As past discussions at Lottery Post have shown, everyone has their own opinions of what is good vs. bad with a lottery.  Taken as a whole, what the class is doing is a good thing to elevate the discussion.

BTW, I also have some problems with the survey, in that NJ is at the bottom.  I personally think that New Jersey has an excellent lottery, with the exception of its pari-mutuel payouts for Pick 3 and Pick 4.  The fact of no state tax on lottery prizes is a big plus that should elevate it, and even though it's a factor in the rankings, NJ is still at the bottom.

The study is not really done from the standpoint of a lottery fan, with the exception of the computerized drawings thing.  I think (from a lottery fan's persepctive) that more weight should be given to the game mix itself.  Having every type of classic lotto game is important - Pick 3, 4, 5, and 6, with Pick 5 and Pick 6 being compounding jackpot games.  Also, the inclusion of midday games is a big plus that should elevate a state.

"The study is not really done from the standpoint of a lottery fan, with the exception of the computerized drawings thing."

"Odds printed on front or back of ticket -- 5"

"Annuity amount or cash value on ticket -- 2"

We walk into a store, go over to the lottery terminal and ask the clerk for $1 QP Lotto ticket and hand them a buck. We look at the ticket and see the Jackpot is $3 million, the pretax cash value is $1.5 million, and look at the back of the ticket and see the odds of winning the Jackpot are 14 million to 1. 

After looking at the ticket we decide it's a terrible bet and ask the clerk for our buck back. The clerk gives us that "you must be stupid" look and points to all the brochures and pamphlets right in front of the terminal that clearly explain all the odds and how the payouts are distributed. And since the Jackpot is subject to change, we should have asked the clerk for the amount update before buying the ticket. These 7 points should be awarded to lotteries that clearly give out that information before the ticket is sold.

"Subscriptions offered? -- 1"

Is there a lottery that doesn't offer future draw play on their play slips?

They obviously mean 6 months or 1 year subscriptions that are geared for people that play the same set of numbers in every draw, but some offer subscriptions at a reduced rate. If somebody is going to play the same set of numbers in the next 104 draws, why is it a bad thing when a lottery offers to sell those tickets for less than $104?

"If offered, is credit card payment OK? -- 2" 

As if people can't withdraw money from credit cards and write a check or buy a money order with it.

"Bonus – 5 :  Maryland was the only state we could find that allows players who win the top prize in a game that offers an annuitized prize (e.g., “Weekly Grand”) to change the way the prize is awarded to a cash payments. "  

From the Ohio Lottery website, Classic Lotto, rules and regulations, Sec. H, part 2: "Commencing with the date of presentment of a valid winning grand prize jackpot ticket, and for sixty calendar days thereafter, claimants may choose the cash option value instead of thirty annual installment payments." 

I don't have the time to research every state lottery website, but I would find the time if I wanted to accurately report the statistical evaluations of state lotteries. Even without looking, I'm pretty sure each state lottery site provides at least a link to a site that has all that information.

The report was on Disclosures and Fairness Issues done by a group of people having very little if any experience playing lottery games or with any form of gambling in general. Do people really buy $20 worth of lottery tickets and then ask "how do I play, how much can I win, and what are my options"?

I think a study of this kind is better done from a non-lottery player's point of view since the majority of us are clueless to the tactics that are used to draw us in to take our money or so desperate and don't care and really don't know what's good or bad.  Lottery Players "in the know" about the tactics state lotteries use have subjective opinions and will fight forever. 

There is a small minority that are "in the know" about state lotteries compared to the people who actually play.  The average person just place bets in hopes of winning.  You know - those people who prefer that others do their thinking.  Those are the people that are targeted and it's more of them.  Not trying to be mean.  Starbucks don't put billboards in ghetto neighborhoods.   Some corporations don't even waste their time targeting certain groups.  And state lotteries are like corporations that want to make money and they know who spend the most and know their mentality.  

I think the criteria used to rank the states was idiot proofed - probably based on assuming all of us are idiots- the idiots the state lottery make a lot of money from - like the people who continue to buy the scratch offs that are sold when the major prizes are gone.  Didn't do their homework, didn't know it was even done.  The idiot like me who bought NC scratch offs with low payoffs.   

People who even read  prize information and do not realize that a "free ticket" was calulated in or didn't know that it's been a week since prize information was updated or don't have it at all on the website.   And unclaimed prizes are not put back in the pot.  The lottery make money before people can figure out they have been had.  I see the ranking criteria used in this study as "we'll trying to protect the people"  It's a shame but necessary.  

This study is the outside looking in objectively.   I'll have to read it again and see if they told us how they came up with the the criteria for ranking.

I agree with Todd that having every type of classic lotto game is important too and more weight should have been given to the game mix.  I wonder what kind of ranking Mass got.  I just thought of that pick3/pick 4 thingy they do.  I wouldn't like that at all.

You seem to be disputing what I said, but that's really just a guess.  I wish you'd be a little more direct so I can understand your point.

Yes, there are some things that are geared towards players.  But to me, it seems like the survey is overall geared toward what a consumer advocate would want, and not necessarily toward things that are attractive to fans of the lottery.

i agree with tennessee being the worst BUT how in the hell can georgia and virginia be at the bottom of the list as one of the worst lotteries also.this list just isn't valid for those reasons.arizona near the top? and california number one?  nah....