Tennessee Lottery chief Rebecca Hargrove said Monday there's no sign that players have lost confidence despite a daily drawings computer glitch.

A July switch to computerized drawings had incorrectly prevented repeat numbers in the drawings until a programming error was fixed in August. The error meant that no winning draw included duplicate numerals, so any ticket holder who had bet on a number like 2-2-1 or 7-7-7-7 wasn't going to win.

But quarterly sales for Cash 3 tickets sales rose 5 percent compared with the same year-ago quarter, while Cash 4 sales were up 2 percent, Hargrove said.

"I'm struggling with the suggestion that we've lost faith with our players," she said.

Hargrove said resuming manual drawings with numbered balls could cost more than $5 million per year, and would run contrary to the national trend toward computerization.

[Editor: This editor simply cannot let Mrs. Hargrove's statement go unchecked.  The last state to go computerized was  Wisconsin — in 2004.  (See here and here for details.)  If she calls that a trend, I hope she does not plan on becoming a statistician any time soon.]

Players complained about the lack of repeat numbers soon after the computer change, but Hargrove said that didn't raise an alarm because of previous two-week stints without repeat numbers.

[Editor: Actually, the Tennessee Pick 3 game went over two weeks without doubles only one time in the history of the game — from Aug. 5, 2005 to Aug. 22, 2005 — but that was when there was no Pick 3 midday drawings, so it was half the number of drawings as it would have been today.  Plus, the drawing system was brand new, which would reasonably lead to at least a quick look-see.  Mrs. Hargrove also did not address her staff's e-mails to inquiring players, which specified that the lottery tested the drawing system , and it produced doubles.]

The faulty daily drawings were followed by another lottery problem last month, when some lottery tickets showed an incorrect Powerball jackpot. Hargrove defended the lottery's performance.

"We've done over 75,000 drawings, we've done over $1 million a day in financial transactions," said Hargrove. "We have a huge operation and we've done that very, very well until recently, when we experienced our first serious operational problem."

The lottery paid SmartPlay International Inc. $221,300 to set up two number-picking computers. An internal lottery audit found that SmartPlay had made a programming error, and that another company hired to double-check the system, Gaming Laboratories Inc., had failed to spot the mistake.

Lottery officials said they found no evidence of fraud. They checked the names of all people involved in designing or checking the new system against a winners database and found no matches.

The lottery has hired another outside auditor, KPMG, to examine whether the computerized drawing system is now sound. Another audit by the state comptroller's office will look more closely at any potential fraudulent activity.

James H. Ripley, a Sevierville attorney who heads the 3-year-old lottery's audit committee, asked other members whether they wanted to consider recommending that KPMG also look into questions of fraud.

"It seems to me we've got our belt on, so the question is whether we need a pair of suspenders to go along with that," he said.

The committee deferred a decision on further fraud audits until later.

"Lottery officials said they found no evidence of fraud. They checked the names of all people involved in designing or checking the new system against a winners database and found no matches."

that is not evidence that no one cheated to profit just because the winners didnt have the same names or same last names as the people involved. they could have had friends claim jackpots or a relative with a different last name.

The only time I was ever required to sign the back of a ticket and show ID was when I hit the Pick-4 straight and 5 out of 6 in the Lotto and that was because the payoff was over $600. If somebody actually knew which number was going to be drawn in advance, it wouldn't be very difficult cashing one or two $500 tickets at multiple stores without ever signing their name or showing ID. This type of investigation proves nothing.

Experienced state lotteries officials know that certain Pick-3 number combinations are played more than others and expect to see higher payouts when they are drawn. But they would raise an eyebrow if a historically low payout combination was drawn and an extraordinary amount of money was wagered on it.

If it is true (and I seriously doubt it) that the cost of having live ball drawings is $5 million a year, they could easily justify the change to a computer draw by controlling outcomes and the payouts and call it "a programming error" if they were caught. There was fraud by the Tennessee Lottery Commission when it replied to emails complaining about the lack of double digits being drawn by saying the system was tested and doubles were drawn when the facts show that was impossible.

Hopefully that question will be asked when the state legislators hold their hearings.