Four draws ago, I requested from GAT 15 numbers out of 49, chose a table and wheeled those 15 predicted numbers with WG. But at that time I did not yet understand that GAT's predicted numbers change with every draw. So the tickets I bought were the same numbers for 4 draws.
Results: First draw - only one number correct out of 15. 2nd draw - only 2 numbers correct. (And by this time I understood that those predicted numbers were only for the first draw, so I didn't expect anything.) 3rd draw - again only 2 numbers correct. 4th draw - 4 numbers correct out of the 15!
.....Sooz
Was it GAT or just dumb luck?
- lottoarchitect
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1635
- Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 5:03 pm
- Location: Greece
- Contact:
Re: Was it GAT or just dumb luck?
Well, always welcome to hear of good hits! Hope you got your money back and made some profit out of it! This is similar to what Simon did at this thread viewtopic.php?f=23&t=449.
There I stated it is not impossible to get good results even with that approach, however the potential wins will be reduced. I have also observed such temporal effectiveness over a few draws ahead of a prediction made e.g. for a couple draws before but overall these are fewer compared to playing the actual prediction made for every draw. In my GAT test version I have a graph demonstrating hits performance over 10 draws ahead of each prediction however it is really hard to extract/utilize that information to our advantage - and the reason not included in the public version neither I encourage this approach. What happens is that each prediction made by GAT although destined for a particular predicted draw, if one number of those suggested do not show up, it generally "owes" to show based on the analysis performed (and the reason it was actually picked by that GAT), so it can easily show up within the vicinity of those few draws ahead. Most of the time however, the correct numbers show up together at the actual predicted draw and less often two or 3 draws ahead of that. In the long run you may get e.g. 10 times such a hit for the predicted draw, 5 times that hit in the 2nd draw ahead (but not at the predicted draw), 5 times ahead that hit in the 3rd draw ahead etc. However this temporal effectiveness fades away quickly. Hope you understand the reason of that hit.
cheers
lottoarchitect
There I stated it is not impossible to get good results even with that approach, however the potential wins will be reduced. I have also observed such temporal effectiveness over a few draws ahead of a prediction made e.g. for a couple draws before but overall these are fewer compared to playing the actual prediction made for every draw. In my GAT test version I have a graph demonstrating hits performance over 10 draws ahead of each prediction however it is really hard to extract/utilize that information to our advantage - and the reason not included in the public version neither I encourage this approach. What happens is that each prediction made by GAT although destined for a particular predicted draw, if one number of those suggested do not show up, it generally "owes" to show based on the analysis performed (and the reason it was actually picked by that GAT), so it can easily show up within the vicinity of those few draws ahead. Most of the time however, the correct numbers show up together at the actual predicted draw and less often two or 3 draws ahead of that. In the long run you may get e.g. 10 times such a hit for the predicted draw, 5 times that hit in the 2nd draw ahead (but not at the predicted draw), 5 times ahead that hit in the 3rd draw ahead etc. However this temporal effectiveness fades away quickly. Hope you understand the reason of that hit.
cheers
lottoarchitect
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 128 guests