🧪 Is Lotto 6 aus 45 really random?
We run all 3.695 Lotto 6 aus 45 draws since 07/09/1986 through 11 statistical tests. The question: do the draws behave the way pure chance predicts, or are there patterns, “hot” numbers, seasonal effects?
No anomaly: 1 of 11 tests fall below the 5% threshold – pure chance would produce 0,55. After correcting for multiple testing (Holm), no finding remains.
| Test | Finding | p-value | p (Holm) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Uniform numbers Is every number drawn equally often? χ² = 63,9 with 44 df; largest deviation: 3 (z = 3,02). | slightly unusual, not significant after correction | 0,027 | 0,293 |
| Uniform Bonus number Are all Bonus number drawn equally often? 3.695 draws; χ² = 40,4 with 44 df; largest deviation: 14 (z = -2,13). | normal | 0,628 | 1,000 |
| Seasonal numbers Do some numbers come up more often in certain months? number × month, χ² = 578,8 with 528 df; most extreme cell: 3 in August (z = 3,54). | normal | 0,062 | 0,624 |
| Draw day Do the numbers depend on the day of the draw? number × weekday, χ² = 91,2 with 88 df; most extreme cell: 43 on Mercoledì (z = 2,46). | normal | 0,386 | 1,000 |
| Stability over time Have the frequencies shifted over the years? 4 periods, χ² = 172,8 with 176 df; largest deviation: 3 in period 4 (z = 3,46). | normal | 0,554 | 1,000 |
| Sum of numbers Do the sums follow the exact distribution? mean sum 138,38 (theoretical 138,00); χ² = 24,5 with 33 df. | normal | 0,856 | 1,000 |
| Even/odd Is the mix of even and odd numbers right? χ² = 3,6 with 6 df. | normal | 0,731 | 1,000 |
| Consecutive numbers Do pairs like 12–13 appear as often as expected? 53,1% of draws contain consecutive numbers (theoretical 52,9%). | normal | 0,810 | 1,000 |
| Repeats from previous draw Does a draw depend on the previous one? on average 0,79 numbers of the previous draw come up again (theoretical 0,80). | normal | 0,699 | 1,000 |
| Number pairs Do certain pairs come up together too often? most frequent pair 3 + 39: 83 times (expected 56,0); 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 | 0,851 | 1,000 |
The latest draw
The draw of 21/10/2026 (2 6 21 32 35 45) has no unusual feature.
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 07/09/1986, 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 11 tests run at once, about 0,55 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 6/45 format (since 07/09/1986). 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.
Regole e FAQ
Is Lotto 6 aus 45 rigged?
The data show no sign of it. 1 of 11 tests fall below 5% (0,55 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.