The press release said nothing about changes to the lower tier prizes.

I thought PB would go for longer odds than 1 in 146 million. At least the starting jackpot and initial increases will be higher.

Quote: Originally posted by CASH Only on April 7, 2005

---

...I thought PB would go for longer odds than 1 in 146 million....

---

I'm glad they didn't.

Quote: Originally posted by JimmySand9 on April 6, 2005

---

May I also suggest the removal of the Match 5 Bonus Pool which limits jackpot growth to $25,000,000 per draw. Especially now, considering that with PowerPlay multiplier of x5, matching 5 with no Powerball would still net $1,000,000, and that's every draw.

---

But the Match 5 Bonus has never even been reached. Almost made it twice, but it was hit right before it would have went into effect. Although limits aren't ideal, when you are getting up to $350 Million, I don't think it's such a bad idea. It spreads the wealth around. And goodness, if you can't live on $350 Million vs. say $400 or $450 Million, then you have a serious problem. lol

Quote: Originally posted by smd173 on April 7, 2005

---

Quote: Originally posted by JimmySand9 on April 6, 2005

---

May I also suggest the removal of the Match 5 Bonus Pool which limits jackpot growth to $25,000,000 per draw. Especially now, considering that with PowerPlay multiplier of x5, matching 5 with no Powerball would still net $1,000,000, and that's every draw.

---

But the Match 5 Bonus has never even been reached. Almost made it twice, but it was hit right before it would have went into effect. Although limits aren't ideal, when you are getting up to $350 Million, I don't think it's such a bad idea. It spreads the wealth around. And goodness, if you can't live on $350 Million vs. say $400 or $450 Million, then you have a serious problem. lol

---

Keep in mind that I'm trying to find something satisfies the lotteries and the players. And big jackpots mean big excitement for players, as well as big profits for the lotteries. The faster it grows, the more exciting the game gets. Anyway, I could live on $4,000,000 (cash, after taxes) easily.

The current odds of 120m-to-1 are depressing as it stands and odds of 146m-to-1 are rediculous at best.  Even the Mega Millions is better at 130m-to-1 which has been described as infinitesimal by statisticians.  We just got the lottery last year and I was buying 2-20 tickets depending on the pot, but now I will never buy more than a couple at a time and only when the jackpots are 100+ million or I may just play my wife's single number and be done with it.  Other than that I plan to pay more attention to the smaller multi-state lotteries (lotto south) that I have a 10x better chance of winning.  I would much rather participate in a 10-20 million dollar lottery where buying 10 tickets is equivalent to buying 105 powerball tickets.  I hope the powerball officials are not doing this just because the numbers were hit early a few times, because that can happen again at 146m-to-1 and if it does are they going to raise them again.  I don't think the public needs to have 200-400 million dollar jackpots to be attracted to the lottery.  People buy tickets when they see the jackpot is on the high-side no matter what that may be (it doesn't need to be an astronomical amount). 

Tony:

You need to push for Tennessee to join Lotto South or Hot Lotto.

I agree, I run up to Kentucky to buy lotto south tickets

Quote: Originally posted by tony95 on April 7, 2005

---

The current odds of 120m-to-1 are depressing as it stands and odds of 146m-to-1 are ridiculous at best.  Even the Mega Millions is better at 130m-to-1 which has been described as infinitesimal by statisticians.... I hope the powerball officials are not doing this just because the numbers were hit early a few times, because that can happen again at 146m-to-1, and if it does, are they going to raise them again?  I don't think the public needs to have 200-400 million dollar jackpots to be attracted to the lottery.... (it doesn't need to be an astronomical amount). 

---

tony95,

The vast majority of lottery players are largely oblivious to the odds of the games. I can't explain it, but evidently, many players get excited about playing for a super-size jackpot that they have virtually no chance of winning. Longer odds and larger jackpots basically mean that there will be fewer winners less often. Maybe the excitement of that lies in a pathological, selective , euphoric ideation of gambling action. It could be that the vast majority of lottery players just don't care about the odds.

Beyond the entertainment aspect, lottery games aren't a very good bet anyway, and people who don't play tend to think that all of us who do play are stupid fools. Maybe we are foolish for thinking that luck will smile on us in a big way or that we'll be smart enough to beat the odds.

I've been foolish long enough at odds of about 120million to one. When they implement the change to the PowerBall game, I'm switching my foolish allegiance to the 13million to one odds of Hoosier Lotto and LOTTO South.

Well, maybe I'll buy just one Quick Pick on PowerBall when the jackpot gets really big, but I'm not counting on it being very exciting... unless I win.

Good luck,

aye'

I just can't see changing the matrix. It is difficult enough now to just win $3....much less the BIG ONE!!!! This is all about GREED from the smaller states. When the jackpot is hit(and just by luck) numerous times over the last 3-4 months..states with small populations lose $30-$50 million/month just in lost revenue, only because the jackpots are not escalating to enourmous amounts. I think this change will "turn off" many players....and like ME, will stick to the smaller payouts, like Pick3 and Pick4.   Hey!!! who couldn't use $500 for a straight play on Pick3?? I'll take it any and every day!!!!!!!

I would like to know just how many of the 29 lotteries in the PB game actually voted FOR changing the game?????