🧪 Is Lotto Texas really random?
We run all 2,410 Lotto Texas draws since 26.04.2006 through 10 statistical tests. The question: do the draws behave the way pure chance predicts, or are there patterns, “hot” numbers, seasonal effects?
No anomaly: 2 of 10 tests fall below the 5% threshold – pure chance would produce 0.50. After correcting for multiple testing (Holm), no finding remains.
| Test | Finding | p-value | p (Holm) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Uniform numbers Is every number drawn equally often? χ² = 67.0 with 53 df; largest deviation: 45 (z = -2.58). | normal | 0.093 | 0.744 |
| Seasonal numbers Do some numbers come up more often in certain months? number × month, χ² = 703.3 with 636 df; most extreme cell: 34 in December (z = 3.36). | slightly unusual, not significant after correction | 0.033 | 0.294 |
| Draw day Do the numbers depend on the day of the draw? number × weekday, χ² = 165.7 with 159 df; most extreme cell: 31 on Wednesday (z = 2.73). | normal | 0.342 | 1.000 |
| Stability over time Have the frequencies shifted over the years? 4 periods, χ² = 253.3 with 212 df; largest deviation: 19 in period 1 (z = 3.26). | slightly unusual, not significant after correction | 0.027 | 0.273 |
| Sum of numbers Do the sums follow the exact distribution? mean sum 163.72 (theoretical 165.00); χ² = 43.5 with 33 df. | normal | 0.105 | 0.744 |
| Even/odd Is the mix of even and odd numbers right? χ² = 5.9 with 6 df. | normal | 0.435 | 1.000 |
| Consecutive numbers Do pairs like 12–13 appear as often as expected? 45.1% of draws contain consecutive numbers (theoretical 45.9%). | normal | 0.459 | 1.000 |
| Repeats from previous draw Does a draw depend on the previous one? on average 0.67 numbers of the previous draw come up again (theoretical 0.67). | normal | 0.907 | 1.000 |
| Number pairs Do certain pairs come up together too often? most frequent pair 14 + 26: 46 times (expected 25.3); spread of all pairs compared with 100 random series. | normal | 0.238 | 1.000 |
| Gaps between hits Are a number's absences as long as pure chance predicts? gap distribution compared with 100 simulated random series. | normal | 0.772 | 1.000 |
The latest draw
Draw of 24.10.2026 (5 13 14 29 35 46) – rarest feature: 3 number(s) repeated from the previous draw; this happens about once every 71 draws.
Almost every draw has some “rare” feature if you look at enough features. That is no sign of manipulation.
Strategies on trial: how would hot, cold or overdue numbers have done?
For every draw since 26.04.2006, the test picks numbers using only the earlier draws (last N draws) and counts how many come up in the next draw. The benchmark is what a random selection of the same size hits on average.
Popular strategies
| Strategy | Selection | Hits per draw | expected | ratio | p-value | p (Holm) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| … | |||||||
Test your own mix
N1/N2: frequency within the last N draws. N3/N4: current gap (draws since last hit, over the whole history). Overlaps count once.
Distribution of hits per draw
observed expected (chance)
Cumulative excess / shortfall vs. chance
Tip: test the same setting over different periods. Try enough variants and some will always show p < 5% – that is why the table also shows the corrected value (Holm).
How to read the table
The p-value is the probability of a result at least this extreme under pure chance. Below 5%, a single test is usually called “significant”. Because 10 tests run at once, about 0.50 such hits are expected by chance alone; the Holm correction accounts for that. Only a result still below 5% after correction would be a serious hint.
Method
Based on the official draws of the current 6/54 format (since 26.04.2006). Frequency tests: chi-square corrected for drawing without replacement. Pairs and gaps: compared with 100 simulated random series of the same length (Monte Carlo, two-sided). Everything is recalculated after every draw.
Rules & FAQ
Is Lotto Texas rigged?
The data show no sign of it. 2 of 10 tests fall below 5% (0.50 expected by pure chance), 0 after correcting for multiple testing. The draws behave like those of a fair drawing machine.
Can these tests predict winning numbers?
No. Precisely because the draws pass the tests, there is no exploitable pattern: every combination has the same chance in every draw.
Why is a test sometimes “unusual”?
At the 5% level, one test in twenty fires by pure chance on average. That is why we also show the Holm-corrected p-value, which accounts for the number of tests.