Re: Using the lowest number as a gap
Here is the data when considering the lowest number in a draw as the first gap:
...
13 -- 181 times -- 9.08% -- 26.48%
14 -- 171 times -- 8.58% -- 35.06%
15 -- 176 times -- 8.83% -- 43.88%
16 -- 197 times -- 9.88% -- 53.76%
17 -- 147 times -- 7.37% -- 61.13%
...
This is what I don't understand

Why do these gaps peak at 16?
Also, if this is true and we consider our decade analysis, can we make this statement:
If one decade misses - thats 10 positions. In order to get between 13-17 as a gap we need to go on one side or the other to hit this gap total.
Consider this: I think the 20's will miss, so in order to get a gap of between 13-17, the set has to start at 15-19 on the low side
and 32-36 on the high side OR 30-34 and 13-17
Maybe we have to look closer at this decade analysis.
It might not be 10 numbers, it could be up to 17!!!
Although, we know that we get a 2-decade miss, 3 out of 10 draws and we also get these kinds of gaps with low numbers in one decade and high numbers in the adjacent decade.