Please comment, gARY !
Manfred
Hi gARY,
in July I found the challenge on merseyworld for the best closed cover
49,6,3,6
http://lottery.merseyworld.com/Wheel/wheel163.html
I sent on 30 July 2004 my record wheel, which I introduced in RGL
on 22 March 2003, to Richard Lloyd.
(this is the URL-address for my Google posting on 22 March 2003 for my
record wheel, paste all 5 lines together into the URL)
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=de&lr=&ie=UTF-8&threadm=72aa15be.03032
30817.315145d4%40posting.google.com&rnum=2&prev=/groups%3Fq%3Dsm
anf%2Brecord%2Bgroup:rec.gambling.lottery%26hl%3Dde%26lr%3D%26ie%3D
UTF-8%26group%3Drec.gambling.lottery%26selm%3D72aa15be.0303230817.31
5145d4%2540posting.google.com%26rnum%3D2
But Richard Lloyd answered
(3040 combination wheel means that 3040 3-number combinations are
covered with this wheel, 3060 is the theoretical maximum for 163 lines):
> Unfortunately, gARY sent me a 3,040 combination wheel on 2nd July:
>
> http://lottery.merseyworld.com/Wheel/wheel163.html
>
> which went on my site first. If I'd have known about the other
> wheel earlier, I could have put it up, but gARY was the first to
> inform me about the 3,040 combination wheel, so I'll keep his on my
> site.
I downloaded this wheel from merseyworld:
# This is the record-holding 163-ticket wheel taken from the page:
# http://lottery.merseyworld.com/Wheel/Wheel.html
# It was constructed by gARY and
# later confirmed to guarantee at least a 3-match in a 6 from 49
(snip)
# Wheel below submitted on Friday 2nd July 2004
1 3 5 8 9 20
1 3 5 10 22 38
1 3 5 14 18 34
1 3 5 23 43 44
1 3 5 27 28 29
1 8 9 10 27 39
1 8 17 28 35 40
1 8 17 29 39 49
1 9 14 29 39 43
1 9 18 20 39 44
1 9 22 23 34 39
1 10 17 28 33 46
1 12 13 17 27 28
1 12 35 38 46 49
1 13 33 35 38 49
1 13 38 40 46 49
1 14 23 38 44 49
1 17 20 22 28 29
1 18 34 38 43 49
2 4 6 11 24 42
2 4 7 16 30 41
2 4 15 19 45 47
2 4 21 25 31 36
2 4 26 32 37 48
2 6 7 25 47 48
2 6 15 30 31 37
2 6 16 26 36 45
2 6 19 21 32 41
2 7 11 19 26 31
2 7 15 24 32 36
2 7 21 37 42 45
2 11 15 16 21 48
2 11 25 30 32 45
2 11 36 37 41 47
2 15 25 26 41 42
2 16 19 24 25 37
2 16 31 32 42 47
2 19 30 36 42 48
2 21 24 26 30 47
2 24 31 41 45 48
3 8 9 35 40 49
3 8 10 17 27 38
3 9 10 33 46 49
3 9 12 13 27 49
3 9 20 22 29 49
3 10 12 13 35 46
3 10 17 20 39 49
3 12 28 33 35 39
3 12 28 39 40 46
3 13 28 33 39 40
3 14 17 29 38 43
3 14 18 23 28 39
3 17 18 20 38 44
3 17 22 23 34 38
3 28 34 39 43 44
4 6 7 31 32 45
4 6 15 36 41 48
4 6 16 21 37 47
4 6 19 25 26 30
4 7 11 15 25 37
4 7 19 21 24 48
4 7 26 36 42 47
4 11 16 19 32 36
4 11 21 26 41 45
4 11 30 31 47 48
4 15 16 24 26 31
4 15 21 30 32 42
4 16 25 42 45 48
4 19 31 37 41 42
4 24 25 32 41 47
4 24 30 36 37 45
5 8 10 27 28 49
5 8 35 38 39 40
5 9 12 17 33 40
5 9 13 17 35 46
5 9 14 17 34 44
5 9 17 18 23 43
5 10 33 38 39 46
5 12 13 27 38 39
5 14 28 29 43 49
5 17 22 27 39 49
5 18 20 28 44 49
5 20 22 29 38 39
5 22 23 28 34 49
6 7 11 21 30 36
6 7 15 16 19 42
6 7 24 26 37 41
6 11 15 26 32 47
6 11 16 25 31 41
6 11 19 37 45 48
6 15 21 24 25 45
6 16 24 30 32 48
6 19 24 31 36 47
6 21 26 31 42 48
6 25 32 36 37 42
6 30 41 42 45 47
7 11 16 24 45 47
7 11 32 41 42 48
7 15 21 31 41 47
7 15 26 30 45 48
7 16 21 25 26 32
7 16 31 36 37 48
7 19 25 36 41 45
7 19 30 32 37 47
7 24 25 30 31 42
8 9 22 28 38 39
8 10 12 27 33 40
8 10 14 18 27 34
8 12 14 20 23 46
8 12 18 22 43 46
8 12 29 34 44 46
8 13 14 22 33 44
8 13 18 23 29 33
8 13 20 33 34 43
8 20 29 35 43 44
8 22 23 35 40 46
9 10 17 28 29 38
9 14 18 28 34 38
9 20 27 28 38 49
9 23 28 38 43 44
10 12 14 22 35 44
10 12 18 23 29 35
10 12 20 34 35 43
10 13 14 20 23 40
10 13 18 22 40 43
10 13 20 22 27 29
10 13 23 27 43 44
10 13 29 34 40 44
10 18 29 33 43 46
11 15 19 24 30 41
11 15 31 36 42 45
11 16 26 30 37 42
11 19 21 25 42 47
11 21 24 31 32 37
11 24 25 26 36 48
12 14 29 33 40 43
12 18 20 33 40 44
12 22 23 33 34 40
13 14 18 34 35 46
13 27 28 35 39 46
14 17 18 34 39 49
14 18 22 29 34 43
14 20 23 27 33 35
14 22 27 40 44 46
15 16 25 30 36 47
15 16 32 37 41 45
15 19 21 26 36 37
15 19 25 31 32 48
15 24 37 42 47 48
16 19 21 30 31 45
16 19 26 41 47 48
16 21 24 36 41 42
17 23 39 43 44 49
18 22 27 33 35 43
18 23 27 29 40 46
19 24 26 32 42 45
20 22 23 34 44 46
20 27 34 40 43 46
21 25 30 37 41 48
21 32 36 45 47 48
25 26 31 37 45 47
26 30 31 32 36 41
27 29 33 34 35 44
I analysed this wheel with Covermaster in the following way:
I loaded it into Covermaster 5.2, sorted it into dependency
( Tools-Sort-Dependency ) and found in the dependency chart
that it is a closed two cover wheel.
The first 77 lines are the cover 22,6,3,3=77, as we can see
in the dependency chart.
I deleted the first 77 lines and the remaining wheel is a
27,6,3,4=86 with the numbers 2 to 49:
1 12 13 17 27 28
5 12 13 27 38 39
8 13 14 22 33 44
1 10 17 28 33 46
5 8 35 38 39 40
1 8 17 28 35 40
3 8 9 35 40 49
5 10 33 38 39 46
14 20 23 27 33 35
10 12 14 22 35 44
3 9 12 13 27 49
8 13 20 33 34 43
3 9 10 33 46 49
18 22 27 33 35 43
8 13 18 23 29 33
8 12 18 22 43 46
8 12 29 34 44 46
10 12 18 23 29 35
10 12 20 34 35 43
27 29 33 34 35 44
20 27 34 40 43 46
10 13 29 34 40 44
1 9 18 20 39 44
8 12 14 20 23 46
10 13 14 20 23 40
3 17 18 20 38 44
5 18 20 28 44 49
14 22 27 40 44 46
5 9 13 17 35 46
18 23 27 29 40 46
10 13 18 22 40 43
1 9 14 29 39 43
3 14 17 29 38 43
5 14 28 29 43 49
1 3 5 23 43 44
9 23 28 38 43 44
17 23 39 43 44 49
1 9 22 23 34 39
3 17 22 23 34 38
5 22 23 28 34 49
3 9 20 22 29 49
1 17 20 22 28 29
5 20 22 29 38 39
1 3 5 14 18 34
9 14 18 28 34 38
14 17 18 34 39 49
5 9 12 17 33 40
3 8 10 17 27 38
5 8 10 27 28 49
1 8 9 10 27 39
1 13 38 40 46 49
12 18 20 33 40 44
1 13 33 35 38 49
12 14 29 33 40 43
1 3 5 8 9 20
1 8 17 29 39 49
1 14 23 38 44 49
3 10 17 20 39 49
5 9 17 18 23 43
8 9 22 28 38 39
9 10 17 28 29 38
12 22 23 33 34 40
1 3 5 27 28 29
1 18 34 38 43 49
5 9 14 17 34 44
13 27 28 35 39 46
3 14 18 23 28 39
3 28 34 39 43 44
5 17 22 27 39 49
9 20 27 28 38 49
1 3 5 10 22 38
1 12 35 38 46 49
13 14 18 34 35 46
3 13 28 33 39 40
8 10 14 18 27 34
8 10 12 27 33 40
3 12 28 39 40 46
3 10 12 13 35 46
3 12 28 33 35 39
10 13 20 22 27 29
10 13 23 27 43 44
8 20 29 35 43 44
14 18 22 29 34 43
8 22 23 35 40 46
20 22 23 34 44 46
10 18 29 33 43 46
Tools - Reports - Charts - Distribution shows how often each number
is available and which numbers have to be transposed to create a wheel
with the pointer numbers 1 to 27 .
We see that the pointer numbers 1 to 27 have been totally mixed up
into the numbers 1 to 49.
I transposed the wheel into the numbers 1 to 27 with Covermaster
to get a wheel with pointer numbers:
Tools-Transpose-Swap number 1 with number 2.
I swapped the following numbers:
28 with 2
29 with 4
33 with 6
34 with 7
35 with 11
38 with 15
39 with 16
40 with 19
43 with 21
44 with 24
46 with 25
49 with 26
I got the following wheel after sorting to dependency:
Tools-Sort-Dependency:
27,6,3,4=86
1 2 12 13 17 27
5 12 13 15 16 27
6 8 13 14 22 24
1 2 6 10 17 25
5 8 11 15 16 19
1 2 8 11 17 19
3 8 9 11 19 26
5 6 10 15 16 25
6 11 14 20 23 27
3 9 12 13 26 27
10 11 12 14 22 24
6 7 8 13 20 21
3 6 9 10 25 26
4 6 8 13 18 23
6 11 18 21 22 27
4 7 8 12 24 25
8 12 18 21 22 25
4 10 11 12 18 23
7 10 11 12 20 21
4 6 7 11 24 27
1 9 16 18 20 24
4 7 10 13 19 24
7 19 20 21 25 27
2 5 18 20 24 26
3 15 17 18 20 24
8 12 14 20 23 25
10 13 14 19 20 23
14 19 22 24 25 27
5 9 11 13 17 25
4 18 19 23 25 27
10 13 18 19 21 22
1 4 9 14 16 21
3 4 14 15 17 21
2 4 5 14 21 26
1 3 5 21 23 24
1 7 9 16 22 23
2 9 15 21 23 24
16 17 21 23 24 26
2 5 7 22 23 26
3 7 15 17 22 23
3 4 9 20 22 26
1 2 4 17 20 22
4 5 15 16 20 22
1 3 5 7 14 18
2 7 9 14 15 18
7 14 16 17 18 26
5 6 9 12 17 19
3 8 10 15 17 27
2 5 8 10 26 27
1 8 9 10 16 27
1 13 15 19 25 26
6 12 18 19 20 24
1 6 11 13 15 26
4 6 12 14 19 21
1 3 5 8 9 20
1 4 8 16 17 26
1 14 15 23 24 26
2 4 9 10 15 17
2 8 9 15 16 22
3 10 16 17 20 26
5 9 17 18 21 23
6 7 12 19 22 23
1 2 3 4 5 27
1 7 15 18 21 26
5 7 9 14 17 24
2 11 13 16 25 27
2 3 7 16 21 24
2 3 14 16 18 23
5 16 17 22 26 27
2 9 15 20 26 27
1 3 5 10 15 22
1 11 12 15 25 26
7 11 13 14 18 25
2 3 6 13 16 19
7 8 10 14 18 27
6 8 10 12 19 27
2 3 12 16 19 25
2 3 6 11 12 16
3 10 11 12 13 25
4 10 13 20 22 27
10 13 21 23 24 27
4 8 11 20 21 24
4 7 14 18 21 22
8 11 19 22 23 25
7 20 22 23 24 25
4 6 10 18 21 25
Then I looked at the dependency chart with
Tools-Reports-Charts-Dependency and found, that the dependency chart
of this wheel is completely identically to the chart of my
published wheel from 2003, lines 78 to 163, if I transpose my wheel
to the numbers 1 to 27 and sort it also to dependency.
Because the chart is identically, I wanted to know whether the wheel is also
identically to my puplished wheel (see at the bottom).
I swapped the numbers of "gARY's" downloaded wheel
from merseyworld in the following order
Tools -Transpose - Swap number 1 with number 2:
28 with 2
29 with 4
33 with 6
34 with 7
35 with 11
38 with 15
39 with 16
40 with 19
43 with 21
44 with 24
46 with 25
49 with 26
6 with 46
8 with 35
13 with 29
14 with 41
22 with 28
3 with 38
1 with 32
2 with 49
10 with 33
11 with 48
15 with 31
19 with 47
20 with 37
7 with 40
21 with 44
9 with 34
4 with 36
12 with 30
18 with 39
23 with 43
24 with 42
25 with 45
26 with 25
27 with 24
16 with 23
5 with 26
17 with 27
7 with 4
11 with 10
15 with 5
13 with 18
20 with 14
15 with 8
20 with 9
19 with 7
8 with 9
13 with 9
4 with 5
5 with 6
9 with 15
9 with 18
Then I sorted this wheel numerical: Tools - Sort - Numerical
Surprising or not - I got a wheel which is in each line identically to my
published record wheel.
Conclusion:
"gARY's wheel from merseyworld is not a new invented second record
wheel, with the same covering, but it is exactly the same record wheel
which I published in RGL in March 2003, only with randomized numbers.
gARY, it seems you only mixed up the numbers of my wheel and informed
Richard Lloyd that you have created a record wheel.
If you really think you have also a (different) record wheel, why didn't you
show it in the RGL group?
With your knowledge of Covermaster you certainly found that your wheel is
identical to mine (simply compare the dependency charts).
Richard Lloyd, now that it is shown that gARY's wheel is not an other wheel
but the same like mine, only with randomized numbers, I ask you to
remove "gARY's" wheel from your homepage and to accept my wheel as a
new record wheel.
You shouldn't trust anybody who don't let you know his real name.
Please your comment gARY !
Manfred
enclosure:
This closed 2-cover wheel I posted on 22 March 2003 and it is the world
record for highest covering of a closed wheel with 163 lines up to today:
Lines 1 to 22: 22,6,3,3 = 77, sorted numerical
Lines 78 to 163: 27,6,3,4 = 86, highest covering, sorted numerical
1 2 3 7 11 15
1 2 4 8 12 19
1 2 5 9 16 20
1 2 6 13 17 21
1 2 10 14 18 22
1 3 4 5 6 10
1 3 8 9 13 14
1 3 12 16 17 18
1 3 19 20 21 22
1 4 7 9 17 22
1 4 11 13 18 20
1 4 14 15 16 21
1 5 7 8 18 21
1 5 11 14 17 19
1 5 12 13 15 22
1 6 7 12 14 20
1 6 8 11 16 22
1 6 9 15 18 19
1 7 10 13 16 19
1 8 10 15 17 20
1 9 10 11 12 21
2 3 4 9 18 21
2 3 5 8 17 22
2 3 6 14 16 19
2 3 10 12 13 20
2 4 5 7 13 14
2 4 6 15 20 22
2 4 10 11 16 17
2 5 6 11 12 18
2 5 10 15 19 21
2 6 7 8 9 10
2 7 12 16 21 22
2 7 17 18 19 20
2 8 11 14 20 21
2 8 13 15 16 18
2 9 11 13 19 22
2 9 12 14 15 17
3 4 7 8 16 20
3 4 11 12 14 22
3 4 13 15 17 19
3 5 7 9 12 19
3 5 11 13 16 21
3 5 14 15 18 20
3 6 7 13 18 22
3 6 8 12 15 21
3 6 9 11 17 20
3 7 10 14 17 21
3 8 10 11 18 19
3 9 10 15 16 22
4 5 8 9 11 15
4 5 12 17 20 21
4 5 16 18 19 22
4 6 7 11 19 21
4 6 8 14 17 18
4 6 9 12 13 16
4 7 10 12 15 18
4 8 10 13 21 22
4 9 10 14 19 20
5 6 7 15 16 17
5 6 8 13 19 20
5 6 9 14 21 22
5 7 10 11 20 22
5 8 10 12 14 16
5 9 10 13 17 18
6 10 11 13 14 15
6 10 12 17 19 22
6 10 16 18 20 21
7 8 11 12 13 17
7 8 14 15 19 22
7 9 11 14 16 18
7 9 13 15 20 21
8 9 12 18 20 22
8 9 16 17 19 21
11 12 15 16 19 20
11 15 17 18 21 22
12 13 14 18 19 21
13 14 16 17 20 22
23 24 25 26 27 28
23 24 26 29 30 31
23 24 29 45 48 49
23 24 32 33 34 35
23 25 27 32 35 36
23 25 27 33 37 38
23 25 27 39 40 41
23 25 27 42 43 44
23 26 28 31 36 37
23 26 31 33 45 46
23 26 31 35 47 48
23 28 31 34 35 49
23 28 32 34 40 43
23 29 38 46 47 49
23 30 38 45 47 49
23 30 38 46 48 49
23 32 34 36 41 44
23 32 34 37 39 42
23 38 39 41 43 49
23 38 40 42 44 49
24 25 26 33 35 49
24 25 29 30 34 38
24 25 31 34 37 49
24 26 32 36 38 49
24 27 29 30 32 49
24 27 31 33 35 38
24 28 29 33 36 37
24 28 39 44 46 48
24 28 41 42 45 47
24 29 33 42 43 44
24 30 33 35 46 47
24 33 35 39 40 41
24 36 39 43 45 47
24 36 40 42 46 48
24 37 40 44 45 47
24 37 41 43 46 48
25 26 28 40 43 49
25 26 36 41 44 49
25 26 37 39 42 49
25 28 34 36 37 38
25 29 31 32 45 47
25 29 31 32 46 48
25 30 31 32 45 48
25 31 32 39 40 44
25 31 32 41 42 43
25 33 34 38 45 46
25 34 35 38 47 48
26 27 29 34 45 48
26 27 30 34 46 47
26 27 34 39 43 44
26 27 34 40 41 42
26 28 31 32 33 38
26 32 34 35 37 38
26 32 38 39 40 41
26 32 38 42 43 44
27 28 31 38 40 43
27 28 32 36 37 49
27 31 33 34 36 49
27 31 36 38 41 44
27 31 37 38 39 42
27 32 33 45 46 49
27 32 35 47 48 49
28 29 33 39 44 47
28 29 35 41 42 46
28 30 33 41 42 48
28 30 35 39 44 45
28 30 40 43 46 47
28 35 43 45 47 48
28 36 39 40 41 44
28 37 40 42 43 45
29 30 33 38 45 48
29 33 36 40 42 47
29 33 37 41 43 47
29 35 36 39 43 46
29 35 37 40 44 46
29 39 40 41 45 48
30 33 36 39 43 48
30 33 37 40 44 48
30 35 36 40 42 45
30 35 37 41 43 45
30 36 41 44 46 47
30 37 39 42 46 47
31 34 39 40 41 49
31 34 42 43 44 49
33 36 39 44 45 46
35 36 37 42 44 48
Created by Manfred
JaTeMoto
Yes, Comment, gARY
"Manfred" <sm...@gmx.de> wrote in message
news:72aa15be.04082...@posting.google.com...
Nick UK
"JaTeMoto" <ja-te-mot...@hotmail.com> wrote something that sounded
like...
>
> Yes, Comment, gARY
>
.........................................
And perhaps you could make a purposeful 'comment' rather than your
three-word.. "Yes, Comment, gARY" then resending the original post in it's
entirety!
Ever heard of <snip for brevity> ? Saves a bit of bandwidth and saves
interested readers/subscribers re-downloading an entire post that they've
already read!
Try it sometime!
Nick.
Gerry
"Nick UK" <lott...@nospam123ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:eNHXc.681$Eo1...@newsfe5-gui.ntli.net...
Nick,
This is very important to those of us who struggle to do wheel
improvements. I know who made that comment and he does deserve
to see a statement from Gary. I don't know what happened and only
Gary can clear the matter up.
I am respectfully requesting that you stay on the sidelines and let this
thing sort itself out.
Thanks
Gerry
Nick UK
>> "JaTeMoto" <ja-te-mot...@hotmail.com> wrote something that sounded
>> like...
>> >
>> > Yes, Comment, gARY
>> >
>> .........................................
>>
>> And perhaps you could make a purposeful 'comment' rather than your
>> three-word.. "Yes, Comment, gARY" then resending the original post in
> it's
>> entirety!
>>
>> Ever heard of <snip for brevity> ? Saves a bit of bandwidth and saves
>> interested readers/subscribers re-downloading an entire post that they've
>> already read!
>>
>> Try it sometime!
>>
>> Nick.
> > ......................................................
> >
"Gerry" <tul...@earthlink.net> wrote..
> Nick,
>
> This is very important to those of us who struggle to do wheel
> improvements. I know who made that comment and he does deserve
> to see a statement from Gary. I don't know what happened and only
> Gary can clear the matter up.
>
> I am respectfully requesting that you stay on the sidelines and let this
> thing sort itself out.
>
> Thanks
>
> Gerry
................................................
No problem Gerry. As a 'non-wheeler' I never intended participating in this
particular event.
My post was pointed directly at "JaTeMoto" for his three-word response to
"Manfred" (the originator of this thread) whilst re-sending the whole of
"Manfred's" post!
In any case: if "JaTeMoto" is not involved in this wheel 'record' dispute,
then perhaps he too, should keep his three-word responses out of it.
I agree: if what "Manfred" says is indeed fact - then of course, he deserves
a response from gARY.
Let's hope gARY will respond and as you say.. "clear the matter up."
Cheers.
Nick.
gARY
This is the exact situation why your clock must be spot on!
At all times.
Thank you,
gARY
gARY
At the mo,
gARY
--
Affordable Wheeling:-
http://www.justservices.com/9ukp.html
"Nick UK" <lott...@nospam123ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:eNHXc.681$Eo1...@newsfe5-gui.ntli.net...
>
EdH
wrote:
>I see this only.
>
>At the mo,
>gARY
gARY,
If your ISP is not giving you all the rgl usenet posts in your
newsreader then it may be time to change ISP's.
Suggestion: Go to the Web and Google Group Rec.Gambling.Lottery to
view the missing posts. They are there.
EdH
Robert Perkis
gARY wrote:
>
> I see this only.
>
> At the mo,
> gARY
>
This is what Manfred posted, I put End at the end if you
don't see that part is missing. RP
Hi gARY,
http://lottery.merseyworld.com/Wheel/wheel163.html
(snip)
27,6,3,4=86
Manfred
enclosure:
Created by Manfred
END
Nick UK
"Robert Perkis" <rob...@icdus.com> wrote in message
news:41303A3F...@icdus.com...
>
> This is what Manfred posted, I put End at the end if you
> don't see that part is missing. RP
>
> email and to the group rec.gambling.lottery:
>
> Hi gARY,
>
> in July I found the challenge on merseyworld for the best closed cover
> 49,6,3,6
>
> http://lottery.merseyworld.com/Wheel/wheel163.html
>
> I sent on 30 July 2004 my record wheel, which I introduced in RGL
> on 22 March 2003, to Richard Lloyd.
>
> (this is the URL-address for my Google posting on 22 March 2003 for my
> record wheel, paste all 5 lines together into the URL)
>
........................................
Yes Robert..
As soon as I find a reason for rgl subscribers *not* to resend masses of
info in their posts.. you find a reason to do exactly that! :-)
What's puzzling me is why gARY didn't see "Manfred's" original post? I'm
using Outlook Express ng reader and as far I'm aware, I receive all posts.
What ng reader do you have gARY? The Sun? The Mirror? :-)
Nick.
Nigel
>
> What's puzzling me is why gARY didn't see "Manfred's" original post? I'm
> using Outlook Express ng reader and as far I'm aware, I receive all posts.
>
> What ng reader do you have gARY? The Sun? The Mirror? :-)
>
> Nick.
>
I don't get all the postings and I have a highly rated (as far as the UK
is concerned) ISP. I used to use NTL from work but that was worse.
Evil Nigel
Robert Perkis
I often see people replying to spam that didn't make it
through to me. Guess it kinda depends on whether you're
on a trunk, branch or twig of the internet. Robert
gARY
1 Manfred
2 JaTeMoto
8 EdH
9 RP
10 Nick UK
(Nigel's hasn't turned Google yet but I obviously see this one)
I am using the News reader via Outlook and generally speaking my ISP is
pretty spot on however every now and then the ISP goes walkabout OR I have
also noticed that if certain words are used my ISP will reject the post,
pity that is not all the crap spam really.
Anyways, I don't intend to cut en' paste so to the point of the thread
riding Nigel post (back on topic).
Manfred (email and to the group rec.gambling.lottery)
I am not disputing you were the first to discover that wheel (1'500 triples)
however as I have been working on and off that project (I point out in the
other thread, I will repost if you wish?) for over a year now you must also
expect me to have made that wheel more than a few times (as indeed I have),
therefore I use it. You say that I jumbled the wheel, I say I optimised from
another and there it was. . . I never compared with your 1'500 triples as I
felt there no need, so if as you say it is the same have you thought that
there can be only_one_way to make this wheel?
And if so, I simply found it, again,
gARY
--
Affordable Wheeling:-
http://www.justservices.com/9ukp.html
"Nigel" wrote
Robert Perkis
I copied and pasted the wheel Manfred posted as coming from
gARY's wheel on Merseryworld into CoverMaster and copied
the report, then did the same for the wheel Manfred said he
posted in r.g.l. prior to gARY's submission to Merseyworld.
Here are the two reports:
gARY's wheel according to Manfred's post tested as . . .
T if M Tested Covered % Not Covered %
-------------------------------------------------------------
2 If 2 : 1,176 582 49.48980 594 50.51020
2 If 3 : 18,424 18,424 100.00000 0 0.00000
2 If 4 : 211,876 211,876 100.00000 0 0.00000
2 If 5 : 1,906,884 1,906,884 100.00000 0 0.00000
2 If 6 : 13,983,816 13,983,816 100.00000 0 0.00000
2 If 7 : 85,900,584 85,900,584 100.00000 0 0.00000
3 If 3 : 18,424 3,040 16.50022 15,384 83.49978
3 If 4 : 211,876 99,445 46.93547 112,431 53.06453
3 If 5 : 1,906,884 1,577,709 82.73754 329,175 17.26246
3 If 6 : 13,983,816 13,983,816 100.00000 0 0.00000
3 If 7 : 85,900,584 85,900,584 100.00000 0 0.00000
4 If 4 : 211,876 2,439 1.15115 209,437 98.84885
4 If 5 : 1,906,884 103,031 5.40311 1,803,853 94.59689
4 If 6 : 13,983,816 2,026,162 14.48934 11,957,654 85.51066
4 If 7 : 85,900,584 22,581,633 26.28810 63,318,951 73.71190
5 If 5 : 1,906,884 978 0.05129 1,905,906 99.94871
5 If 6 : 13,983,816 42,195 0.30174 13,941,621 99.69826
5 If 7 : 85,900,584 886,371 1.03186 85,014,213 98.96814
6 If 7 : 85,900,584 7,009 0.00816 85,893,575 99.99184
Manfred's wheel results
T if M Tested Covered % Not Covered %
-------------------------------------------------------------
2 If 2 : 1,176 582 49.48980 594 50.51020
2 If 3 : 18,424 18,424 100.00000 0 0.00000
2 If 4 : 211,876 211,876 100.00000 0 0.00000
2 If 5 : 1,906,884 1,906,884 100.00000 0 0.00000
2 If 6 : 13,983,816 13,983,816 100.00000 0 0.00000
2 If 7 : 85,900,584 85,900,584 100.00000 0 0.00000
3 If 3 : 18,424 3,040 16.50022 15,384 83.49978
3 If 4 : 211,876 99,445 46.93547 112,431 53.06453
3 If 5 : 1,906,884 1,577,709 82.73754 329,175 17.26246
3 If 6 : 13,983,816 13,983,816 100.00000 0 0.00000
3 If 7 : 85,900,584 85,900,584 100.00000 0 0.00000
4 If 4 : 211,876 2,439 1.15115 209,437 98.84885
4 If 5 : 1,906,884 103,031 5.40311 1,803,853 94.59689
4 If 6 : 13,983,816 2,026,162 14.48934 11,957,654 85.51066
4 If 7 : 85,900,584 23,554,262 27.42037 62,346,322 72.57963
5 If 5 : 1,906,884 978 0.05129 1,905,906 99.94871
5 If 6 : 13,983,816 42,195 0.30174 13,941,621 99.69826
5 If 7 : 85,900,584 886,371 1.03186 85,014,213 98.96814
6 If 7 : 85,900,584 7,009 0.00816 85,893,575 99.99184
gARY
4 If 7 : 85,900,584 22,581,633 26.28810 63,318,951 73.71190
Manfred
4 If 7 : 85,900,584 23,554,262 27.42037 62,346,322 72.57963
The only difference is in the 4if7 area where Manfreds's version
pulls ahead in an otherwise totally even race making Manfred's
wheel the winner in total overall coverage the criteria for
being posted as the best on Merseyworld I believe.
A: This shows the two wheels aren't exactly identical.
B: Manfred should point this out while resubmitting if
it tests the same way using the Merseyworld tester
verify.zip at http://lottery.merseyworld.com/Wheel/
That's my opinion, I might even be right. Robert Perkis
Manfred
I believe you that you found the same wheel again.
Does that also mean that you did know that your
wheel which you sent to Richard Lloyd is exactly
the same like mine or not, when you sent it as a
new merseyworld record wheel ?
Anybody can make a home page and a challenge
and its own rules of his challenge.
But the important place is RGL for me, where the
experts are.
Before you sent your wheel to Richard Lloyd
the old record at merseyworld was beaten by my
publishing in RGL
I didn't say that you jumbled the wheel, I said it seems
that you jumbled the wheel. That's a big difference
and I hope you see that.
Manfred
"gARY" <Find-Contact-Page@Website> wrote in message news:<4130f...@mk-nntp-1.news.uk.worldonline.com>...
Manfred
if you can transpose one wheel into another,
then the covering has to be the same.
Both wheels are the same, line by line and
number for number, if we swap the numbers like shown.
Now I loaded both wheels, which you also compared,
into Covermaster and set
Pool: 49
Pick: 6
Match: 4
Hits: 7
Both wheels cover 25.007.836 combinations like expected.
There is no difference like at the quick report which shows
23.554.262 and 22.581.633 covered combinations respectively.
I think to remember that John at one posting mentioned an error
in the quick report for covermaster 5.2.
Perhaps John can say why Covermaster shows 3 different numbers
for 4 if 7 and which is right ?
Manfred
Robert Perkis <rob...@icdus.com> wrote in message news:<41318B4A...@icdus.com>...
B Bo
'difference'...
John
"Manfred" <sm...@gmx.de> wrote in message
news:72aa15be.04082...@posting.google.com...
Harry Scott
<sm...@gmx.de> writes
>email and to the group rec.gambling.lottery:
>
>Hi gARY,
>
>in July I found the challenge on merseyworld for the best closed cover
>49,6,3,6
>
>http://lottery.merseyworld.com/Wheel/wheel163.html
>
>I sent on 30 July 2004 my record wheel, which I introduced in RGL
>on 22 March 2003, to Richard Lloyd.
>
># This is the record-holding 163-ticket wheel taken from the page:
># http://lottery.merseyworld.com/Wheel/Wheel.html
>
># It was constructed by gARY and
># later confirmed to guarantee at least a 3-match in a 6 from 49
>
>Tools-Reports-Charts-Dependency and found, that the dependency chart
>of this wheel is completely identically to the chart of my
>published wheel from 2003, lines 78 to 163, if I transpose my wheel
>to the numbers 1 to 27 and sort it also to dependency.
>
>Because the chart is identically, I wanted to know whether the wheel is also
>identically to my puplished wheel (see at the bottom).
>
>I swapped the numbers of "gARY's" downloaded wheel
>from merseyworld in the following order
>Tools -Transpose - Swap number 1 with number 2:
>
>Manfred
>
>
>enclosure:
>
Why all the fuss.
I went to Merseyworld site today AND downloaded about 30 163 line perms
and from what I could see they were all different and the second perm
downloaded had won a jackpot previously of £2,824,080 on line 43!
We all know about the guaranteed #5 dividend but the average is around 3
#5 dividends and the average winnings were around £39,000 on the 30 or
so I downloaded minus the jackpot one of course!
This over the 906 draws to date. 39000*100/906*163 = 26.4% return, as
expected.
Just how many perms like this exist, probably 2 or 3 million I estimate
in this 6/49 lottery, a world record my arse.
Try;
http://lottery.merseyworld.com/Perms.html
--
Harry Scott
Manfred
1) we need not to open a second thread with the same topic.
You can have there the same problems like here.
I prefer to stay here and want only to answer here.
If you have problems with your ISP and newsreader, use
any browser like Netscape, Mozilla, Opera or Microsoft
Internet Explorer (certainly you are surfing with a browser
nearly every day in the internet), goto
http://groups.google.com
and then goto " rec.gambling.lottery " and for 100% you will
see all postings.
2) Once again, I didn't say you jumbled the numbers, I said
it seems so.
I believe you that you found the same wheel a second time.
But like at a melody or a rhyme: if someone published it
before and you make it a second time, then it is not yours
but it is of the first publisher. That is guilty for all publications,
since hundred of years, and now also for publications of wheels.
Therefore, what you sent to merseyworld is not your wheel,
like you said to Richard Lloyd, also if you found it a second time.
It's my wheel which you found a second time, independent
how the pointer numbers are changed, isn't it?
And you should have told this to Richard Lloyd.
Manfred
"gARY" <Find-Contact-Page@Website> wrote in message news:<4130f...@mk-nntp-1.news.uk.worldonline.com>...
Manfred
my english is not so good and guilty is similar to the
german word "gültig" which means "valid", and guilty is
nonsense here.
So I replace guilty by valid:
Hi gARY,
1) we need not to open a second thread with the same topic.
You can have there the same problems like here.
I prefer to stay here and want only to answer here.
If you have problems with your ISP and newsreader, use
any browser like Netscape, Mozilla, Opera or Microsoft
Internet Explorer (certainly you are surfing with a browser
nearly every day in the internet), goto
http://groups.google.com
and then goto " rec.gambling.lottery " and for 100% you will
see all postings.
2) Once again, I didn't say you jumbled the numbers, I said
it seems so.
I believe you that you found the same wheel a second time.
But like at a melody or a rhyme: if someone published it
before and you make it a second time, then it is not yours
but it is of the first publisher. That is valid for all publications,
since hundred of years, and now also for publications of wheels.
Therefore, what you sent to merseyworld is not your wheel,
like you said to Richard Lloyd, also if you found it a second time.
It's my wheel which you found a second time, independent
how the pointer numbers are changed, isn't it?
And you should have told this to Richard Lloyd.
Manfred
"gARY" <Find-Contact-Page@Website> wrote in message news:<4130f...@mk-nntp-1.news.uk.worldonline.com>...
gARY
> it seems so.
> I believe you that you found the same wheel a second time.
I have not checked your past published wheel and I take your word that these
are indeed the same.
> But like at a melody or a rhyme: if someone published it
> before and you make it a second time, then it is not yours
> but it is of the first publisher. That is valid for all publications,
> since hundred of years,
I agree.
> and now also for publications of wheels.
I'm not so sure here, as firstly I only remember you posting to rgl the
wheel carrying some 1'500 trio's and not the full blown 163 which now leads
me to another point with regard.to whom the wheel author is . . this
163wheel is in two parts as you know so does the author of the 22,6,3,3=77
have a claim here also?
It gets complicated when you talk about owning combinations of numbers
especially if that wheel is made of others.
Just my opinion.
Regards,
gARY
gARY
> >from merseyworld in the following order
> >Tools -Transpose - Swap number 1 with number 2:
> >Please your comment gARY !
> >
> >Manfred
> >
> >
> >enclosure:
> >
>
> Why all the fuss.
>
> I went to Merseyworld site today AND downloaded about 30 163 line perms
> and from what I could see they were all different and the second perm
--------------/\/----------------/\/--------------
> Just how many perms like this exist, probably 2 or 3 million I estimate
> in this 6/49 lottery, a world record my arse.
They all (the perms) would use the same wheel pattern Harry, it is the
underlying pattern wheelers improve.
There is only one 'best' underling pattern (also called pointer numbers, as
you place the number of you choice ONCE where you wish within the said
structure).
Still, ya learning ! ;)
gARY
Gerry
"gARY" <Find@Find ;)> wrote in message
news:4133919e$0$8514$cc9e...@news.dial.pipex.com...
> > >I swapped the numbers of "gARY's" downloaded wheel
> > >from merseyworld in the following order
> > >Tools -Transpose - Swap number 1 with number 2:
> > >Please your comment gARY !
> > >
> > >Manfred
> > >
> > >
> > >enclosure:
> > >
> >
> > Why all the fuss.
> >
> > I went to Merseyworld site today AND downloaded about 30 163 line perms
> > and from what I could see they were all different and the second perm
>
> --------------/\/----------------/\/--------------
>
> > Just how many perms like this exist, probably 2 or 3 million I estimate
> > in this 6/49 lottery, a world record my arse.
>
>
> They all (the perms) would use the same wheel pattern Harry, it is the
> underlying pattern wheelers improve.
>
> There is only one 'best' underling pattern (also called pointer numbers,
as
> you place the number of you choice ONCE where you wish within the said
> structure).
>
> Still, ya learning ! ;)
> gARY
The lottery goes well past wheels and best underlying patterns. You aren't
even close to being able to comprehend that... Mr Redcar
You might even have a chance at understanding once you take your little
toy soldier out of your hand ;-)
You might even learn something from Harry ;-)
Robert Perkis
You have to discard for a moment the concept of numbers to
talk pattern, think in terms of lines on graph paper with
asterisks in boxes making the pattern, this is why we can
load the numbers onto the wheel in any order with the same
guarantee and shift them around with [Randomize] with the
same guarantee. However, there are more then one pattern
for each wheel description waiting to be found.
* * * * * *
* * * - - - * * *
* * * - - - - - - * * *
- - - * * * * * *
- - - * * * - - - * * *
- - - - - - * * * * * *
Robert Perkis
Manfred
every line of a wheel is - or a group of lines are -
a part of another wheel.
There is no wheel which has no lines of another wheel.
E.g. the first line of every pick-6 wheel can be transformed
into 1-2-3-4-5-6 .
Post any wheel with 10 lines or so and I show you some wheels
where lines are identically.
If you make a computer program, you may use also some
algorithm which come from others, e.g. a sort algorithm.
Anyway it is your program and you can make a copyright.
Only if parts of your program have a copyright, you will get
problems.
There is no copyright for my used 22,6,3,3=77.
Manfred
"gARY" <Find-Contact-Page@Website> wrote in message news:<41337...@mk-nntp-1.news.uk.worldonline.com>...
Harry Scott
<Find@Find.?> writes
>> Why all the fuss.
>>
>> I went to Merseyworld site today AND downloaded about 30 163 line perms
>> and from what I could see they were all different and the second perm
>> downloaded had won a jackpot previously of £2,824,080 on line 43!
>
>--------------/\/----------------/\/--------------
>
>> Just how many perms like this exist, probably 2 or 3 million I estimate
>> in this 6/49 lottery, a world record my arse.
>
>
>They all (the perms) would use the same wheel pattern Harry, it is the
>underlying pattern wheelers improve.
>
>There is only one 'best' underling pattern (also called pointer numbers, as
>you place the number of you choice ONCE where you wish within the said
>structure).
Did I know that? Of course I did, or rather surmised, way back when the
perm was *A* 168 perm, not a make up of two perms.
A classic perm that, divisible by 2 3 4 6 7 8 12 14 16 etc. never to be
beaten in that respect.
I still maintain that there are possibly umpteen perms giving a similar
guarantee maybe 168, 3,000,000,, 167,say 1,000,000,, 166, say 50,000,,
165,say 100,, maybe down to say 160,1 perm. Finding them is the problem,
not in our lifetimes. Maybe even a 150 perm, who knows, or even cares?
You have more chance of winning a jackpot than finding that one perm, by
about 2 million times easier!
Bet you can't find a 163 perm that only guarantees winning one #5
dividend and one only each week, using all the numbers of course.
This comment of yours reminds me of when you and our Frank were chasing
groups of 16 number sets and the chase came to a halt when I pointed out
that there were around 87 million million sets of 16 in a 49 number
setup and you were looking for *the* one!
>> Try;
>> http://lottery.merseyworld.com/Perms.html
>> --
>> Harry Scott
>
>
Why the kudos for a single dividend guarantee which guarantees an
average of three #5 dividends anyway and will forever.
Another candidate for the 4th floor methinks, complete with the smoking
'puter.
--
Harry Scott
Gerry
Yes, they are still waiting to be found and in most cases accidentally.
That is what Gary did and has made a great big deal of the thing. Harry
said there are probably 2-3 million 163 line patterns. There's probably
more but I don't even know how to figure that out and don't care. On a
6/49 we are dealing with 13,983,816 combinations that can be assembled
into patterns and you guys are quibbling over minutia. Why?
So you can have your name on a marquee because you put a pattern in
Covermaster and let it grind away for a very long time until you get the
result you want ?
You know very well that when we hit the CM start button we become
spectators and have to wait for the outcome. We can run the program
overnight, mow the lawn or whatever and come back to see what we have.
Most of the time it is a failure. Once in a while we get what we want and
get to crow a little... not a lot ;-)
There was a time when wheel improvement was challenging and fun. Not
any more thanks to Gary and his obsession to be famous.
I have been known to say I am the greatest open cover optimizer alive.
That is just gamesmanship. Gary has taken the game to another sublevel.
It's fun to pound our chest a little, not wag our little soldiers at each
other thinking any of this is meaningful to a lotto player.
Example:
Gary claims the 163 line world record. I tested his and Rade and Dragan's
wheel over 100 draws of the UK lottery. Rade and Dragan's wheel
returned 5,987 UKP and Gary's returned 3,969 UKP. The results will
be different on a different set of draws or on a different lottery. If we
randomize to different patterns the results will be different and so on.
Like Harry said, "why all the fuss"?
I tested my published 163 line single cover record and what do you know,
it won a jackpot on those same 100 draws.
Thump, thump
gARY
> groups of 16 number sets and the chase came to a halt when I pointed out
> that there were around 87 million million sets of 16 in a 49 number
> setup and you were looking for *the* one!
Again. . .
We were looking for the one pattern of 16numbers Harry,
gARY
> Why the kudos for a single dividend guarantee which guarantees an
> average of three #5 dividends anyway and will forever.
Whoooo tiger !! I never kicked this thread off!
gARY
>
> every line of a wheel is - or a group of lines are -
> a part of another wheel.
Exactly, this is a problem.
> There is no wheel which has no lines of another wheel.
> E.g. the first line of every pick-6 wheel can be transformed
> into 1-2-3-4-5-6 .
> Post any wheel with 10 lines or so and I show you some wheels
> where lines are identically.
And me to you.
> If you make a computer program, you may use also some
> algorithm which come from others, e.g. a sort algorithm.
> Anyway it is your program and you can make a copyright.
>
> Only if parts of your program have a copyright, you will get
> problems.
>
> There is no copyright for my used 22,6,3,3=77.
>
> Manfred
I may require a third party ref here as I honestly don't know Manfred.
gARY
gARY
> There is no copyright for my used 22,6,3,3=77.
>
> Manfred
IF Mr.22,6,3,3=77 ever comes out to play. . .
We all eat dust I feel as more then a few partial 49,6,3,6, wheels could not
be done, without !
I think I will stick to beating unseen, unheard and gone Gerry, I'm safe
there!
Always,
gARY
Gerry
"gARY" <Find-Contact-Page@Website> wrote in message
> I think I will stick to beating unseen, unheard and gone Gerry, I'm safe
> there!
Ignoring your problems never make them go away ;-)
I came back here due to popular demand. I was more popular than
your demand.
ar,ar