotto draw history than it warrants including giving each history a special relationship with numbers that are subsequently picked. Basically it is just a bunch of random combinations for the prescribed Pool and Pick and whatever conclusions pertain to one history apply to another of like Pool and Pick.

The following table analyzes 1636 draws of the UK 6/49 Lotto game and shows the integer repeats (or matches with the considered draw) for up to 6 draws prior to the considered draw.

Integers Matched | Prev Draw | Prev % | Prev 2 Draws | Prev 2 % | Prev 3 Draws | Prev 3 % | Prev 4 Draws | Prev 4 % | Prev 5 Draws | Prev 5 % | Prev 6 Draws | Prev 6 % |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

0 | 687 | 42.00% | 321 | 20.00% | 134 | 8.00% | 65 | 3.97% | 41 | 2.51% | 20 | 1.00% |

1 | 679 | 41.00% | 580 | 35.00% | 377 | 23.04% | 212 | 12.96% | 107 | 6.54% | 59 | 4.00% |

2 | 243 | 15.00% | 486 | 30.00% | 487 | 30.00% | 381 | 23.29% | 259 | 15.83% | 156 | 10.00% |

3 | 26 | 2.00% | 194 | 12.00% | 396 | 24.00% | 428 | 26.16% | 381 | 23.29% | 324 | 20.00% |

4 | 1 | 45 | 3.00% | 174 | 11.00% | 320 | 19.56% | 356 | 21.76% | 331 | 20.00% | |

5 | 9 | 0.55% | 45 | 3.00% | 150 | 9.17% | 267 | 16.32% | 316 | 19.00% | ||

6 | 1 | 0.06% | 20 | 1.00% | 56 | 3.42% | 135 | 8.25% | 220 | 14.00% | ||

7 | 2 | 11 | 0.67% | 56 | 3.42% | 119 | 7.00% | |||||

8 | 1 | 12 | 0.73% | 23 | 1.41% | 58 | 4.00% | |||||

9 | 1 | 10 | 0.61% | 22 | 1.00% | |||||||

10 | 1 | 9 | ||||||||||

11 | 1 | |||||||||||

12 | 1 |

A quick check mathematically for the previous draw with 0 repeats can be done by dividing the possibilities excluding 6 integers ie 43c6 by that for all possibilities ie 49c6. The calculation is 6096454/13983816 = 0.435936 or 44% which is close to the empirical value of 42%.

Colin Fairbrother

]]>

There are two myths that I became aware of around 2000 in my study of Lotto numbers and a third a bit later on-

- The errant notion that there are beneficial Upper Limits for Absence of Integers in a Lotto game.

. - The belief that Integer Distribution will even out as the number of draws increases.

. - The absurdity of specifying a
**reduced**Pool for a given Lotto game without giving the lines played and thinking this**entitles**credit to be taken for any prize that falls in that reduced Pool without acknowledging that this is at usually the considerable cost of all combinations for the reduced Pool being played.

The first myth is that there is some upper limit to the absence of an integer in a Lotto game. For the Pick 6 Pool 49 Classic Lotto Washington is a good example with the integer 32 not appearing for 85 draws from a previous highest absence in that game of 36. The average absence for an integer is around 7. Is 85 the limit? Nah! It can easily go well over the 100 mark. (Multiply 8.16 by Monte Carlo 1913 26 Blacks in succession factor of 13 to get 104)

The second myth is that as the number of draws increases so the integer occurrence will become closer to the average. For 49 draws it is possible, but most unlikely to have an equal distribution of 6 occurrences for each integer giving a theoretical average per draw of 0.1224489. The chances of an even distribution happening are greater at 49 draws than at any number of draws after that.

The average occurrence per draw at 20682 draws is pretty spot on varying from 0.1117880 to 0.124939561. However, as per the table below the Standard Deviation for the Occurrence per Integer at 1000 draws is 10.89 compared to 46.28 at 20,000 draws. The maximum Occurrence Difference is only 49 at 1000 draws but is 272 at 20,000 draws. This can hardly be interpreted as a trend towards evenness of distribution!

Draws | StDev | AVEDEV | Average | Max | Min | Max Occur Diff |

1000 | 10.89103961 | 8.82132 | 122.4490 | 152 | 103 | 49 |

2000 | 15.96200194 | 12.29571 | 244.8980 | 289 | 220 | 69 |

3000 | 18.78291779 | 13.62099 | 367.3469 | 411 | 318 | 93 |

4000 | 22.34696673 | 16.59142 | 489.7959 | 538 | 433 | 105 |

5000 | 26.35745692 | 19.72928 | 612.2449 | 688 | 538 | 150 |

6000 | 27.44731806 | 20.81799 | 734.6939 | 816 | 648 | 168 |

7000 | 28.47985324 | 21.20700 | 857.1429 | 947 | 765 | 182 |

8000 | 28.67760156 | 21.78759 | 979.5918 | 1045 | 880 | 165 |

9000 | 31.38305742 | 23.02124 | 1102.0408 | 1176 | 981 | 195 |

10000 | 34.81737922 | 26.90796 | 1224.4898 | 1302 | 1089 | 213 |

11000 | 34.64479121 | 25.49105 | 1346.9388 | 1431 | 1199 | 232 |

12000 | 37.08556919 | 27.13953 | 1469.3878 | 1555 | 1315 | 240 |

13000 | 38.91977460 | 30.58809 | 1591.8367 | 1675 | 1446 | 229 |

14000 | 39.56807619 | 31.18950 | 1714.2857 | 1803 | 1571 | 232 |

15000 | 41.09857513 | 31.29946 | 1836.7347 | 1918 | 1685 | 233 |

16000 | 42.64886221 | 32.07247 | 1959.1837 | 2059 | 1813 | 246 |

17000 | 47.26507701 | 35.73678 | 2081.6327 | 2203 | 1929 | 274 |

18000 | 47.53852862 | 36.53228 | 2204.0816 | 2339 | 2050 | 289 |

19000 | 45.37017902 | 35.15119 | 2326.5306 | 2462 | 2188 | 274 |

20000 | 46.28637116 | 36.18409 | 2448.9796 | 2584 | 2312 | 272 |

The **third myth** is seen most often in Lotto forums and newsgroups with predictionists giving say 20 integers in a Lotto game with a Pool of say 45 or 49. They rate their chances of success on the reduced Pool carrying on as if the Picking of 20 integers has somehow eliminated the balance of the Pool from consideration. They want to take credit for any prize without specifying the lines played.

Even if they specified all the 38,760 combinations possible for a pool of 20 integers in a Pick 6 game this represents only a 0.28% in a 6/49 game for 1st prize and 0.48% in a 6/45.

Colin Fairbrother

]]>
There is no way of telling the start or end of a Lotto history orwhether it has been jumbled up without knowing the draw dates or drawIDs which means there is no intrinsic order to the draws - it is simplya bucket of numbers. For a particular time of the day you could set 100machines or computers to start at exactly the same time and the chancesare they will all be different numbers. No draw result is more valid thananother and to resolve this scenario a random selection from the 100results is needed.

The heyday of interest in discussing Lotto in on-line forums andin particular about using the history of draws to determine the numbersto play peaked around 2005. **Practically all the many thousands of sites on Lotto number analysisare about assuming a relationship or constraint between the next draw and the draws previousto that, which as I will show is utter bunkum and is really the stuff ofnumerology with their penchant for errant ersatz science, mathematicsand statistics.**

You still have freaky people that actually believe that from thehistory of draws for a particular Lotto game the next jackpot numbercan be narrowed down. This of course is based on the erroneousassumption mentioned above that there is a relationship between thehistory and the next draw. ** Interestingly, give someone a single draw result or a set and a choicebetween a number of draw histories and they wouldn't be able to pickthe relevant history without knowing the answer or looking it up**.

**There are two principles to keep in mind when discussing the history ofdraws for a Lotto game: -**

In the following table for aPick 6, Pool 49 Lotto game you can seethe chances of success playing all the combinations for the respective Pool. Using only 42 integers fromthe Pool of 49 you have a 86% chance of success for the 1's but only a62% chance for the 3's and 38% for the 6's.

Integers Used of 49 | 6's | 6's % | 5's | 5's % | 4's | 4's % | 3's | 3's % | 2's | 2's % | 1's | 1's % |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

7 | 7 | 0.00 | 21 | 0.00 | 35 | 0.02 | 35 | 0.19 | 21 | 1.79 | 7 | 14.29 |

14 | 3003 | 0.02 | 2002 | 0.10 | 1001 | 0.47 | 364 | 1.98 | 91 | 7.74 | 14 | 28.57 |

21 | 54264 | 0.39 | 20349 | 1.07 | 5985 | 2.82 | 1330 | 7.22 | 210 | 17.86 | 21 | 42.86 |

28 | 376740 | 2.69 | 98280 | 5.15 | 20475 | 9.66 | 3276 | 17.78 | 378 | 32.14 | 28 | 57.14 |

35 | 1623160 | 11.61 | 324632 | 17.02 | 52360 | 24.71 | 6545 | 35.52 | 595 | 50.60 | 35 | 71.43 |

42 | 5245786 | 37.51 | 850668 | 44.61 | 111930 | 52.83 | 11480 | 62.31 | 861 | 73.21 | 42 | 85.71 |

49 | 13983816 | 100.00 | 1906884 | 100.00 | 211876 | 100.00 | 18424 | 100.00 | 1176 | 100.00 | 49 | 100.00 |

The following table shows 34 draws for a 6/45 Lotto Game with thelatest draw either at the top or the bottom of the table. Withoutlooking it up the integers for the last draw could be anywhere and notshow up as being untoward.

There is nothing to stop a Lotto operator from using blank ping pongballs and writing the integers on them prior to shuffling for the draw.Amazingly, on a forum that caters for the Lotto deranged they bemoanthe fact that test runs by the Lotto operator are not revealed as if itwould make a difference.

What is a Lotto history? It is made up of independent random numberselection events that occur at a predetermined date and time by aLottery Operator after selling tickets where people have nominated aset of numbers which they hope will match as much as is possible withthe draw result. The time and date have no effect on the numberdrawn and serve to identify it only.Often I have come across the shysters claiming such and such supportstheir spiel when in fact it it just the natural distribution. Considera Pick 6, Pool 45 Lotto game. It is possible for all theintegers to occur within 8 draws but this is highly unlikely. Here is amore likely distribution (in fact actual): -

Draw | Integer Occurrence | Repeats | Integer Non-Occurrence |
---|---|---|---|

1 | 6 | 0 | 39 |

2 | 12 | 0 | 33 |

3 | 15 | 3 | 30 |

4 | 19 | 5 | 26 |

5 | 22 | 8 | 23 |

6 | 24 | 12 | 21 |

7 | 27 | 15 | 18 |

8 | 29 | 19 | 16 |

9 | 30 | 24 | 15 |

10 | 32 | 28 | 13 |

11 | 35 | 31 | 10 |

12 | 36 | 36 | 9 |

13 | 38 | 40 | 7 |

14 | 38 | 40 | 7 |

15 | 40 | 50 | 5 |

16 | 40 | 56 | 5 |

17 | 40 | 62 | 5 |

18 | 41 | 67 | 4 |

19 | 41 | 73 | 4 |

20 | 41 | 79 | 4 |

21 | 41 | 85 | 4 |

22 | 41 | 91 | 4 |

23 | 41 | 97 | 4 |

24 | 43 | 101 | 2 |

25 | 43 | 107 | 2 |

26 | 43 | 113 | 2 |

27 | 43 | 119 | 2 |

28 | 43 | 125 | 2 |

29 | 43 | 131 | 2 |

30 | 43 | 137 | 2 |

31 | 43 | 143 | 2 |

32 | 44 | 148 | 1 |

33 | 44 | 154 | 1 |

34 | 45 | 159 | 0 |

Now, you may be tempted to think that the prior six draws has shrunkthe number of integers by more than 50% to 24 from the Pool of 45.

**There is a big question about the logic of making an association with an as yet non existent next draw.** If you make the association it is made by you and then you must ask yourself the question, "Am I receiving anything extra from that of using any other random selection of six lines from the 8,145,060 possibilities?"

Lotto operators in the main still provide frequency or occurrence andabsence or recency data and charts on their websites. The UK NationalLottery gives for the 6/49 game the ball-set and machine used as if itmattered. Disclaimers such as this one from Tattersalls in Australiaare not uncommon: -

Introducing Signatures

Top 31 Signatures

Absence or Recency

**From the articles there are two overwhelming facts - lack of repetition andinconsistency between ostensibly that which should be giving the best results if there wassome correlation between history and the next draw.**

**The whole scenario of Lotto history analysis thus becomes farcical and results in the whole process being nothing other than a quaint way of jumblingthe numbers to produce a set of numbers to play, which is more than likely inferior to random selections.**

**All the thousands of websites touting history analysis as being some guideto future draws are basing their "analysis" on a false assumption. **

The good thing about signatures is that it handles both absence and occurrence or each considered separately.

Consider the oft used method of 5 categories (Repeat, Hot, Warm, Luke, Cold) for each integer with the following 5 signature examples: -

Previous Occurrence | Single Occurrence | Double Occurrence | Triple Occurrence | No Occurrence |
---|---|---|---|---|

P00:{02,12,20,27,30,31} | ||||

S01:{09} | D01:{7,45} | T01:{06,32} | ||

D02:{15,33,34} | ||||

S03:{10,11,28} | D03:{39} | |||

S04:{01,40} | D04:{3,21,22} | |||

S05:{24} | D05:{18,41,43} | |||

S06:{4,35} | D06:{38} | |||

S07:23,25,37} | ||||

S09:{05,13,26,29} | ||||

N10:{08,14,16,17,19,36,42,44} |

**Alternatively, you could use just four categories and have the previous draw resultsin H, W, L and C with absence eg**

Absence | Hot | Warm | Luke | Cold |
---|---|---|---|---|

0 | {30} | {12,20,31} | {02,27} | |

1 | {6,32} | {7,45} | {09} | |

2 | {15,33,34} | |||

3 | {39} | {10,11,28} | ||

4 | {03,21,22} | {01,40} | ||

5 | {18,41,43} | {24} | ||

6 | {38} | {04,35} | ||

7 | {23,25,37} | |||

8 | ||||

9 | {05,13,26,29} | |||

10 | {08,17} | |||

11 | {36} | |||

12 | ||||

13 | {44} | |||

14 | {19} | |||

15 | {42} | |||

26 | {16} | |||

30 | {14} |

Cat Avg Occurrence

P 6

H 4

W 9

L 15

C 11

P W L L C C

P W L L L C

P H W L L C

P W W L L C

W W L L L C

H W L L L C

W L L L C C

H W W L L C

W W L L C C

The average for W is 9 but it varies from 2 to 17.

The average for L is 15 but it varies from 5 to 26.

The average for C is 11 but it varies from 4 to 18.

PfxsPHWLC | PfxsCnt |
---|---|

06 04 10 15 10 | 30 |

06 04 09 16 10 | 28 |

06 04 10 14 11 | 27 |

06 04 11 13 11 | 22 |

06 05 08 15 11 | 22 |

06 03 11 16 09 | 22 |

06 03 11 15 10 | 22 |

**You probably understand my reluctance years ago when writing aboutsignatures to release details of this system with its potential to bemisconstrued. The problem is of the 210 Signature Combinations there isno basis for favoring one over the other and when this is combined withthe varying number of integers in each signature all 8,145,060combinations of six integers are possible as it should be, so it's backto randomness and a good template.**

**If you had 01 only in P00, 2 only in S01, 3 only in S02, 4 only in S03,5 only in S05 and 6 only in S06 and you played P00 S01 S02 S03 S04 S05you would have won if the winning number was 01 02 03 04 05 06. **

**To halve the possibilities in a 6/49 game remove just 6 integersand for a 6/45 game remove 4 or 5. Halving the Pool means just a verysmall fraction of all the possibilities are considered and this has adrastic effect on the yield. See Analysis of 15 Lotto Number Sets.**

S00 S02 S08 D00 N10 N10 or W L L L C C

A minimum of two repeats is necessary to be of any future use and if used the probability is that a new single occurrence is more likely andeven a double before a triple occurrence occurs. Bear in mind that we have at least 6 for H* from the previous draw, and most probably 6 of MH*, MMH*, MMMH*, MMMMH*, MMMMMH* and those alone need up to 36 integers with nearly 2 million combinations! The insurmountable problem is that for say, signature length 12, you have in a Pool 49, Pick 6 game, six possibilities for P if only one appearance in the past 10 draws and then you need to select2 from say 16 for W, then 2 from say 16 for L then 1 from 11 for C with little difference between them for ranking - this would give 12 very arbitrary combs. The results after many innovations and exhaustive testing using my LottoTester™ program give at or about thesame yield as using random selections.

**In other words you could have just as easily taken whatever number of combinations youwanted to play from the immediate previous draws and simply randomizedit for the pool applicable to the game.**

Signature | Count | Probability | Rank |
---|---|---|---|

MMMMMMMMMM* | 10 | 0.24 | 1 |

H* | 0 | 0.13 | 2 |

MH* | 1 | 0.12 | 3 |

MMH* | 2 | 0.11 | 4 |

MMMH* | 3 | 0.09 | 5 |

MMMMH* | 4 | 0.07 | 6 |

MMMMMH* | 5 | 0.06 | 7 |

MMMMMMH* | 6 | 0.06 | 8 |

MMMMMMMH* | 7 | 0.05 | 9 |

MMMMMMMMH* | 8 | 0.04 | 10 |

MMMMMMMMMH* | 9 | 0.03 | 11 |

**The likelihood of an integer repeating in the next draw main numbers can easily be miscalculated. In a 2094 draw sample for a Pick 6, Pool 45 Lotto game there are 2occasions where 4 integers repeat (.1%), 49 where 3 integers repeat (2.3%), 296 where 2 integers repeat (14.1%) and 869 with just 1 repeat (41.5%). The likelihood of 1 or more integers repeating is then 58%, less than the usual figure given of around 74.5% (double counting?).**

**For a marginal improvement over random selections you can do no better than my online program ****LottoToWin**** available for a token $5.00 per year subscription.**

**My program ignores history and concentrates on producing a set of numbers to play by using all integers, not repeating paying subsets and maximizing without "optimizing" the coverage.**

It could have been obtained by using the template above with this number order which is just one of 5,864,443,200 permutations of 45 from 45 integers: -

**The reality is at every drawing everything is new and each integer has the same likelihood of being picked as any other integer.**

**When you stand back after applying all the sophisticated programming to extract something from history you may realize as I did that you're really just maximizing the best results obtainable from a small number of lines. The same template result for 9 lines in a 6/45 Lotto game can be obtained in a few seconds using pen and paper by randomizing the following lines: -**

01 02 03 04 05 06

07 08 09 10 11 12

13 14 15 16 17 18

19 20 21 22 23 24

25 26 27 28 29 30

31 32 33 34 35 36

37 38 39 40 41 42

09 10 11 43 44 45

**Using the 6/45 sample history above you could have decided to use: -**

P02 W03 W04 L03 L04 C02

P03 W05 W06 L05 L06 C03

P04 W07 L07 L08 L09 C04

P05 W08 L10 L12 L13 C05

P06 W09 W10 W11 L13 C06

H01 W12 L14 L15 L16 C07

H02 W13 L01 L02 L03 C08

This gives in numerical order: -

11 12 14 15 28 33

01 16 20 34 39 40

03 04 17 24 27 35

19 21 23 25 30 37

05 18 22 31 36 41

06 13 26 29 42 43

09 10 11 32 38 44

02 07 45 09 10 08 12 15 33 11 28 14 20 34 39 01 40 16 27 03 24 0435 17 30 21 23 25 37 19 31 22 18 41 05 36 06 43 13 26 29 42 32 38 44

**Consider the sobering fact that for a Pick 6 Pool 45 lotto game where getting four integers correct has odds of 1 in 733 more than two thirds of theintegers are in the previous 10 draws but this only gives less than one third of the winning Fours. In other words two thirds of the winning Fours require near the full complement of the 45 integer Pool.**

**For the sample of 2094 draws in a Pick 6 Pool 45 Lotto game probability formula calculates that playing one line should give 2094/733 = 2.86 or 3 wins for a combination offour integers ie a Comb-Four. Each line has 15 CombFours and there are 148,995 possibilities of which only 31,890 occurred. Obviously, with 117,105 having no appearance you are better off randomizing the line played. If you were lucky and five of your plays had 06 24 26 36 you could have won the maximum repeat of five CombFours: -**

**Comb-Fours Count in 2094 Draws**

1 | 5 |

10 | 4 |

193 | 3 |

2776 | 2 |

25714 | 1 |

117105 | 0 |

**SO, IN 2094 DRAWS OR RANDOM SELECTIONS 2980 COMB-FOURS REPEATED BY CONTRAST NOT ONE COMB-FOUR THAT WAS RELATED TO ABSENCE OR RECENCY AND OCCURRENCE OR FREQUENCY REPEATED.**

**BUT THERE'S STILL MORE! **

**For the sample of 2094 draws in a Pick 6 Pool 45 Lotto game probability formula calculates that playing one line should give 2094/45 = 47 wins (if paid on) for a combination of three integers ie a CombThree. Each line has 20 CombThrees and there are 14190 possibilities of which 13450 occurred. If you were lucky and twelve of your plays had 01 18 37 or 05 34 42 you could have won the maximum repeat of twelve CombThrees.**

**CombThrees Count in 2094 Draws**

2 | 12 |

3 | 11 |

10 | 10 |

39 | 9 |

124 | 8 |

301 | 7 |

751 | 6 |

1404 | 5 |

2358 | 4 |

3159 | 3 |

3179 | 2 |

2120 | 1 |

740 | 0 |

**So, for a Pick 6, Pool 45 Lotto with 14,190 Comb-Three possibilities we have in 2094 draws 11,330 CombThrees thatrepeated, 2120 that occurred only once and 740 with no appearance.**

**BY CONTRAST JUST 2 COMB-THREES REPEATED ONLY TWICE THAT WERE RELATED TOABSENCE OR RECENCY AND OCCURRENCE OR FREQUENCY.**

**Consider a simple example where you played the line 01 02 03 04 05 06 for the 2094 draws. Three combinations of four integers wins are expected and that is what you would have got 02 03 04 05, 02 03 04 06 and 03 04 05 06.**

FOR USING LOTTO HISTORY ANALYSIS TO PRODUCE NUMBERS TO PLAY.

**You're to be congratulated for thinking Lotto history analysis is as a way to beneficially produce numbers to play in Lotto,irrelevant and is a gigantic con played out by closet or brazen numerologists or despicable opportunists prostituting their integrity for a few lousy bucks and all using the usual trick of assuming something false is true by pandering to something intuitive but incorrect and then constructing a dung heap on thin air.**

This is an analysis of Hits (H) and Misses (M) for the **integers** in a combined set of 6/49 Lotto histories totalling 17,649 draws where the chronological order has been retained . The **Signature** is counted for a **Hit** in the next draw.

Having determined that Absence has no relationship with Appearance, Occurrence or Frequency in previous draws does not rule out the intuitive and correct supposition that irrespective of what came before, **Absence range totals** in our signatures do decrease as the number of Draws increases. This simply means that as you increase the number of draws considered the percentage of integers with increasing non-appearance will diminish.

**What this also means is that if you have 3 hits in a row and then say a couple of misses the likelihood of a hit after the misses is unaffected by the previous 3 hits**. Now if that doesn't produce some dejected faces among the pseudo analysts I dunno what will!

14M means 14 misses.

* is a wild card ie could be any combination of hits and misses.

Where does one go from here? Well, I think I've done enough debunking for a while. The stats and techniques I produce expose the lies and distortions of the swindlers.

I think what is offered on this site has had an effect on the small lotto internet community that frequents forums and some of it has filtered through to those that don't. Whatever the case this site serves as a reference point for those that wish to know or care to point out the information to others.

Having been in business some 30 years I am well aware that just having a website does not generate business - it still has to be publicised in other ways to draw interest apart from high search engine ratings. The problem I need to resolve is whether there is a sufficient market for an honest product that talks about a marginal improvement or facilitates interesting ways to produce play sets rather than how to win the lottery. The number of Lotto players that have visited any Lotto Forum doesn't even register on the radar compared to the hundreds of millions that play.

Regards

Colin

When the Signatures for 17,816 winning draw numbers in the AllWorld649 database are grouped, counted and sorted there are no surprises. The top of the list is always for shorter signatures whether it be a length of 2 or in this case 30, a string of no appearances. If we add the counts for each signature up to 30 with one appearance the total is 8914 ie (near enough to half of the 17,816 winning draws) and representing 8.34% of the 106,896 signatures.

**The Signatures with a significant count (ie greater than 63) have only 1 appearance in the 30 character string**. Looking at the string we see -

__THERE IS NO PROGRESSION IN AN INCREASE OF OCCURRENCES WITH AN INCREASE IN ABSENCE FOR THE SIGNIFICANT 1 HIT IN 30 SIGNATURES.__

**How much closer than that could it be!**

**In other words the likelihood of a number coming up where the signature has a significant count, that was somewhere in the past 14 Draws is just as likely as one that was in the past 15 to 30 draws!**

**Prediction as far as Jackpot Lotto is concerned is a delusion and an absurdity and its practitioners are without question misguided. The people that prey on the gullible with this delusion, especially when they know they are wrong, are the pits of humanity and deserving of the utmost abhorrence.**

*Can the Waffle Artists, given these facts, explain how their systems work? Put simply, they can't and they don't work.*

Regards

Colin

Having hopefully dispelled the notion or myth that a particular history has some influence on the next draw of any Lotto game does not mean we can't use the immediate past history to do interesting things. One thing you need is a method for describing the history and it is quite common in probability books to use Hit/Miss strings. I first introduced this way of looking at the history on another forum in relation to PowerBall numbers - no one seemed to have heard of it and I haven't seen it mentioned since then.

Here is a table showing some of the more common signatures (only 63) over 20 draws with a short term occurrence limit of 10 and long term of 20, which are applicable for each number. Not as simple as you thought, eh! So for a 6/49 Lotto game you would need to realistically consider over 3,000 signatures not to mention the myriad ways you can put them together for 49 integers as repetition is allowed.

A shorthand way of showing MHMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM is MH18M.

In the table below the more common possible Signatures are shown for each integer for 20 draws in a Pick 6, Pool 49 Lotto game. The row with integers 1 to 20 in the columns represents the draws. Looking at the first Signature the last draw in column 1 shows M and the previous 19 draws all have M so this represents a Signature that can be applied to any of the 49 integers of non-occurrence for 20 draws.

Looking at the last row we see an integer's occurrence for the last 20 draws can be described with no occurrence in the last 8 draws, prior to that 2 consecutive hits preceded by 10 draws with no occurrence.

Look at my other posts on signatures and for a more sophisticated and encompassing approach look at **ANALYSIS OF LOTTO DRAW HISTORY - THE FINAL WORD****.**

Regards

Colin

]]>

If you maintain that the history of draws for a particular Lotto game has some bearing on the latent, but currently non-existent, next draw then it follows that an actual draw has some bearing on the draws that follow. I put this to the test by reversing the history - so what came after for the purposes of this test, is what came before.

Needless to say you'll not be able to do this in real time - although I recall there was a thread on the FairyLand Forum - actually one of the best they ever had - because Todd stayed out of it, on this subject. I still recall the perfect timing and posturing of MidWestern Girl. Yep, if they concentrated hard enough then they could project themselves into the future and pick up the next draw result - never heard of anyone getting the big one in this way!

Results are pretty much the same as those for the immediate previous draws whether transposed or not. Let's be clear then - you don't have to use a bunch of draws inmmediately before the next draw. You can use contiguous draws from anywhere in the history or even from another Lotto game's history of the same type to play around with.

Regards

Colin

Using the transparently obvious descending numerical order as in the Tansposed Key Table below, values are changed for the combinations in the immediate previous history for sets of multiples of 7 played against the next draw.

Transposed Key | |||||||||||||

Was | Now | Was | Now | Was | Now | Was | Now | Was | Now | Was | Now | Was | Now |

01 | 49 | 08 | 42 | 15 | 35 | 22 | 28 | 29 | 21 | 36 | 14 | 43 | 07 |

02 | 48 | 09 | 41 | 16 | 34 | 23 | 27 | 30 | 20 | 37 | 13 | 44 | 06 |

03 | 47 | 10 | 40 | 17 | 33 | 24 | 26 | 31 | 19 | 38 | 12 | 45 | 05 |

04 | 46 | 11 | 39 | 18 | 32 | 25 | 25 | 32 | 18 | 39 | 11 | 46 | 04 |

05 | 45 | 12 | 38 | 19 | 31 | 26 | 24 | 33 | 17 | 40 | 10 | 47 | 03 |

06 | 44 | 13 | 37 | 20 | 30 | 27 | 23 | 34 | 16 | 41 | 09 | 48 | 02 |

07 | 43 | 14 | 36 | 21 | 29 | 28 | 22 | 35 | 15 | 42 | 08 | 49 | 01 |

An interesting aside is that for 30 of the 17,850 draws I end up with the same combination - 30 seconds for the reason why.

As you can see there is very little difference in the percentage return between the transposed values and the original values. I think we can deduce from this, among other things, that the structure of the number set is more important than the actual numbers.

Regards

Colin

To kick off our journey into history I thought I would use plays that are probably the most unlikely ones a Lotto player would use - the draws from the immediate previous history. We can use this as a benchmark when considering other methods.

This qualifies as a System because from one draw to the next we are playing the same set of combinations bar one. Results are pretty good. A variation on this method would be to transpose your own numbers.

Regards

Colin