"Buying a specific set of 27 tickets for the UK National Lottery will
mathematically guarantee that you win something"
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2384455-mathematicians-find-27-tickets-that-guarantee-uk-national-lottery-win/

What?

These are the lines (to save you looking)

1 2 3 4 5 6
1 2 3 4 7 8
1 2 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14
9 10 11 15 16 17
12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 26 27
18 19 22 23 30 31
18 19 24 25 28 29
20 21 22 23 28 29
20 21 24 25 30 31
22 23 24 25 26 27
26 27 28 29 30 31
32 33 34 35 40 41
32 33 36 37 44 45
32 33 38 39 42 43
34 35 36 37 42 43
34 35 38 39 44 45
36 37 38 39 40 41
40 41 42 43 44 45
46 47 48 49 54 55
46 47 50 51 58 59
46 47 52 53 56 57
48 49 50 51 56 57
48 49 52 53 58 59
50 51 52 53 54 55
54 55 56 57 58 59

But they say it only guarantees you a Lucky Dip. Hah ;-) The Lotto say that
1 line in 10.3 should give you a Lucky Dip.

I'd rather they had spent their time coming up with the top 27 lines of six
number
sets.

--
MJ

Damn. Requires a subscription to read the article :-(

Marmaduke Jinks wrote:

> "Buying a specific set of 27 tickets for the UK National Lottery will
> mathematically guarantee that you win something"
> https://www.newscientist.com/article/2384455-mathematicians-find-27-tickets-that-guarantee-uk-national-lottery-win/
>
> What?
>
> These are the lines (to save you looking)
>
> 1 2 3 4 5 6
> 1 2 3 4 7 8
> 1 2 5 6 7 8
> 9 10 11 12 13 14
> 9 10 11 15 16 17
> 12 13 14 15 16 17
> 18 19 20 21 26 27
> 18 19 22 23 30 31
> 18 19 24 25 28 29
> 20 21 22 23 28 29
> 20 21 24 25 30 31
> 22 23 24 25 26 27
> 26 27 28 29 30 31
> 32 33 34 35 40 41
> 32 33 36 37 44 45
> 32 33 38 39 42 43
> 34 35 36 37 42 43
> 34 35 38 39 44 45
> 36 37 38 39 40 41
> 40 41 42 43 44 45
> 46 47 48 49 54 55
> 46 47 50 51 58 59
> 46 47 52 53 56 57
> 48 49 50 51 56 57
> 48 49 52 53 58 59
> 50 51 52 53 54 55
> 54 55 56 57 58 59
>
> But they say it only guarantees you a Lucky Dip. Hah ;-) The Lotto say that
> 1 line in 10.3 should give you a Lucky Dip.
>
> I'd rather they had spent their time coming up with the top 27 lines of six
> number
> sets.
>

"nigel" <useweb@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:Ja2cnSW0stqoflX5nZ2dnZfqn_udnZ2d@brightview.co.uk...
> Damn. Requires a subscription to read the article :-(
>
Does this help?
https://metro.co.uk/2023/07/31/lottery-numbers-pick-mathematicians-guarantee-win-19221434/

Not sure it helped me. I wasn't prepared to come up with a sub to read the
article..

MJ

> Marmaduke Jinks wrote:
>
>> "Buying a specific set of 27 tickets for the UK National Lottery will
>> mathematically guarantee that you win something"
>> https://www.newscientist.com/article/2384455-mathematicians-find-27-tickets-that-guarantee-uk-national-lottery-win/
>>
>> What?
>>
>> These are the lines (to save you looking)
>>
>> 1 2 3 4 5 6
>> 1 2 3 4 7 8
>> 1 2 5 6 7 8
>> 9 10 11 12 13 14
>> 9 10 11 15 16 17
>> 12 13 14 15 16 17
>> 18 19 20 21 26 27
>> 18 19 22 23 30 31
>> 18 19 24 25 28 29
>> 20 21 22 23 28 29
>> 20 21 24 25 30 31
>> 22 23 24 25 26 27
>> 26 27 28 29 30 31
>> 32 33 34 35 40 41
>> 32 33 36 37 44 45
>> 32 33 38 39 42 43
>> 34 35 36 37 42 43
>> 34 35 38 39 44 45
>> 36 37 38 39 40 41
>> 40 41 42 43 44 45
>> 46 47 48 49 54 55
>> 46 47 50 51 58 59
>> 46 47 52 53 56 57
>> 48 49 50 51 56 57
>> 48 49 52 53 58 59
>> 50 51 52 53 54 55
>> 54 55 56 57 58 59
>>
>> But they say it only guarantees you a Lucky Dip. Hah ;-) The Lotto say
>> that
>> 1 line in 10.3 should give you a Lucky Dip.
>>
>> I'd rather they had spent their time coming up with the top 27 lines of
>> six number
>> sets.
>>
>

Marmaduke Jinks wrote:
> "nigel" <useweb@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:Ja2cnSW0stqoflX5nZ2dnZfqn_udnZ2d@brightview.co.uk...
>
>>Damn. Requires a subscription to read the article :-(
>>
>
> Does this help?
> https://metro.co.uk/2023/07/31/lottery-numbers-pick-mathematicians-guarantee-win-19221434/
>
> Not sure it helped me. I wasn't prepared to come up with a sub to read the
> article..
>
> MJ

Thank you. That looks a very different process to the hard
number-crunching used by traditional wheel generation programs. I wonder
whether that means 27 isn't set in stone and might be beaten.

Any wheelie people looking for a challenge?

The article says that you have to use exactly those numbers to win, but
I believe it's the pattern that's important and the actual numbers are
interchangeable.

Nigel

They would have been basing their analysis on what has happened in the last
n 6/59 draws. Which is a risk.

I put their numbers into a spreadsheet to monitor over the next n draws.

But I did also extract the top n doubles and then trebles; then made about
the same number of lines with them and will be monitoring those too.

MJ

"nigel" <useweb@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:RO6dnXCyo5q-q1f5nZ2dnZfqnPudnZ2d@brightview.co.uk...
>
>
> Marmaduke Jinks wrote:
>> "nigel" <useweb@nospam.com> wrote in message
>> news:Ja2cnSW0stqoflX5nZ2dnZfqn_udnZ2d@brightview.co.uk...
>>
>>>Damn. Requires a subscription to read the article :-(
>>>
>>
>> Does this help?
>> https://metro.co.uk/2023/07/31/lottery-numbers-pick-mathematicians-guarantee-win-19221434/
>>
>> Not sure it helped me. I wasn't prepared to come up with a sub to read
>> the article..
>>
>> MJ
>
> Thank you. That looks a very different process to the hard
> number-crunching used by traditional wheel generation programs. I wonder
> whether that means 27 isn't set in stone and might be beaten.
>
> Any wheelie people looking for a challenge?
>
> The article says that you have to use exactly those numbers to win, but I
> believe it's the pattern that's important and the actual numbers are
> interchangeable.
>
> Nigel
>

On Wednesday, 2 August 2023 at 11:55:43 UTC+1, nigel wrote:
> Marmaduke Jinks wrote:
> > "nigel" <use...@nospam.com> wrote in message
> > news:Ja2cnSW0stqoflX5...@brightview.co.uk...
> >
> >>Damn. Requires a subscription to read the article :-(
> >>
> >
> > Does this help?
> > https://metro.co.uk/2023/07/31/lottery-numbers-pick-mathematicians-guarantee-win-19221434/
> >
> > Not sure it helped me. I wasn't prepared to come up with a sub to read the
> > article..
> >
> > MJ
> Thank you. That looks a very different process to the hard
> number-crunching used by traditional wheel generation programs. I wonder
> whether that means 27 isn't set in stone and might be beaten.
>
> Any wheelie people looking for a challenge?
>
> The article says that you have to use exactly those numbers to win, but
> I believe it's the pattern that's important and the actual numbers are
> interchangeable.
>
> Nigel

pattern reminds me of fano planes / steiner triple systems.

On Wednesday, 2 August 2023 at 16:06:17 UTC+1, Marmaduke Jinks wrote:
> They would have been basing their analysis on what has happened in the last
> n 6/59 draws. Which is a risk.
>
> I put their numbers into a spreadsheet to monitor over the next n draws.
>
> But I did also extract the top n doubles and then trebles; then made about
> the same number of lines with them and will be monitoring those too.
>
> MJ
> "nigel" <use...@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:RO6dnXCyo5q-q1f5...@brightview.co.uk...
> >
> >
> > Marmaduke Jinks wrote:
> >> "nigel" <use...@nospam.com> wrote in message
> >> news:Ja2cnSW0stqoflX5...@brightview.co.uk...
> >>
> >>>Damn. Requires a subscription to read the article :-(
> >>>
> >>
> >> Does this help?
> >> https://metro.co.uk/2023/07/31/lottery-numbers-pick-mathematicians-guarantee-win-19221434/
> >>
> >> Not sure it helped me. I wasn't prepared to come up with a sub to read
> >> the article..
> >>
> >> MJ
> >
> > Thank you. That looks a very different process to the hard
> > number-crunching used by traditional wheel generation programs. I wonder
> > whether that means 27 isn't set in stone and might be beaten.
> >
> > Any wheelie people looking for a challenge?
> >
> > The article says that you have to use exactly those numbers to win, but I
> > believe it's the pattern that's important and the actual numbers are
> > interchangeable.
> >
> > Nigel
> >

I am not convinced just because the article appeared in new scientist. Thanks for the metro link.
Looking at the numbers they are banking on doubles and triples to save the day

"NN" <november.nihal@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:afe4b167-efc8-42b4-a80e-07c47aeb11a4n@googlegroups.com...
> On Wednesday, 2 August 2023 at 11:55:43 UTC+1, nigel wrote:
>> Marmaduke Jinks wrote:
>> > "nigel" <use...@nospam.com> wrote in message
>> > news:Ja2cnSW0stqoflX5...@brightview.co.uk...
>> >
>> >>Damn. Requires a subscription to read the article :-(
>> >>
>> >
>> > Does this help?
>> > https://metro.co.uk/2023/07/31/lottery-numbers-pick-mathematicians-guarantee-win-19221434/
>> >
>> > Not sure it helped me. I wasn't prepared to come up with a sub to read
>> > the
>> > article..
>> >
>> > MJ
>> Thank you. That looks a very different process to the hard
>> number-crunching used by traditional wheel generation programs. I wonder
>> whether that means 27 isn't set in stone and might be beaten.
>>
>> Any wheelie people looking for a challenge?
>>
>> The article says that you have to use exactly those numbers to win, but
>> I believe it's the pattern that's important and the actual numbers are
>> interchangeable.
>>
>> Nigel
>
> pattern reminds me of fano planes / steiner triple systems.
>
I had to look that up, but yes you are right. Finite geometry. Never used
it myself.

They would only have had 2 Lucky Dips last night.

MJ

"Marmaduke Jinks" <Jinks@Totopoly.co.uk> wrote in message
news:uafpit$m44o$1@dont-email.me...
> "NN" <november.nihal@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:afe4b167-efc8-42b4-a80e-07c47aeb11a4n@googlegroups.com...
>> On Wednesday, 2 August 2023 at 11:55:43 UTC+1, nigel wrote:
>>> Marmaduke Jinks wrote:
<snip>

> I had to look that up, but yes you are right. Finite geometry. Never
> used it myself.
>
> They would only have had 2 Lucky Dips last night.
>
> MJ
My mistake; they only had one LD.

NN wrote:
> On Wednesday, 2 August 2023 at 11:55:43 UTC+1, nigel wrote:
>
>>Marmaduke Jinks wrote:
>>
>>>"nigel" <use...@nospam.com> wrote in message
>>>news:Ja2cnSW0stqoflX5...@brightview.co.uk...
>>>
>>>
>>>>Damn. Requires a subscription to read the article :-(
>>>>
>>>
>>>Does this help?
>>>https://metro.co.uk/2023/07/31/lottery-numbers-pick-mathematicians-guarantee-win-19221434/
>>>
>>>Not sure it helped me. I wasn't prepared to come up with a sub to read the
>>>article..
>>>
>>>MJ
>>
>>Thank you. That looks a very different process to the hard
>>number-crunching used by traditional wheel generation programs. I wonder
>>whether that means 27 isn't set in stone and might be beaten.
>>
>>Any wheelie people looking for a challenge?
>>
>>The article says that you have to use exactly those numbers to win, but
>>I believe it's the pattern that's important and the actual numbers are
>>interchangeable.
>>
>>Nigel
>
>
> pattern reminds me of fano planes / steiner triple systems.
>

Can anyone remember the internet addresses of wheel repositories? I'd
like to know what their records are for 6/59 lotteries guaranteeing at
least one 2-match. (See, I can't even remember the proper jargon).

Nigel

Alas, my goto site - "the Lucky Gene" - has gorn.

https://www.lottery.co.uk/lotto/odds

MJ

"nigel" <useweb@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:gI6cnWh4trVqSVb5nZ2dnZfqnPednZ2d@brightview.co.uk...
> NN wrote:
>> On Wednesday, 2 August 2023 at 11:55:43 UTC+1, nigel wrote:
>>
>>>Marmaduke Jinks wrote:
>>>>"nigel" <use...@nospam.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:Ja2cnSW0stqoflX5...@brightview.co.uk...
>>>>
>>>>>Damn. Requires a subscription to read the article :-(
>>>>
>>>>Does this help?
>>>>https://metro.co.uk/2023/07/31/lottery-numbers-pick-mathematicians-guarantee-win-19221434/
>>>>Not sure it helped me. I wasn't prepared to come up with a sub to read
>>>>the article..
>>>>MJ
>>>
>>>Thank you. That looks a very different process to the hard
>>>number-crunching used by traditional wheel generation programs. I wonder
>>>whether that means 27 isn't set in stone and might be beaten.
>>>Any wheelie people looking for a challenge?
>>>The article says that you have to use exactly those numbers to win, but I
>>>believe it's the pattern that's important and the actual numbers are
>>>interchangeable.
>>>Nigel
>>
>>
>> pattern reminds me of fano planes / steiner triple systems.
>>
>
> Can anyone remember the internet addresses of wheel repositories? I'd like
> to know what their records are for 6/59 lotteries guaranteeing at least
> one 2-match. (See, I can't even remember the proper jargon).
>
> Nigel
>

On Monday, July 31, 2023 at 3:19:44 PM UTC+3, Marmaduke Jinks wrote:
> "Buying a specific set of 27 tickets for the UK National Lottery will
> mathematically guarantee that you win something"
> https://www.newscientist.com/article/2384455-mathematicians-find-27-tickets-that-guarantee-uk-national-lottery-win/
>
> What?
>
> These are the lines (to save you looking)
>
> 1 2 3 4 5 6
> 1 2 3 4 7 8
> 1 2 5 6 7 8
> 9 10 11 12 13 14
> 9 10 11 15 16 17
> 12 13 14 15 16 17
> 18 19 20 21 26 27
> 18 19 22 23 30 31
> 18 19 24 25 28 29
> 20 21 22 23 28 29
> 20 21 24 25 30 31
> 22 23 24 25 26 27
> 26 27 28 29 30 31
> 32 33 34 35 40 41
> 32 33 36 37 44 45
> 32 33 38 39 42 43
> 34 35 36 37 42 43
> 34 35 38 39 44 45
> 36 37 38 39 40 41
> 40 41 42 43 44 45
> 46 47 48 49 54 55
> 46 47 50 51 58 59
> 46 47 52 53 56 57
> 48 49 50 51 56 57
> 48 49 52 53 58 59
> 50 51 52 53 54 55
> 54 55 56 57 58 59
>
> But they say it only guarantees you a Lucky Dip. Hah ;-) The Lotto say that
> 1 line in 10.3 should give you a Lucky Dip.
>
> I'd rather they had spent their time coming up with the top 27 lines of six
> number
> sets.
>
> --
> MJ

Martsopolleahk:

Axiomate, ain’t it great to be alive? How about them axiomates Kotkoduck, and Kokostirk, and Kotskarr, et al.? Especially Kotskarr, Doollow’s uncle, should have jumped right in. It’s about odds and calculations, after all! I remember the glory days of the 2000s! O tempora! O mores!

I presume you mean “2 out of 6” by “Lucky Dip”. Here are the odds for your “6 of 59” lotto game:

The odds calculated as EXACTLY in a lotto game '6/59':
~ 0 of 6 in 6 from 59 -> 1 in 1.96
~ 1 of 6 in 6 from 59 -> 1 in 2.62
~ 2 of 6 in 6 from 59 -> 1 in 10.26
~ 3 of 6 in 6 from 59 -> 1 in 96.17
~ 4 of 6 in 6 from 59 -> 1 in 2179.85
~ 5 of 6 in 6 from 59 -> 1 in 141690.17
~ 6 of 6 in 6 from 59 -> 1 in 45057474

The odds calculated as AT LEAST in a lotto game '6/59':
~ 0 of 6 in 6 from 59 -> 1 in 1
~ 1 of 6 in 6 from 59 -> 1 in 2.04
~ 2 of 6 in 6 from 59 -> 1 in 9.23
~ 3 of 6 in 6 from 59 -> 1 in 92.05
~ 4 of 6 in 6 from 59 -> 1 in 2146.72
~ 5 of 6 in 6 from 59 -> 1 in 141246
~ 6 of 6 in 6 from 59 -> 1 in 45057474

The odds of ‘at least 2 of 6’ are the equivalent of the odds of ‘winning any prize’ (that being your infamous ‘Lucky Dip’).

The lotto wheel you posted does, indeed, guarantee ‘2 of 6 from 59’. I checked it with my grandiose piece of software known world-over as ‘WheelCheck.exe’. In real-life, that wheel will assure some 20-22 ‘Lucky Dips’ if played in 10 lottery draws.

To have a wheel matching the ‘1 in 10’ odds, one must apply a ‘lexicographical’ wheel. Again, another grandiose piece of software comes in play. It is known world-over as ‘LexicoWheels.exe’. It generates an 11-line lotto wheel to match the ‘1 in 10.3’ odds to get ‘exactly 2 out of 6’. The minimum guarantee is not assured by the lexicowheel. However, if you play the wheel in 10 lottery draws, you will get 10 ‘Lucky Dips’. The lower cost is the advantage of this type of lotto wheels.

1 3 11 41 50 53
2 4 5 14 19 57
3 5 21 40 43 49
4 9 11 19 25 31
5 15 37 43 48 54
7 9 25 27 44 48
8 30 37 41 54 59
11 13 18 45 46 57
14 15 17 21 41 42
18 22 30 32 36 45
30 32 35 44 52 59

The best — indubitably the best — strategy of lotto wheeling is exposed right here, in this famous and grandiose community. Read the thread started by Kotkoduck, the famed lotto-wheeling pioneer:
• https://groups.google.com/g/rec.gambling.lottery/c/O6MrMoK0Pwg?hl=en
• “Super 18,6,4,6 42 Wheel”.

It is kind of messy, since many readers posted all manner of stuff. The method, however, is neatly presented on a dedicated webpage:

• https://saliu.com/bbs/best-18-number-lotto-wheels.html
• “The Best Lotto Wheels for 9, 12, 18, 21 Numbers: 4-in-6 Minimum Guarantee”.

There is NO easier way for you to win that big lotto game, Martsopolleahk, Doollow, Kotskarr, Strumelleahg, et al. May Mnezău help you!

Ion “Axiomatic Parpaluck” Saliu
Founder of Lottery Mathematics
Founder of Axiomaticism … and many other important endeavors
https://saliu.com/axiomatic.html

But can your wheeling software reduce the number of tickets to 26?

Ion Saliu wrote:

> On Monday, July 31, 2023 at 3:19:44 PM UTC+3, Marmaduke Jinks wrote:
>
>>"Buying a specific set of 27 tickets for the UK National Lottery will
>>mathematically guarantee that you win something"
>>https://www.newscientist.com/article/2384455-mathematicians-find-27-tickets-that-guarantee-uk-national-lottery-win/
>>
>>What?
>>
>>These are the lines (to save you looking)
>>
>>1 2 3 4 5 6
>>1 2 3 4 7 8
>>1 2 5 6 7 8
>>9 10 11 12 13 14
>>9 10 11 15 16 17
>>12 13 14 15 16 17
>>18 19 20 21 26 27
>>18 19 22 23 30 31
>>18 19 24 25 28 29
>>20 21 22 23 28 29
>>20 21 24 25 30 31
>>22 23 24 25 26 27
>>26 27 28 29 30 31
>>32 33 34 35 40 41
>>32 33 36 37 44 45
>>32 33 38 39 42 43
>>34 35 36 37 42 43
>>34 35 38 39 44 45
>>36 37 38 39 40 41
>>40 41 42 43 44 45
>>46 47 48 49 54 55
>>46 47 50 51 58 59
>>46 47 52 53 56 57
>>48 49 50 51 56 57
>>48 49 52 53 58 59
>>50 51 52 53 54 55
>>54 55 56 57 58 59
>>
>>But they say it only guarantees you a Lucky Dip. Hah ;-) The Lotto say that
>>1 line in 10.3 should give you a Lucky Dip.
>>
>>I'd rather they had spent their time coming up with the top 27 lines of six
>>number
>>sets.
>>
>>--
>>MJ
>
>
> Martsopolleahk:
>
> Axiomate, ain’t it great to be alive? How about them axiomates Kotkoduck, and Kokostirk, and Kotskarr, et al.? Especially Kotskarr, Doollow’s uncle, should have jumped right in. It’s about odds and calculations, after all! I remember the glory days of the 2000s! O tempora! O mores!
>
> I presume you mean “2 out of 6” by “Lucky Dip”. Here are the odds for your “6 of 59” lotto game:
>
> The odds calculated as EXACTLY in a lotto game '6/59':
> ~ 0 of 6 in 6 from 59 -> 1 in 1.96
> ~ 1 of 6 in 6 from 59 -> 1 in 2.62
> ~ 2 of 6 in 6 from 59 -> 1 in 10.26
> ~ 3 of 6 in 6 from 59 -> 1 in 96.17
> ~ 4 of 6 in 6 from 59 -> 1 in 2179.85
> ~ 5 of 6 in 6 from 59 -> 1 in 141690.17
> ~ 6 of 6 in 6 from 59 -> 1 in 45057474
>
> The odds calculated as AT LEAST in a lotto game '6/59':
> ~ 0 of 6 in 6 from 59 -> 1 in 1
> ~ 1 of 6 in 6 from 59 -> 1 in 2.04
> ~ 2 of 6 in 6 from 59 -> 1 in 9.23
> ~ 3 of 6 in 6 from 59 -> 1 in 92.05
> ~ 4 of 6 in 6 from 59 -> 1 in 2146.72
> ~ 5 of 6 in 6 from 59 -> 1 in 141246
> ~ 6 of 6 in 6 from 59 -> 1 in 45057474
>
> The odds of ‘at least 2 of 6’ are the equivalent of the odds of ‘winning any prize’ (that being your infamous ‘Lucky Dip’).
>
> The lotto wheel you posted does, indeed, guarantee ‘2 of 6 from 59’. I checked it with my grandiose piece of software known world-over as ‘WheelCheck.exe’. In real-life, that wheel will assure some 20-22 ‘Lucky Dips’ if played in 10 lottery draws.
>
> To have a wheel matching the ‘1 in 10’ odds, one must apply a ‘lexicographical’ wheel. Again, another grandiose piece of software comes in play. It is known world-over as ‘LexicoWheels.exe’. It generates an 11-line lotto wheel to match the ‘1 in 10.3’ odds to get ‘exactly 2 out of 6’. The minimum guarantee is not assured by the lexicowheel. However, if you play the wheel in 10 lottery draws, you will get 10 ‘Lucky Dips’. The lower cost is the advantage of this type of lotto wheels.
>
> 1 3 11 41 50 53
> 2 4 5 14 19 57
> 3 5 21 40 43 49
> 4 9 11 19 25 31
> 5 15 37 43 48 54
> 7 9 25 27 44 48
> 8 30 37 41 54 59
> 11 13 18 45 46 57
> 14 15 17 21 41 42
> 18 22 30 32 36 45
> 30 32 35 44 52 59
>
> The best — indubitably the best — strategy of lotto wheeling is exposed right here, in this famous and grandiose community. Read the thread started by Kotkoduck, the famed lotto-wheeling pioneer:
> • https://groups.google.com/g/rec.gambling.lottery/c/O6MrMoK0Pwg?hl=en
> • “Super 18,6,4,6 42 Wheel”.
>
> It is kind of messy, since many readers posted all manner of stuff. The method, however, is neatly presented on a dedicated webpage:
>
> • https://saliu.com/bbs/best-18-number-lotto-wheels.html
> • “The Best Lotto Wheels for 9, 12, 18, 21 Numbers: 4-in-6 Minimum Guarantee”.
>
> There is NO easier way for you to win that big lotto game, Martsopolleahk, Doollow, Kotskarr, Strumelleahg, et al. May Mnezău help you!
>
> Ion “Axiomatic Parpaluck” Saliu
> Founder of Lottery Mathematics
> Founder of Axiomaticism … and many other important endeavors
> https://saliu.com/axiomatic.html
>

On Friday, August 11, 2023 at 6:15:38 PM UTC+3, nigel wrote:
> But can your wheeling software reduce the number of tickets to 26?

What’s da purpose, Doollow? 27 or 26 tickets — you still lose more money than playing 11 tickets. Lotto-wheeling ain’t about the size — it is about winning more. Or, at least, about losing less.. Ask your idols about it — Kotkoduck and Kokostirk. That’s why I stressed: “The best — indubitably the best — lottery strategy is exposed right here, in this famous and grandiose community. Read the thread started by Kotkoduck, the famed lotto-wheeling pioneer:
• https://groups.google.com/g/rec.gambling.lottery/c/O6MrMoK0Pwg?hl=en
• “Super 18,6,4,6 42 Wheel”.”
You should look no further IF wheeling is your only lotto strategy. But, then again, it feels so great to live! O tempora! O mores!

“Nigel, Nigel, Doollow, Avast,
You are running oh-so-fast.
No one can see your tail,
For you are the fastest snail.”

"Marmaduke Jinks" <Jinks@Totopoly.co.uk> wrote in message
news:ua88st$396gp$1@dont-email.me...
> "Buying a specific set of 27 tickets for the UK National Lottery will
> mathematically guarantee that you win something"
> https://www.newscientist.com/article/2384455-mathematicians-find-27-tickets-that-guarantee-uk-national-lottery-win/
>
> What?
>
> These are the lines (to save you looking)
>
> 1 2 3 4 5 6
> 1 2 3 4 7 8
> 1 2 5 6 7 8
> 9 10 11 12 13 14
> 9 10 11 15 16 17
> 12 13 14 15 16 17
> 18 19 20 21 26 27
> 18 19 22 23 30 31
> 18 19 24 25 28 29
> 20 21 22 23 28 29
> 20 21 24 25 30 31
> 22 23 24 25 26 27
> 26 27 28 29 30 31
> 32 33 34 35 40 41
> 32 33 36 37 44 45
> 32 33 38 39 42 43
> 34 35 36 37 42 43
> 34 35 38 39 44 45
> 36 37 38 39 40 41
> 40 41 42 43 44 45
> 46 47 48 49 54 55
> 46 47 50 51 58 59
> 46 47 52 53 56 57
> 48 49 50 51 56 57
> 48 49 52 53 58 59
> 50 51 52 53 54 55
> 54 55 56 57 58 59
>
> But they say it only guarantees you a Lucky Dip. Hah ;-) The Lotto say
> that
> 1 line in 10.3 should give you a Lucky Dip.
>
> I'd rather they had spent their time coming up with the top 27 lines of
> six number
> sets.
>
> --
> MJ
>
Since the article was published I've tracked the 27 lines. It won't come as
any surprise to know that there is a deficit of -�279 (based on the reported
Match3 being �51 last time, in a must-be-won Lotto). But the scientists
have had 2 x Match3s.

I put together 2 entries. One based on 30 lines (based on the top trebles)
and it has also had 2 x Match3s but with a deficit of -�313. The other was
28 lines (based on top doubles) but it has only had 1 Match3, deficit -�323.

MJ

On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 11:43:28 AM UTC+3, Marmaduke Jinks wrote:
> "Marmaduke Jinks" <Ji...@Totopoly.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:ua88st$396gp$1...@dont-email.me...
> > "Buying a specific set of 27 tickets for the UK National Lottery will
> > mathematically guarantee that you win something"
> > https://www.newscientist.com/article/2384455-mathematicians-find-27-tickets-that-guarantee-uk-national-lottery-win/
> >
> > What?
> >
> > These are the lines (to save you looking)
> >
> > 1 2 3 4 5 6
> > 1 2 3 4 7 8
> > 1 2 5 6 7 8
> > 9 10 11 12 13 14
> > 9 10 11 15 16 17
> > 12 13 14 15 16 17
> > 18 19 20 21 26 27
> > 18 19 22 23 30 31
> > 18 19 24 25 28 29
> > 20 21 22 23 28 29
> > 20 21 24 25 30 31
> > 22 23 24 25 26 27
> > 26 27 28 29 30 31
> > 32 33 34 35 40 41
> > 32 33 36 37 44 45
> > 32 33 38 39 42 43
> > 34 35 36 37 42 43
> > 34 35 38 39 44 45
> > 36 37 38 39 40 41
> > 40 41 42 43 44 45
> > 46 47 48 49 54 55
> > 46 47 50 51 58 59
> > 46 47 52 53 56 57
> > 48 49 50 51 56 57
> > 48 49 52 53 58 59
> > 50 51 52 53 54 55
> > 54 55 56 57 58 59
> >
> > But they say it only guarantees you a Lucky Dip. Hah ;-) The Lotto say
> > that
> > 1 line in 10.3 should give you a Lucky Dip.
> >
> > I'd rather they had spent their time coming up with the top 27 lines of
> > six number
> > sets.
> >
> > --
> > MJ
> >
> Since the article was published I've tracked the 27 lines. It won't come as
> any surprise to know that there is a deficit of -£279 (based on the reported
> Match3 being £51 last time, in a must-be-won Lotto). But the scientists
> have had 2 x Match3s.
>
> I put together 2 entries. One based on 30 lines (based on the top trebles)
> and it has also had 2 x Match3s but with a deficit of -£313. The other was
> 28 lines (based on top doubles) but it has only had 1 Match3, deficit -£323.
>
> MJ

"... It won't come as any surprise to know that there is a deficit of -£279..."

QED.

That’s why I stressed: “The best — indubitably the best — lottery strategy is exposed right here, in this famous and grandiose community. Read the thread started by Kotkoduck, the famed lotto-wheeling pioneer:
• https://groups.google.com/g/rec.gambling.lottery/c/O6MrMoK0Pwg?hl=en
• “Super 18,6,4,6 42 Wheel”.”

You should look no further IF wheeling is your only lotto strategy. But, then again, it feels so great to live! O tempora! O mores!T

"Marmaduke Jinks" <Jinks@Totopoly.co.uk> wrote in message
news:ua88st$396gp$1@dont-email.me...
> "Buying a specific set of 27 tickets for the UK National Lottery will
> mathematically guarantee that you win something"
> https://www.newscientist.com/article/2384455-mathematicians-find-27-tickets-that-guarantee-uk-national-lottery-win/
>
> What?
>
> These are the lines (to save you looking)
>
> 1 2 3 4 5 6
> 1 2 3 4 7 8
> 1 2 5 6 7 8
> 9 10 11 12 13 14
> 9 10 11 15 16 17
> 12 13 14 15 16 17
> 18 19 20 21 26 27
> 18 19 22 23 30 31
> 18 19 24 25 28 29
> 20 21 22 23 28 29
> 20 21 24 25 30 31
> 22 23 24 25 26 27
> 26 27 28 29 30 31
> 32 33 34 35 40 41
> 32 33 36 37 44 45
> 32 33 38 39 42 43
> 34 35 36 37 42 43
> 34 35 38 39 44 45
> 36 37 38 39 40 41
> 40 41 42 43 44 45
> 46 47 48 49 54 55
> 46 47 50 51 58 59
> 46 47 52 53 56 57
> 48 49 50 51 56 57
> 48 49 52 53 58 59
> 50 51 52 53 54 55
> 54 55 56 57 58 59
>
> But they say it only guarantees you a Lucky Dip. Hah ;-) The Lotto say
> that
> 1 line in 10.3 should give you a Lucky Dip.
>
> I'd rather they had spent their time coming up with the top 27 lines of
> six number sets.
>
> --
> MJ
>
So a follow up to this story of two scientists choosing 27 lines.

Their 27 lines, in the last 21 draws, have delivered a Match3 on just 4
occasions. No higher prize than Match3.

A spreadsheet I drew up with the top trebles into 30 lines, has delivered a
Match3 on 7 occasions. Nothing higher than a Match3.

A spreadsheet I drew up with the top doubles into 28 lines, has delivered a
Match3 on 3 occasions and a Match4 on 2 occasions! A Match4, as we know,
contains 4 trebles/Match3s. Effectively 11 Match3s.

MJ