I'm so confused about your logic. On one hand I do want reform regarding the excessive pretests and post tests, but I'm having trouble understanding your next point.
If you can afford to spend 10 dollars on each combo, why would you exclude 247? I can't quite convince myself that It's only about the money and nothing else, or for some other reason, but since you haven't revealed the reason why you excluded 247, I'll just presume the money was the reason.
About 3 or 4 times a week I play a combo on my list I really don't wanna play for one reason or another, but I continually remind myself that I don't want to kick myself in the a$$ just because I wanted to save 50 cents by excluding a combo. That would make my blood pressure rise rather quickly.
But the most Important issue that I see here has to do with what I call, for a lack of a better term, the "Two Late theory", meaning, once you get past a certain threshold, especially In your extreme case, you might as well bet on the excluded combos. In other words, I can understand when there's a standoff with equal sides, dealing with let's say two groups of numbers, in this case one must make vital descisions. But when the overall sources reveal the majority, one must In my opinion concede. I would never In my entire lifetime leave 247 out. You covered 90%, why risk it? Over 10 bucks?
Hope this was of some help. lol