Dennis Bassboss said:
But I agree 100% with that text (and link)that is stating that basically it is not good to play quick picks....Only luck or ''flukes'' can make you win with these... 
Nobody on earth has the same DNA ...besides twins...An error in ramdomness...??? And there are many twins (repeaters)in many lotto to this date if not all...And there is always going to be that way otherwise it wouldn't be ramdom...
This reminds me of a guy once talking about the U.F.O. phenomenom...another very religious person started to give up these arguments trying to prove that it doesn't exist...
1- We never saw one before
2- The distance involved to and from another world is too far...
3- There's no water outside of earth...Therefore no life..
4- It's only in people imagination....
The first guy said ...''Then why do you believe in god???'' 
My point is that I can use these same arguments you are using to go into another direction....Prove to me that I can't hit...
No two persons have identical DNA because they are so many possibilities, probably trillions, that even with total randomness there will not be two persons who are identical. There are repeaters in lotteries with total randomness because the number of possibilities are not so great. Randomness only implies equal probabilities, or that there is no relationship between a past drawing and a future drawing.
Even if lotteries are not totally random (because it is very difficult to achieve true randomness), why would this imply that there is a relationship between past winning numbers and future numbers? I see persons with long lists of past winning numbers looking for a relationship, but if you consider the machine that determines the winning numbers, why should there be any relationship with the past, and if you are considering individual balls, well these balls are changed frequently by the lottery people so that 33 in a past drawing may not even be the same 33 in the current drawing. This is why I do not see the point in looking at patterns from old numbers as a means to predict the future. The other thing I find strange is the idea of "hot" and "cold" numbers and the fact that the winning set tends to be a combination of hot and cold numbers. You could assign any arbitrary name to 2 different kinds of numbers, and assign them totally randomly, so that hot numbers actually have no increased frequency and cold numbers don't have a decreased frequency, in the past. Lo and behold, you will find that there are a equal number of these "hot" and "cold" numbers in the winning ticket. It is the nature of random number generation and has no meaning whatsoever. Whatever kind of labels you give to numbers and from whatever means of assigning them, it will turn out that there is a mix of 2 different kinds, and this has no meaning.
