My opinion is this: they certainly have access to the data; however, I think they simply don't care. First of all, if they really wanted only PNP/LMIA candidates, they might have made having those a mandatory requirement, like the language test. If they only wanted candidates with a very high score, they could have implemented a minimum score for acceptance into the pool, like in Australian system. As the applicants, we worry a lot about our chances, other people in the pool, etc, so it may be difficult to see things from their point of view, which I'm pretty sure is rather indifferent. Somebody just has a schedule and follows it, like a bureaucrat, without thinking about the actual people involved in the process, as well as their scores. So that's my point of view - I think they have everything in place to "calibrate" the draws, but they simply don't care about it. As for the number of draws, I posted my theory a couple of pages back - I think the "real" draws were the 1st and the 4th. 3rd draw was just to correct CIC's mistake with CEC/FSW eligibility (I think some other people believe so, too). The 1st and the 2nd draws (that's my speculation) were one and the same draw, split in half for some reason, that's why the number of ITAs in the 1st and 2nd draws was exactly the same. So, from my theory, it looks like there were 2 draws: January 31 (1558 ITAs) and February 27 (1187 ITAs), and I'm not expecting anything until the end of March; also, it seems like a simple reasonable schedule - a draw at the end of each month. Anyway, just to be clear - it's all just my opinion that I felt like sharing, I might well be wrong and other people may interpret things differently.