🧪 Is SA Lotto really random?
We run all 41 SA Lotto draws since 03/06/2026 through 11 statistical tests. The question: do the draws behave the way pure chance predicts, or are there patterns, “hot” numbers, seasonal effects?
Note: only 41 draws in the current format – the tests have little power so far. Detecting small deviations takes several hundred draws.
No anomaly: 0 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 = 36,1 with 51 df; largest deviation: 10 (z = 2,09). | normal | 0,943 | 1,000 |
| Uniform Bonus ball Are all Bonus ball drawn equally often? 41 draws; χ² = 54,1 with 51 df; largest deviation: 1 (z = 3,65). | normal | 0,356 | 1,000 |
| Seasonal numbers Do some numbers come up more often in certain months? number × month, χ² = 221,0 with 255 df; most extreme cell: 24 in September (z = 4,13). | normal | 0,939 | 1,000 |
| Draw day Do the numbers depend on the day of the draw? number × weekday, χ² = 80,9 with 102 df; most extreme cell: 10 on Sabato (z = 2,58). | normal | 0,939 | 1,000 |
| Stability over time Have the frequencies shifted over the years? 4 periods, χ² = 191,4 with 204 df; largest deviation: 19 in period 1 (z = 2,82). | normal | 0,726 | 1,000 |
| Sum of numbers Do the sums follow the exact distribution? mean sum 157,41 (theoretical 159,00); χ² = 7,4 with 6 df. | normal | 0,284 | 1,000 |
| Even/odd Is the mix of even and odd numbers right? χ² = 3,0 with 2 df. | normal | 0,226 | 1,000 |
| Consecutive numbers Do pairs like 12–13 appear as often as expected? 58,5% of draws contain consecutive numbers (theoretical 47,3%). | normal | 0,148 | 1,000 |
| Repeats from previous draw Does a draw depend on the previous one? on average 0,70 numbers of the previous draw come up again (theoretical 0,69). | normal | 0,685 | 1,000 |
| Number pairs Do certain pairs come up together too often? most frequent pair 20 + 50: 3 times (expected 0,5); spread of all pairs compared with 100 random series. | normal | 0,733 | 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 | 0,970 | 1,000 |
The latest draw
Draw of 21/10/2026 (1 3 8 23 32 35) – rarest feature: sum 102 (possible 21–297, mean 159,0); a deviation this large happens about once every 9 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 03/06/2026, 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 6/52 format (since 03/06/2026). 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 SA Lotto rigged?
The data show no sign of it. 0 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.