Are you suggesting that people are smart enough to know their chances of winning are extremely slim with odds of 1 in 150 million, but will think they've got a realistic chance with odds of 1 in 75 million? Even with smaller games the odds are high enough that the only rational thought is that you won't win. With 1 in 20 million odds spending $1000 a year means you should expect to win once every 20,000 years.

For the most part, the lottery pays out 50 cents for every dollar they collect, and the only rational thought is that you'll lose half of what you bet. The only question is whether or not you risk that loss aginst the possibility of being  among the minority who win. Maybe it's just  a matter of perspective, but I don't think sales for  huge jackpots have anything to do with overcoming rational thoughts about winning. I think it's a mixture of  regular players concentrating their efforts on the huge jackpots and people who rarely play figuring there's no more risk in spending a buck or two  on lottery tickets than buying that pack of gum that will also be gone in a day or two. Buying a ticket and expecting to win is irrational, but figuring you can afford to lose the $1 for the very slim chance of winning isn't, and the odds don't have anything to do with that.

Whether it's lottery sales or anything else, plenty of people are always ready to jump up and down and point to a single cause for whatever they happen to be concerned about, but life is almost never that simple. There are dozens of possible reasons why lottery sales  change. Perception of the odds is only one of them, and probably a minor one for most people. It's no more or less rational to spend $20 for a 1 in 125,000  chance of winning $1 million than to spend  $1 for a 1 in 175 million chance of winning $10 or 100 million. The rational people know they'll probably lose the money and play withj money they can afford to lose. As many posters here have pointed out, a lot of people stop for gas, cigarettes or a newspaper and decide to buy a ticket or two while they're at it. Most people have a limited amount of money to play around with (and most of the rest aren't buying a lot of lottery tickets anyway) so they have to decide what to buy and what not to buy. It makes perfect sense to me that lottery sales would be lower when filling your car with gas costs $50 than when it costs $25, so why is everybody so sure the odds are the most important reason to most players?

Just what would this "anti-multi state game" be, and how would it work?  To pay $20 or 30 million in prizes for each drawing would require collecting well over $20 or 30 million, assuming the lottery still intends to make a profit and that there won't be any prizes other than the $1 million. $50 million in PB sales means an advertised jackpot of about $60 million, which which generally comes after the 2nd roll. If it takes PB a week and a half to sell enough tickets to put $25 million in the prize pool how can you have a game that isn't multi state or that has  drawings more than a couple of times a year?

The "fever" starts when the jackpot gets a lot of media coverage. The media coverage starts either because the jackpot is a record or because other news is quiet. Record jackpots are hard to come by because there are more players and thus more often winners before it gets there. The jackpots on multi state games still seem to go up at the same rate so I think this "lull" at the multi-state level is at least partly an illusion. The slowdown is really in State Lotto sales because States that joined PB or MM have players that abandoned the State Lotto for the Multi State game with the bigger jackpots. For the average casual player 10 million or 100 million to 1 is the same thing but $100 million is much more exciting than anything under $10 million. Another factor is that if a record Powerball jackpot is reached they start using the rolldown rule which slows the jackpot itself.

The solution might be for PB or MM states to abandon their local Pick-6 games to get even more players into PB/MM and also the two should be combined but not to add more balls!

Again, I still usually have to wait in line behind the person buying dozens of scratch-offs and reading a list of 50 Pickits. No fever reduction here!

The "fever" starts when the jackpot gets a lot of media coverage. The media coverage starts either because the jackpot is a record or because other news is quiet. Record jackpots are hard to come by because there are more players and thus more often winners before it gets there. The jackpots on multi state games still seem to go up at the same rate so I think this "lull" at the multi-state level is at least partly an illusion. The slowdown is really in State Lotto sales because States that joined PB or MM have players that abandoned the State Lotto for the Multi State game with the bigger jackpots. For the average casual player 10 million or 100 million to 1 is the same thing but $100 million is much more exciting than anything under $10 million. Another factor is that if a record Powerball jackpot is reached they start using the rolldown rule which slows the jackpot itself.

The solution might be for PB or MM states to abandon their local Pick-6 games to get even more players into PB/MM and also the two should be combined but not to add more balls!

Again, I still usually have to wait in line behind the person buying dozens of scratch-offs and reading a list of 50 Pickits. No fever reduction here!