John,

RAND(-1) uses a seed value from the system clock. So it's more random than RAND(SECONDS()).

>I've always found it fine, but just to add a bit more randomness, you might want to subsitute the -1 with SECONDS().
>
>eg. RAND(SECONDS())
>
>
>>RAND(-1)
>>REPLACE ALL no WITH RAND()*1000
>
>>Can anyone advise me if with that way is it really random so I can be sure that the drawing is fare ?