Who told you I have no idea what I'm doing? Did you get inside my brain? If you knew what you were doing, you would have found the pattern before me. Therefore, I am the one who should tell you that you have no idea what I found. Therefore, try to focus on the meaning of my words and not on the words themselves. If you saw me boasting, you would do the same thing, even though I am not boasting.
There is no pattern. You're making post-factum stats on a few dozen observed random variables, in what is a multi-septiliion sized possibilities space (all of equal chance), in order to delusion yourself that the ideal (e.g. random) model will magically follow your fitness function of shrinking the range (it won't, that's not how physics works; it's not even how MATH works). But you'll have many friends here that are on your side with that kind of desperate thinking, so don't lose your hope!
Also one likely needs lots of years of studying math in order to understand the meaning of the words above, or what a "zero margin of error" means. Let me clarify: we don't even have a zero margin of error if we scan the full P71 range, from first key to the last. It's only the belief that a key should exist there that is allowing us to call it a near-zero margin of error on finding it. Let alone your 61-bit reduction. Every time you half the range blindly (since it's the only option) you're halving the success chances, down from near 100% to the 0.2% which in your mind is the guaranteed range to look in. It may be there. Guaranteed? Not even remotely close. Choose your words, math terminology is universal, not language-barriered.
Also hashing 2**62 keys in a continuous range doesn't cost 34k, maybe 5k with custom GPU computing dealers and non-crappy software.
