Starting with pick 3, since that is the "simplest".

Numbers are random, they form a discrete uniform distribution when looking at past draws.

Frequencies, however, run from high to low (or low to high, depending on perspective)... frequencies are almost linear (almost but not quite)

By rigid inter quartile classification, I am sorting the numbers in the 150 draw sample into bins.

Every time I add new draws and run the script, the numbers change, but the frequencies stay in close proximity to previous runs.

So I am NOT looking at specific numbers, just targeting a specific frequency range to pick from, playing whatever numbers happen to populate that frequency range on that particular run. This is why I do not look at individual numbers... skips won't matter, even or odd won't matter, high or low won't matter, pairs won't matter... it is still trying to find a needle in a haystack, but based on the classifications, the haystack got smaller... 1:~300 vs. 1:1,000.

It is also why I make smaller history samples, because full history does not contain that volatility that changes the numbers with each run.

I know I might be using a wrong sample size, or a wrong window size, but it is not like there is a resource for determining such things.

To simplify, I have created a filter based on frequency. Classification is phase 1

I am still experimenting how to interpret the data and make a better pick... this is phase 2.

I have applied this idea to multiple games so far. Pick 3, Pick 5, Match 6 and Cash 4 Life.

The other key element in this is play cycle... it is never going to give the next draw with any accuracy, so a range was determined for each game...

Pick N plays the same combo for 21 draws

Match 6 plays the same combo for 28 draws

Cash 4 Life plays the same combo for 30 draws.

What drives development is back test results... if picking from the 300ish possible neutral combos, there is over a 90% chance that at least 1 will appear straight in the next 21 draws... that is over the entire draw history of the pa pick 3 evening, with 17,000+ draws to look at.

My level of difficulty is still high, as I am only playing one of those combos. Watching how the numbers churn through the frequency filter feels like almost seeing the mechanics of randomness itself. When pulling 17,000 randomly generated 3 digit combos from random.org, the same 90%+ is exhibited... this means that regardless of the source, ball draws, computer draws, or actual random numbers... the observation holds that frequency better explains the churn than the numbers themselves.

Finding that needle is still vexing, but it is some progress with each cycle. I may never win anything big, but IF I do, this will be the way.