Last updated on April 14, 2024
Hi Edvin,
I bought your 6/46 calculator.
I downloaded “the dominant” combination template. However when I checked some suggested composition against the historical data for NJ Pick 6 wins it showed those patterns never won going all the way back to 1980 which contradicts your point of patterns being repeated every 5-6 or even more draws.
So my question is should I check every pattern in your suggestion for historical appearance and only choose ones that showed up in history which means combining combinatorics with statistics that you said not needed to use your calculators.
I am just trying to verify your point of combinatorial composition repeat themselves at least once in while in lottery drawings. The only tool I can use is the search tool for the past winning numbers here https://www.njlottery.com/en-us/drawgames/pick6lotto.html#tab-winningNumbers
So when I enter any suggested composition from “the dominant” list, it does not show as jackpot won at all for as long back as 1980. Essentially, I am trying to verify your combinatorial math approach by the historical statistics.
Thanks.
Tony
Hi Tony,
Thank you for your explanation, and I understand what you are trying to achieve.
Allow me to offer my perspective on this matter.
First, the New Jersey Pick-6 game evolved through several alterations over the years, shifting from a 6/36 format to 6/39, then progressing to 6/42, followed by 6/46, eventually arriving at 6/49, and ultimately reverting to 6/46.
So, if you’re conducting statistical verification of the Lotterycodex analysis using data as far back as 1980, then it becomes quite challenging to establish any meaningful comparisons due to inconsistent datasets.
With an inconsistent dataset, you achieve nothing but unstable probability and an absence of statistical significance, to name a few.
In short, you cannot mix 6/36, 6/39, 6/42, 6/46, and 6/49 datasets.
Accurately analyzing the game’s behavior becomes more challenging when the foundational rules continuously change.
I appreciate your diligence in your research. All lottery players should adopt a similar mindset. I actively encourage users of Lotterycodex to verify all calculations with historical results, and I’ve emphasized this on my website multiple times.
As you can observe in many of my articles, I’m actively involved in statistical verification. However, it’s crucial to approach this task with care. For instance, when conducting a statistical analysis of the Powerball game, I must initiate my analysis from October 7, 2015, when the 5/69 format was introduced.
Read: Powerball: Game Strategy, FAQs, and Interesting Facts
The same principle applies to Mega Millions. This game adopted the 5/70 format on October 31, 2017, so my analysis should start on this date to make an accurate data comparison.
Read more: How to Win Mega Millions According To Math
Powerball and Mega Millions have undergone numerous changes over time. Therefore, extracting the appropriate dataset is imperative to conduct a meaningful analysis.
The reality is that lottery games go through various transformations over time. This is why I exercise great caution in my analysis to provide precise and timely insights.
I hope that helps. If you need further assistance, please let me know.
Stay safe,
Edvin
Dear Edvin
Thanks for your informative site.
Quick question, do you primarily use odd/even, high/low for the dominant groups? What of adding sum of the line and consecutive numbers to the mix to create even more balanced sets? You could, for instance, choose sets from the 80th percentile for sum of the line and for consecutive numbers choose in a 649 combinations with 1,1,1,1,1,1 (all non-consecutive) and 2,1,1,1,1,1 patterns which I think covers around 50% of all occurrences.
All the best
Hi LJ, once you have balanced odd and even numbers, as well as balanced low and high numbers, you’ll also achieve a balanced sum. It operates under the same principle. Try it yourself. However, let me share an insight, you may not know. The issue with sum range is that not all combinations with an optimal sum have balanced odd/even and low/high numbers. In short, relying solely on sum range doesn’t offer a granular approach. For example, your combination can have a good sum but all numbers are all even numbers. Lotterycodex addresses this problem by creating a unique combinatorial design, providing you with a granular strategy for selecting numbers. So, when you have a dominant composition, it also has an optimal sum. It’s a mathematical certainy.