A Same-Game Repeat Study from 2011 Through 2026

One of the oldest beliefs in Pick 3 play is the idea that certain digits “like” to repeat themselves into the next draw. You hear it all the time:

“That digit isn’t done yet.”

But does the data actually support that idea?

I recently ran a repeat-digit study on Ohio Pick 3 results going all the way back to 2011 through the present to find out whether some digits truly show a tendency to repeat into the very next same-game draw more often than others.

And the answer is:

Yes… but only slightly.

This was not a general frequency test.

The question was much narrower:

• If a digit appears in one draw,

• how often does that SAME digit appear again in the NEXT same-game draw?

The games were separated intentionally:

• Midday was only tested against the next Midday draw

• Evening was only tested against the next Evening draw

That distinction matters because the two Ohio games often behave differently rhythmically.

The test also compared repeat rates against each digit’s ordinary next-draw appearance rate. That part is important because raw counts alone can be misleading.

In other words, I wasn’t simply looking for which digits repeated most often.

I wanted to know:

Which digits repeated MORE often than normal expectation?

The strongest Midday repeater turned out to be digit: 5

Digit 5 repeated into the next Midday draw approximately:

30.0% of the time with a relative lift over baseline of: 1.060

That means Midday 5 repeated about 6% more often than its ordinary next-draw expectation.

Not enormous.

But measurable.

The weakest Midday repeater was: 4

which repeated only: 24.0% of the time

with a lift of: 0.939

suggesting it repeated slightly LESS often than normal expectation.

The Evening side produced a different personality.

The strongest Evening repeater by raw repeat rate was: 1

repeating into the next Evening draw: 29.6% of the time

However, when compared against ordinary expectation, the strongest Evening digit by relative strength became: 3

with a lift value of: 1.047

Meanwhile, the weakest Evening repeater was surprisingly: 5

which repeated only: 25.2% of the time

with a lift of: 0.930

That’s interesting because Midday 5 was the strongest repeater while Evening 5 became one of the weakest.

Another reminder that Midday and Evening should probably not be treated as identical games.

The important takeaway from this study is NOT:

“Digit 5 is guaranteed to repeat.”

That would be overstating the findings.

What the data actually suggests is something more subtle:

Some digits appear slightly more repeat-friendly than others.

The strongest repeaters only beat expectation modestly, while the weakest digits fall modestly below expectation.

That means the repeat-digit concept may have value as a supporting filter, but probably not as a stand-alone prediction system.

Most Pick 3 systems fail because they make hard claims from soft edges.

This study showed measurable tendencies, but not runaway predictive laws.

And honestly, that’s what makes the findings interesting to me.

Because once the data is measured honestly, the conversation becomes less about “magic numbers” and more about probability leanings and behavioral tendencies inside the game itself.

Small edges matter.

Especially when they help break ties between otherwise equal choices.

If there’s one thing this test reinforced for me, it’s this:

The Ohio Pick 3 appears to contain tiny pockets of uneven behavior that can be measured statistically — even if the edges themselves are modest.

And sometimes in Pick 3 research, finding a small honest edge is more valuable than chasing a big illusion.

As always, use this information responsibly and as part of a larger approach, not as a guarantee.

But if you’ve ever suspected certain digits “linger” into the next draw more than others…

the data suggests you may not have been imagining it after all.