I am not questioning the randomness of the results, let's be clear on that. The results of all draw games analyzed so far are close enough to expected distributions to be considered random enough, even though they all fail Chi Square tests. That has more to do with the number of combinations drawn with a matrix vs the number of un-drawn combinations that will never be seen in a million years...

I am questioning the randomness of the quick picks! As I purchased my last set of QPs for Monday's draw, I looked to see how truly poorly the QPs performed on Wednesday and Saturday. Wednesday's 3 QP tickets had 1 match (43, a white ball) and Saturday matched zero. I expect similar for Monday. These quick picks did so bad, they would have had the sole 43  match if counting all 6 lines against BOTH draws.

So, what could the premise be here? The Quick Picks are intentionally bad! But how could they all be so far off if they had no idea of what the winning combo was going to be? Could their greed be so great as to send out intentionally bad QPs to force the draws to roll over and increase sales? Because of the randomness of the draw, they would not need to do this but greed is an all powerful drug that nobody is immune to... if humans are involved, the chance of interfering to maximize profits is non zero.

So the premise is, can you buy 3 quick picks and use that data to reverse solve the draw? Can how bad the QPs are be the guide to a better pick?

Why 3 QPs? Why not 1 or 10? Triangulation! Using the data points that are possibly intentionally so far away from the winner to figure out if there is any repeatable truths hidden in the data. 

Notice how the QPs get better when the jackpot gets hit... or in the weeks leading up to the big win...

The low jackpots seem to bring in bad QPs because somebody has to pay for the roll overs... The premise is not as far fetched as it sounds.