[Q] I’ve been analysing all my past lottery results over the years and whilst I know these things are supposed to be random, there is a pattern. Some numbers have definitely been drawn more often than others, and some have definitely appeared in the jackpot combination more than others. Should I play those numbers?
[A] You’re absolutely right.
Do you remember rolling a dice at school and charting the results? You tallied up each number as it was rolled, and then drew a little bar graph of the results. And the graph made pretty much a straight line proving that all the numbers had the same chance of being rolled.
Or did it?
Actually your graph was pretty wonky – oh yes it was! But don’t take offense, I’m sure you drew yours just as well as I did 
. But all of our graphs were actually pretty wonky, and wonky in different ways too. If we took all our results together and drew another graph then we’d have one that was smoother, but still not perfectly straight.
We all get caught up in what we think we learned about ‘averages’.
But the fact is if you take any set of past results from any lottery for any period in time, you will find the same thing. Some results appear more or less often than others – a wonky graph. And that’s because this is exactly the sort of result that is entirely normal for a random process. If it were not possible for this to happen then the results would not be random.
With randomness if you actually repeat the ‘test’ enough times then every possible set of results would happen. Not just every result, but every different wonky graph for each set of results you pull out. So everything from never winning a single thing on the lottery, to hitting the jackpot every single draw for your whole life!
This is how random works. Just because the current state of play is ‘less likely than the true average’ does not mean there is anything unusual going on.
The weak point in the chain here is actually our brains – they love to see patterns in randomness. That’s the nature of our brains, we just can’t help trying to make a nice comfortable order out of things. And when it happens to be numbers we’re trying to make order of we’re even worse than ever!
So the real question here is not which numbers to play as a result of all this analysis, but whether the past results have anything useful to reveal to us in the first place. And the fact is, they don’t.
Comments ↓
1 K.C. // Apr 23, 2008 at 3:43 pm
I have been working with the lotto for the last 3 years and there is a way to forecast with a 20% to 25% accuracy what the numbers will do.
Some people might thing that is not possible, but I know for sure that there is a way for an educated guess of what numbers are supposed to appear.
So far I have been hitting:
80% of the time 2 0ut of 3 on pick 3.
40% of the time 2 out 0f 4 on Pick 4.
20% of the time 3 0ut of 5 on Pick 5.
I have not hit the big pay-off “Yet” but it’s very promising for somebody that 3 years ago would not spend a penny on the lotto.
Good luck to everybody ( LUCK …………..????)
2 Lottery-Guy.com // Apr 24, 2008 at 3:16 am
Hi K.C. – those results look a little guessed 80%, 40%, 20%..?
But sorry to burst your bubble, even without seeing proper detailed figures, common sense alone dictates that your results are nothing more or less than random chance. Sounds like you’ve been hit by the infrequency illusion. Good luck.
3 Al // Nov 27, 2008 at 11:23 am
Hi all,
Try using Excel function LINEST(chronological list of the lowest numbers drawn), combined with SLOPE and Y-INTERCEPTION.
This way I predict 4-5 out of 6 numbers to be drawn. I also include adjacent numbers (i.e. if predicted number is 11, I include 10 and 12 also).
When done above for all 6 numbers, I get about 15-20 numbers to be wheeled.
I usually hit 4-6.
4 Teufel // Nov 27, 2008 at 2:41 pm
The past is just that – the past as far as exact repeats go. Yet, depending upon the type of pattern that you chase and record the past sets can yield information as to how a certain pattern was accomplished but not necessarily the exact data. Unless that you use an assorted amount of pattern predictability in your tool kit, you won’t understand what it is that I am saying.
Teufel…
5 Lottery-Guy.com // Nov 28, 2008 at 11:58 am
Hi Teufel. So you’re saying you can use tools to predict patterns in the results, but not actual results..?
Sounds to me like you’re just predicting ‘patterns’ that mere randomness dictates will be there (like people who chase sums and deltas and such like). So apart from being of passing interest to us geeks who like numbers, it doesn’t actually give any benefit in terms of chances of winning.
6 Lottery-Guy.com // Nov 28, 2008 at 12:13 pm
Hey Al. I wasn’t clear on how many lines you’re actually playing, or what your win rate is.
But 2 points really:-
1. Forgetting all the wacky Excel maths a moment, if you compare the actual number of lines you are playing against the odds for the game you’re playing – how do you compare to average luck?
2. If you’re predicting a number 11, why pick 10 and 12 too? These are balls bouncing around in a draw machine, so they don’t know anything about Excel, or the fact they are labelled numerically closely to your predicted number..?
7 John faulkner // Nov 29, 2008 at 9:27 am
This is a great blog and I agree 100%. We cannot say often enough that it is impossible to predict future lottery numbers based on past results. In fact there is no way of predicting lottery numbers, period.
However it still matters what lottery numbers you pick because some numbers lead to bigger prizes if you do win.
8 Teufel // Nov 29, 2008 at 10:31 am
A rundown for the pick 3 game of …1… thru ..0.. which equals 30 digits by adding a fourth row or a total of 40 digits gives a pattern of predictability when I create a 5 x 6 rundown of the same numbers or a 6 x 5 of the same sets. The answer to each days win shows in these constructs. I know which day (s) to use and how to use them. They all came from a piece of past history and not in the order that the clues or patterns were derived. I do not “chase patterns” per se but the resulting end use of the created pattern shows me where the win will fall. Many people have brushed me off but I work with simplistic ideas and because they are so simple players tend to try and make rocket science of common abstract thinking. Those folks that have asked me usually blow the whole pattern instead of using the instructions that I give which are six items. I let the players choose their own numbers from the very short list that I give to work from. The pattern that I use sets the rundown and the rundown is converted to a …5 x 6… or a …6 x 5… setup. Once done this setup is good for seven days and all of this came from past history and logical thinking.
Teufel…
9 Lottery-Guy.com // Dec 2, 2008 at 4:46 am
But surely Teufel whatever method you use to pick a subset of numbers – you’re going to find some of the winning numbers appear in that subset..! That’s random numbers for you.
But bottom line… beneath the complexity of what you’re doing, does it actually make any difference to your win rate versus choosing numbers randomly?
The answer to that has to be ‘no’..?
10 dan // Jan 27, 2009 at 6:31 pm
This is all good and well this win rate, blah blah blah but i bet none of you have scooped a jackpot. Keep working on it though lol.
11 Lottery-Guy.com // Jan 28, 2009 at 4:01 am
Hi Dan
Not sure who you were commenting to..? But jackpots obviously have tough odds (surprise, it’s a lottery!) but as I’m pointing out here – adding enormous complexity to selecting numbers does nothing to actually help you win. And that’s just the same if you’re doing it for your own ego, entertainment, or if you’re paying money to some charlatan to buy that ’system’.
12 Sparx // Mar 7, 2009 at 4:59 pm
If you look closly there is a Delta Function. And that 90% of the numbers are 1 to 15.
13 Lottery-Guy.com // Mar 9, 2009 at 5:12 am
Hi Sparx. Yep, I’m aware of ‘deltas’ (briefly referred to in one of my comments above).
Deltas are just yet another irrelevant way of picking numbers, dreamed up by someone with a spreadsheet who liked analysing past results but who then draw silly conclusions to try and apply rules to randomness.
14 Les Jed // Aug 31, 2009 at 7:31 am
Hi, I have been playing using Excel with Lotto 649 and Super 7 in Canada for many years. I have the data from day one of each lottery. I must admit I have never won a significant lottery so far. However I am having fun and that is really the point of playing a lottery. I study time between numbers winning, the most frequent numbers winning and losing, how many numbers drawn in the current draw that were in the past 6 draws, charts and so on. Good luck to everyone and don’t forget if you are not having fun then it is not worth it!
15 Lottery-Guy.com // Aug 31, 2009 at 8:04 am
Hi Les Jed. Having fun is definitely key. If it isn’t fun I’d recommend finding a different game to play. Winning is nice too though. Be lucky.
16 Ian // Nov 26, 2009 at 7:25 am
Years ago I bought a statistics and probability book and random does come in waves! The lottery balls seem to throw up many more high numbers than probable… Why? because there is more higher abrasive paint on the numbers and the larger surface area paint on balls fall because the abrasiveness slows down spinning… ie; 44, 38, 23 and so on, look at the stats for frequent balls etc, very interesting. Ian
17 Lottery-Guy.com // Nov 26, 2009 at 7:36 pm
Hi Ian. Well that has to rate amongst the wackiest theories I’ve heard…
A quick look at the frequency of balls drawn shows 36, 37, 41 amongst the least drawn balls. So I don’t see any evidence to backup your theory?
(Who says the paint is more abrasive than the ball surface anyway..?)
18 Danny // Dec 5, 2009 at 9:52 pm
Patterns in randomness aren’t even worth thinking about, the odds on the relationships between the numbers are the only thing I’d worry about.
EG: the likelyhood of all even or odd numbers occuring, or consecutive sequences.
Imagine you were a book keeper; what would your payout be for, effectively a ,”straight” , on winning – 1,2,3,4,5,6 ? Higher than just some lucky dip? Yes
Common sense really
19 Lottery-Guy.com // Dec 5, 2009 at 10:20 pm
Danny,
Common sense..? Nope, common misunderstanding.
And completely wrong I’m afraid.
You’re placing significance on these combinations because your brain can make a pretty pattern. But the balls don’t know they’re making a pattern – so why would they be less likely to come out that way?!
The fact is there is no such thing as unlikely combinations, in any lottery.
20 Dave // Dec 13, 2009 at 12:22 pm
Just curious, of all the lotteries in the world and the millions of drawings that have occurred over years and years, has any lottery anywhere produced the lowest consecutive result for their game? ex. 1,2,3,4,5 or 1,2,3,4,5,6.
It would seem that if randomness is truly at play this event would prove it. I realize the astronomical odds but certainly one lottery somewhere it has occurred or has it?
21 Lottery-Guy.com // Dec 16, 2009 at 10:15 pm
Hey Dave,
The longest running lottery in the world has had less than 15,000 draws. Most have had less than a couple of thousand draws. And there are nearly 14 MILLION combinations in a 6 from 49 lottery.
So it’s actually no surprise at all at this stage that there are combinations that have never been drawn anywhere in the world.
In fact, there will be millions of them!
Of course the newspaper headlines will explode with how amazing, astounding and incredibly improbable it is when 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 is drawn somewhere… But they won’t when 6, 23, 27, 34, 35, 37 is drawn for the first time anywhere in the world…
The only difference is the lack of what our brains recognise as a pretty pattern..!
22 Dave // Jan 8, 2010 at 4:01 pm
I understand what you are saying but every Pick 5 and Pick6 lottery has the numbers 1,2,3,4,5 in addition to 2,3,4,5,6,7 and several more five consecutive combinations.
I’ve never heard of a 5 consecutive number winning combination.
It’s just interesting that out all the lotteries combined, none, have had this occurrence to my knowledge.
Wonder what the odds are when you combine all the lotteries in the world of having one five consecutive winning combination.
If you took the lottery with the lowest number of playable numbers and based it on that with the all the drawings to date with every lottery with at least that minimum number of playable numbers.
23 Lottery-Guy.com // Jan 8, 2010 at 6:26 pm
Hi Dave
What are the odds when you combine all the worlds lotteries of having five consecutive numbers?
Exactly the same as them having any other combination!
The only reason it’s even on your mind is because you’re attaching significance to a ‘pretty pattern’. There are millions of other combinations that have never been drawn anywhere in the world.
Remember, it’s actually balls that come out of the machine, not numbers – the numbers printed on them just help us decide who won.
24 Dave // Jan 9, 2010 at 2:15 am
What ‘pretty pattern’ would that be? I’m merely suggesting out of the MILLIONS of drawings that have occurred since the lottery became a concept of man, I nor anyone I know has EVER seen or heard of a consecutive winning combination.
25 Lottery-Guy.com // Jan 9, 2010 at 7:28 pm
Consecutive numbers = “pretty pattern”
I agree, it’s never been drawn. But just like millions of other combinations (literally millions) that have never been drawn. You’re not wondering about most of those purely because they don’t make a pattern when you put them in numerical order.
Like I said above, the longest running lottery in the world has only had 15,000 draws. Most have been running a lot less than that.
There are many millions more lottery combinations than there have been draws.
So it’s actually of no surprise, or significance that consecutive numbers have yet to be drawn.
26 Dave // Jan 26, 2010 at 9:35 pm
I’ve given what you have said some thought. If the longest running lottery in the world has only 15,000 drawings then I should be looking for the short-term patterns. I understand randomness, but randomness often occurs in clusters. If you look at all the possible combinations that can occur you are applying a long-term analysis to a short-term game which would be my lifetime.
Also, I concede there are no perfect patterns to be found in past lottery drawings but I can’t help but see occurrences, like numbers that repeat the very next drawing or numbers that are dormant and become awake hitting several times once they hit twice within a few drawings.
There is no perfect sure fire way to predict the lottery but I believe there are smarter ways to pick numbers than out of thin air. I can often pick at least one or two numbers that I’m sure are going to hit and they often do. I just need to get lucky on the other four or five. But I only need to get lucky once.
Besides, I’m learning a lot about Microsoft Excel in the process, that alone is worth the time spent investigating patterns and occurrences. To me, it’s fun, maybe one day it will pay off.
27 Lottery-Guy.com // Jan 27, 2010 at 12:14 am
Yes you can see historical patterns in randomness. But any patterns, long or short term, are entirely useless for predicting what comes next. It’s how lottery games are designed, and there simply is no evidence to prove otherwise.
Enjoy learning Excel though. It won’t help you win but spreadsheets are pretty cool – all hail Visicalc that brought the spreadsheet to the masses.
Please Do Add Your Comments Here...