The paradox of Lotto Architect

Talk about anything Lotto Architect related which doesn't fit in the other forums
Post Reply
Site Admin
Posts: 111
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2008 4:22 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

The paradox of Lotto Architect

Post by draughtsman » Sun Jan 27, 2008 6:23 am


There is a sort of paradox in the filtering aspect of Lotto Architect, and that is you obviously have to filter but the more you do there is the chance that you will remove the major prize number set. Thus if you commence with an N=30 6if6 wheel there is a pretty good chance you will have the main numbers but they will be somewhere among about 600,000 other tickets. To get this large number set down to a reasonable budget level requires a bit of work. The key of course must be to make sure your filters are as precise as possible both in both Number Groups and Rejection Filters.
Number Groups can be set up with some precision, with the process for these quite straight forward. But it is also possible to achieve very good rejection rates with the rejection filters, and also with very good accuracy. A vastly increased hit rate can be achieved with no diminution of accuracy if you use different draw filters. I have found by selecting a draw filter 'Select last Draws' and then select last 100 or last 50 draws will provide a significant increase in the rejection rate of the filter, and when tested within the filter Report system the accuracy is still maintained at close to 100% ie 100 successful and correct rejections for 100 attempts. Thus a very good set of base filters can be developed for use in every draw. It is then necessary of course to develop a set of unique filters for a specific draw. These draw specific filters can again be based on draw filtering and in this case I use the by 2 and by 3 modes. Further filtering should also be designed around the Expectation and Delays system.
The other aspect to be considered is your budget. Given that I play only jackpot lotto’s I find if I do not enter some draws at all ie when the jackpot is least, this allows me at the next draw to double up on my entry and still maintain my budget. Doubling up aids the process as with this approach you reduce the need for over aggressive filtering to allow you to meet you budget.

Sorry this was so long but I think an interesting topic and I know of no other program that allows one to develop such strategies. Actually for those other programs there is basically nothing to talk about, ie press a few buttons and start hoping.

Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2009 5:43 am

Re: The paradox of Lotto Architect

Post by marjorinax » Fri Jul 24, 2009 9:44 am

What should I tell the cashier when I buy my next lotto ticket, cash or annuity? Would it be best to take a lump sum payment or take it over a long term for a lotto player that is in his 30s?

Getting used to it
Getting used to it
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2013 12:39 am

Re: The paradox of Lotto Architect

Post by popeye » Sun Dec 01, 2013 3:00 am

I have played with LA a bit after downloading and have one observation.
I think it has potential.
What it lacks for those who first try it is a step-by-step procedure for getting started and producing a result.
The easiest part of it was importing a lotto.
But, after that, until one does a bushel of trial and error, it is not easy to get anywhere with it.
It should go something like
- import the lotto you work with.
- to get going, here is the first thing to do - set some numbers using.....
- then do this and this and this until you have some numbers to work with.
In simple terms a working example.
Now, after doing this a few times. the player can experimenting with other settings.

User avatar
Site Admin
Posts: 1457
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 5:03 pm
Location: Greece

Re: The paradox of Lotto Architect

Post by lottoarchitect » Sun Dec 01, 2013 9:43 am

Actually, the whole design of LA is radicaly different from all the other programs I am aware of, the reason is freedom on what you want to do with your playing tickets. Even that you say "to get going, here is the first thing to do - set some numbers using....." can be a step quite later, I mean, you think the process here like, I'll use those numbers and try to reduce them. LA's approach is, I may equally use different sets of numbers right at the beginning (i.e. 2-3 different style wheels) without actually knowing wich sets these might be. That means, nowhere setting manually numbers occurs. Even the actual selection of each set of wheel can be derived by other processes (i.e. HCD, number groups inspections or whatever). This is why there isn't a starting point in LA or linear workflow. Everything is at your disposal to use the way you believe it will suit you best. All the programs I know about is all about: 1) select your lotto game 2) observe a graph and select the numbers you want 3) pick a wheel that fits to your selected numbers 4)apply filtering if this doesn't fit the budget (which is a very bad approach really). What LA lacks is a better redesign of some processes it contains. But the construction idea will remain the same for good reason.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest