Mass. Lottery game very profitable for those who know how and when to play

While I love these stories, the concept of dropping between 100,000$ and 300,000$ on a lottery game in one day (or 3) is beyond daunting for me.  Odds may be stacked in your favor, but you still have to walk away knowing that you may lose it all.  I have a hard time 'losing' 20$!

It's like anything in life: there are no guarantees from anything.  But it's also true in life that in most cases big rewards are gained through risk.  So it's all a matter of containing the risk and risking what you can afford.  And these people seem to have done that.

Maybe now that this quirk has drawn national attention, Massachusetts will reconsider its value as states like Ohio, Indiana and Illinois and others have pick6 games where the jackpots have gone over a year without a winner and rolled to over $40M which attracted even more players.  Sounds like this quirk only attracts small groups of extra players, many from out of state who only play because they are guaranteed to win more than they contribute to the state.   And if their winnings are in amounts of less than $600, they probably have a hard time tracking them down for taxes too.

If it was a guaranteed return, Bank of America would probably be investing in it, they've lost money investing in more risky ventures.

Years ago when state lotteries first started to come on strong, there were quite a few players who thought they could beat them if they invested enough and took out second mortgages on their homes.  People learned from those folks going bankrupt and losing their home that it was a bad idea to borrow money to play lotteries.

Just goes to show you that different people have different needs. Imagine losing a home because you gambled it away? How do you explain it to your family and friends? These are the kinds of things that make men and women jump over the Tobin Bridge or the infamous Golden Gate Bridge

I find it interesting that the group was from MIT.

What, does the faculty/student body of MIT sit around and hold classes on how to 'Break' Vegas and Break lotteries? :)

First they mastered card counting (cant remember the official name of the group but just watch the movie '21' with Kevin Spacey), now they are on to the lottery.

I am sure they have schemed more than that, which is awesome either way.

Maybe I should seek out an online course from there lol

It's interesting to note that in spite of those groups buying millions of tickets, the jackpot has only be won once in seven years.  Seem likes buying lots of tickets during the roll back period when the match4 and match5 payouts are large is the only strategy a player needs, not an MIT education.

Following this story the state Treasurer put a limit on the number of tickets for the Cash WinFall game stores can sell per day.

Treasurer Grossman said stores can sell a maximum of $5,000 worth of Cash WinFall tickets in a single day.

That could have been predicted once the winning strategy that actually worked was exposed by the news paper stories.  It's also likely this game will be replaced with in the year.  Those big spenders knew once the story was out to the general public their buying all those tickets at one or two stores would end.

I just wonder how many other lottery "quirks" may exist that the general public don't know about and lotteries don't talk about.

RJOh

The roll down would still carry the same odds for the game as any other drawing on a ticket by ticket

bases. They would need more than just a betting strategy unless the payouts exceded the odds for

each lower prize which on may 9th 2011 the payouts were as below

Normal odds                                       roll down payouts

2x= free ticket      1 in 6.8                  $ no info

3x = $5.00            1 in 47.4                $26.00

4X= $150.00         1 in 800                 $824.00

5X= $4000.00       1 in 39,028            $24, 821.00

6X= JP                   1 in 9,366,819

Matching a 4 of 6 was the only option that paid more than the expected ticket cost needed to win that level

prize which would have netted a $24.00 dollar profit.  One would have to do better then the expected odds

to make out big playing this game.  You would need to buy 39,028 tickets on average to hit a 5 of 6 which

paid 24,821,00 which would show a loss of $14,207.  Even with the large payouts a system of picking the sets

would need to be in use.  The increased prize level would not provide it unless the free tickets won a good

amount in the next drawing. 

RL

From other stories I've read about this the math done by several math professors showed anyone who bought a $100,000 worth of CashFall tickets during the rundown would likely earn their money back plus a profit which five gambling companies were doing.  The only strategy they used or needed was buying several hundreds thousands tickets randomly before the drawing.

RJOh

Random tickets overall would conform to the odds of the game.  If the prize payout was less then

the tickets needed to win then they take a big gamble.  Playing at that level is something I can't 

afford to do and if I could afford it then I would not play.  In the article they mentioned a 5 of 6

could win $100,000.00 and that would mean that it was very safe but I still think some sort of

system or wheel would needed  to ensure a certain amount of coverage.   If the payouts were

less then the cost of tickets for that prize then it would not be a sure bet.

RL

RJOh

Run off 500,000 random sets for a game and see how it does over time,  They may be pooling money from

many sources which would make the end payout even less.  If I buy all 575757 sets for my 5-39 and half 

of that goes back into the prize.  Lets say that the JP was 575757 / 2 = $287878.50 plus half of my investment

of $287878.50 would bring the prize up to $575757 and I would get my money back if no other person matched

all 5 numbers minus taxes which should not be a problem because I could claim the ticket cost.  If I bought

575757 random tickets I would expect 30% to be repeats so I would have a 70% chance of breaking even plus the

smaller prizes.  With 70% of the tickets you might not even hit a 4 of 5.   In a 5-39 matrix there are only 170 tickets

that match 4 numbers. 

RL

If the payouts didn't exceed the odds of winning then there were too many hogs in the feeding trough for that roll down.  Since all the big spenders formed gambling companies they can claim all their loses including the cost of tickets as professional gamblers and are not limited to only claiming loses up to the amount they won as regular players are.  The big spenders could still break even for the year since these roll downs happen several times during the year, if not then as gamblers they shouldn't expect to come out ahead all the time.