bbbbcccc
Joined: Sep 5, 2013
• Posts: 71
September 5th, 2013 at 4:59:17 PM permalink
The Mega Millions Lottery is making changes that will result in more small prizes, but make the jackpot much, much more difficult to hit. The new jackpot odds will go from 1 in 176,000,000 to 1 in 259,000,000. Given that it got as high as \$600,000,000 recently, I'd imagine that this could lead to a billion dollar ticket in the not too distant future.

http://www.calottery.com/play/draw-games/mega-millions/changes
slyther
Joined: Feb 1, 2010
• Posts: 691
September 6th, 2013 at 8:42:52 AM permalink
Imagine the hysteria when the advertised jackpot is \$1B
98Clubs
Joined: Jun 3, 2010
• Posts: 1728
September 6th, 2013 at 10:01:44 AM permalink
Jeez, I wudda thought 6/48 + 1/20. If its still \$1 OK.

***EDIT*** This made me lookup other games... It turns out that the New England Lucky for Life game is also changing.
Pick 5/43 + 1/43 (41,391,714) to win \$1000/day for life (30 yr. minimum) AND added a \$500/week prize (30 yr minimum) for just the 5/43.
Tickets remain \$2 a pop, but this dog has a \$2 prize for 2/5 that will curtail medium prizes to not-worth-it levels. Odds 1 in 8.6,
remove the dog, and it would be 1 in 32.7 with better prizes. /EDIT
Some people need to reimagine their thinking.
miplet
Joined: Dec 1, 2009
• Posts: 2075
September 6th, 2013 at 11:07:36 AM permalink
Quote: 98Clubs

Jeez, I wudda thought 6/48 + 1/20. If its still \$1 OK.

But that would only be 1 in 245,430,240 to win the jackpot instead of 1 in 258,890,850 :+)

Bellow will be the new return table based on a \$15 Million Jackpot:

whitegoldcombinationsprobabilitypaysreturnmegaplier return
5110.000000003862632150000000.0579394752653480
50140.00000005407684410000000.0540768435809920.155020284932176
413500.0000013519210950000.0067596054476240.019377535616522
4049000.0000189268952535000.0094634476266740.027128549863131
31241500.000093282555177500.0046641277588610.0133704995754
303381000.00130595577248150.0065297788624050.01871869940556
215474000.00211440458401750.0105720229200840.03030646570424
2076636000.029601664176235000
1145844750.01770813839114120.0354162767822810.101526660109206
10641826500.247913937475967000
01121030140.04674948535261110.0467494853526110.134015191344151
001694421960.654492794936553000
25889085010.2321710635968790.499463886550387
“Man Babes” #AxelFabulous
JB
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
• Posts: 2089
September 6th, 2013 at 11:40:31 AM permalink
In similar news, the relatively new lottery game played in the six New England states called "Lucky for Life" is also about to undergo some crippling changes. The top prize is \$1,000 a day for the rest of your life, and has been won seven times since the game launched last March, including on its very first drawing. But starting September 19, the grand prize will be roughly 3 times as difficult to hit.

If you plan on living at least 51 years and 4 months after winning the top prize, the current game is +EV before considering taxes or splitting. The odds of hitting the grand prize are currently 1 in 13,818,168 but will plummet to 1 in 41,391,714 starting with the September 19 drawing. The second prize will change from a flat \$25,000 to \$25,000 a year for the rest of your life. This is the change that the game's creators are focusing on in their press release to make the new version sound better than the original.
98Clubs
Joined: Jun 3, 2010
• Posts: 1728
September 6th, 2013 at 12:57:24 PM permalink
Yeah, a real dog. After reading it, I came up with a 5/52 +1/16 that looks and pays more attractively without the 2/5 dog.
Probably 2-3-4-5-10.... for the re-invented swindle, err uh, game. EDIT: Amazing they had to pinch pennies, as a 500/wk payoff costs only \$1000/year. /EDIT
Some people need to reimagine their thinking.
FleaStiff
Joined: Oct 19, 2009
• Posts: 14484
September 6th, 2013 at 3:41:45 PM permalink
Well, I'm not surprized that the proposed changes in each of the lotteries is being described in a misleading manner.

I consider 100.00 to be the minimum "payout" ... anything less is just churned back into more tickets anyway, no one ever leaves the lottery vendor with the ten dollars or the two dollar prize.
Alan
Joined: Jun 14, 2011
• Posts: 582
September 6th, 2013 at 5:31:27 PM permalink
I hope this isn't too off topic, but I would much rather have a reasonable chance of winning say \$25k, than a snowballs(lightning strikes) chance at \$500 million. I don't necessarily need \$500 million, but \$25k could do me(and a lot of others) some good.
RaleighCraps
Joined: Feb 20, 2010
• Posts: 2501
September 6th, 2013 at 5:34:47 PM permalink
Quote: Alan

I hope this isn't too off topic, but I would much rather have a reasonable chance of winning say \$25k, than a snowballs(lightning strikes) chance at \$500 million. I don't necessarily need \$500 million, but \$25k could do me(and a lot of others) some good.

+1

Giving 40 people \$1M would do way more for the economy than giving 1 person \$40M
Always borrow money from a pessimist; They don't expect to get paid back ! Be yourself and speak your thoughts. Those who matter won't mind, and those that mind, don't matter!
bigfoot66
Joined: Feb 5, 2010
• Posts: 1582
September 6th, 2013 at 5:40:20 PM permalink
Quote: RaleighCraps

+1

Giving 40 people \$1M would do way more for the economy than giving 1 person \$40M

Eliminating the monopoly on lotteries and allowing competition would have much more of a positive effect on the economy.
Vote for Nobody 2020!
98Clubs
Joined: Jun 3, 2010
• Posts: 1728
September 6th, 2013 at 10:05:58 PM permalink
The problem is most states use a closed circuit network of data-share (retailer to State-run game Operator) to keep the gaming in-State.
A competitor needs such a network. To consider using the Internet is even more difficult.
Some people need to reimagine their thinking.
98Clubs
Joined: Jun 3, 2010
• Posts: 1728
September 6th, 2013 at 10:14:01 PM permalink
Quote: Alan

I hope this isn't too off topic, but I would much rather have a reasonable chance of winning say \$25k, than a snowballs(lightning strikes) chance at \$500 million. I don't necessarily need \$500 million, but \$25k could do me(and a lot of others) some good.

Separately... +2
I'll take 40G's on a 1 in 200,000 chance for a buck. Worth it.
Some people need to reimagine their thinking.
FleaStiff
Joined: Oct 19, 2009
• Posts: 14484
September 6th, 2013 at 11:46:09 PM permalink
Quote: Alan

I hope this isn't too off topic, but I would much rather have a reasonable chance of winning say \$25k, than a snowballs(lightning strikes) chance at \$500 million. I don't necessarily need \$500 million, but \$25k could do me(and a lot of others) some good.

Ah, but a "Spanish Lottery" (one with what is essentially winner takes all, no consolation or trivial prizes) raises far more money that a more reasonable and egalitarian lottery of an impressive sum awarded to dozens and dozens of winners. (Spain, Portugal, Perth Australia, Irish sweepstakes).

And this "winner" of dribs and drabs is just false advertising. Thats like saying come to the casino and "win" a free drink or free key chain.
100xOdds
Joined: Feb 5, 2012
• Posts: 3986
September 7th, 2013 at 4:54:35 AM permalink
Quote: miplet

But that would only be 1 in 245,430,240 to win the jackpot instead of 1 in 258,890,850 :+)

Bellow will be the new return table based on a \$15 Million Jackpot:

whitegoldcombinationsprobabilitypaysreturnmegaplier return
5110.000000003862632150000000.0579394752653480
50140.00000005407684410000000.0540768435809920.155020284932176
413500.0000013519210950000.0067596054476240.019377535616522
4049000.0000189268952535000.0094634476266740.027128549863131
31241500.000093282555177500.0046641277588610.0133704995754
303381000.00130595577248150.0065297788624050.01871869940556
215474000.00211440458401750.0105720229200840.03030646570424
2076636000.029601664176235000
1145844750.01770813839114120.0354162767822810.101526660109206
10641826500.247913937475967000
01121030140.04674948535261110.0467494853526110.134015191344151
001694421960.654492794936553000
25889085010.2321710635968790.499463886550387

is this the actual new prize structure?
cant find it on the website.

if it is, then the 4+1 prize of \$5k is actually reduced from the current \$10k.
worse odds and 1/2 the prize \$.
WTF?!

the new prizes are also worse when hitting 3+0 and 3+1 compared to the current:

only the 0+1,1+1 and 4+0 have improved over the current.
but then again, people to buy lotto are math challenged...
Craps is paradise (Pair of dice). Lets hear it for the SpeedCount Mathletes :)