The 29 lotteries that participate in the Powerball game have voted to make changes that will boost the average jackpot size, but also will boost the odds of winning.
Starting Aug. 29, the beginning jackpot will increase to $15 million from the current $10 million, the Multi-State Lottery Association announced Wednesday. The top prize will grow by no less than $5 million between each drawing.
"Lottery games need to be changed from time to time, to respond to both player demands and population changes," said Randy Davis, president of the Louisiana Lottery Corp. and chairman of the Powerball Game Group.
To boost the jackpot size, two numbers will be added to the first pool in the game, meaning players will choose five numbers from one to 55. The current first draw picks five white balls from a pool of 53.
The Powerball is drawn from a separate pool of red balls numbered from one to 42. That will not change.
The larger number of white balls boosts the jackpot odds to 1 in 146.1 million. The current game has jackpot odds of 1 in 120.5 million.
Ed Stanek, Iowa Lottery chief executive and one of Powerball's co-inventors, said the changes are part of a popular product's evolution.
"Players tell us they expect large jackpots in the game and we will continue to deliver those," Stanek said.
The odds of winning a cash prize in the game will increase only slightly, to 1 in 36.60 from 1 in 36.06, lottery officials said.
I like it. No formula is going to make everyone happy, but this suites me just fine. It will only take two draws to increase the jackpot to 25M. An amount that has only been achieved twice this entire year!
i think it will. now that they are raising the starting jackpot, increasing the matrix (even though they should have increased the number of powerballs to choose from), and increasing the minimum rollover, they should have no problem getting the jackpot back up into the $100 million range.
O.K. Now this is a "realistic" proposal. Somewhere between a rip-off (PA Lucky For Life) and a complete bank-breaker (doesn't exist).
5 & Powerball: Jackpot (Of Course)
5 (No Powerball) : $200,000
4 & Powerball: $10,000
4 (No Powerball): $200
3 & Powerball: $200
3 (No Powerball): $10
2 & Powerball: $10
1 & Powerball: $4
0 & Powerball: $3
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.
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).
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.
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 have to believe that there are a lot of people out there who know the odds are very long at 120m-to-1 and this will push them away from the powerball. I doubt that I am much different than any other person as I set a budget for the lottery and try buy my plays toward the back end (after the pot has been built up a bit). If those pots are 50 million dollars or 200 million makes very little difference to the average guy. I am not going to go take out a bank loan just because the lottery has gone 34 plays and is up to 350 million dollars, in fact I will see it as evidence that thing is unwinnable. At 120m-to-1 the powerball seemed to be working very well. The jackpot was being hit about once a month, which to me seems reasonable. Now we are likely not to see a winner for 2 or more months and that does not say good things about a lottery in which so many people participate. And all the powerball officials are offering is a 5 million dollar carrot on the front end which will make almost no difference by the time someone gets around to winning it.
Sorry to rant, but one last reason this change is bad for Powerball. Before the change, Powerball had better odds than MegaMillions (130m:1 vs 120m:1). Now MegaMillions has a substantial advantage (130m:1 vs 146m:1). People on the border may decide to play MegaMillions over Powerball. I won't feel sorry for them if sales drop, especially since this change was motivated by greed on the part of the lottery officials and not on making the game better for the players. They should have left it alone. This has just been a year of disappointments for me, first EA kills the ESPN NFL Football series by purchasing exclusive rights to NFL names and likenesses and now Powerball odds have been jacked up to an insulting level. I mean I could have tollerated a slight increase, but a 21 percent increase in the odds.. please.
good question....by the way i agree with the person who would rather play pick five,i could use 100,000 dollars as much as i could 10 million and by the time i buy ten pick five tickets that would equal buying a hundred powerball tickets to get to the same odds,i ,ight spend one dollar on powerball maybe but my main allegiance will be to games that are winnable on a daily basis like pick 5,a winner won on pick 5 last night in memphis where i live,all the more reason to stick with pick 5....
Quote:Originally posted by LOTTOMIKE on April 8, 2005 good question....by the way i agree with the person who would rather play pick five,i could use 100,000 dollars as much as i could 10 million and by the time i buy ten pick five tickets that would equal buying a hundred powerball tickets to get to the same odds,i ,ight spend one dollar on powerball maybe but my main allegiance will be to games that are winnable on a daily basis like pick 5,a winner won on pick 5 last night in memphis where i live,all the more reason to stick with pick 5....
Keep in mind that the odds of winning smaller prizes are much higher with Lotto 5. They need a Match 2 prize.
Even though they plan to drop two new numbered balls into the mixing hopper on August 29, it certainly won't keep me from continuing to regularly play favorite old number sets. My main concern is the type of drawing conducted regardless of tweaking the odds. I'm just relieved and thankful that Powerball didn't change to computerized draws.
jimmysand i agree,i wish we had prizes for matching two on lotto five but then again that would mean a lot more money they would be paying out and you know how stingy they are with prize payouts......
I just went to the powerball page and noticed that this is not the first time they have made the odds worse. Apparently it started off with 49 numbers. (Click the news and info link, and then click "History of Multistate Lottery Association")
I said 5/55 + 1/40. They say they going to do 5/55 + 1/42. I was half right.
I like it. No formula is going to make everyone happy, but this suites me just fine. It will only take two draws to increase the jackpot to 25M. An amount that has only been achieved twice this entire year!
I like the changes and I hope it leads to higher jackpots that powerball has been having lately.
i think it will. now that they are raising the starting jackpot, increasing the matrix (even though they should have increased the number of powerballs to choose from), and increasing the minimum rollover, they should have no problem getting the jackpot back up into the $100 million range.
and it will take only 17 draws (maximum) for the jackpot to get back to $100 million.
I just hope they raise the lower prize amounts. They didn't when they went to the current format.
they will need to do so. winning $100,000 for matching 5 of 55 is way too little for the odds.
- 5 & Powerball: Jackpot (Of Course)
- 5 (No Powerball) : $200,000
- 4 & Powerball: $10,000
- 4 (No Powerball): $200
- 3 & Powerball: $200
- 3 (No Powerball): $10
- 2 & Powerball: $10
- 1 & Powerball: $4
- 0 & Powerball: $3
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.The upcoming powerball change includes increasing the match 5 amount to $200,000.
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.
I'm glad they didn't.
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
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?????
I have to believe that there are a lot of people out there who know the odds are very long at 120m-to-1 and this will push them away from the powerball. I doubt that I am much different than any other person as I set a budget for the lottery and try buy my plays toward the back end (after the pot has been built up a bit). If those pots are 50 million dollars or 200 million makes very little difference to the average guy. I am not going to go take out a bank loan just because the lottery has gone 34 plays and is up to 350 million dollars, in fact I will see it as evidence that thing is unwinnable. At 120m-to-1 the powerball seemed to be working very well. The jackpot was being hit about once a month, which to me seems reasonable. Now we are likely not to see a winner for 2 or more months and that does not say good things about a lottery in which so many people participate. And all the powerball officials are offering is a 5 million dollar carrot on the front end which will make almost no difference by the time someone gets around to winning it.
Sorry to rant, but one last reason this change is bad for Powerball. Before the change, Powerball had better odds than MegaMillions (130m:1 vs 120m:1). Now MegaMillions has a substantial advantage (130m:1 vs 146m:1). People on the border may decide to play MegaMillions over Powerball. I won't feel sorry for them if sales drop, especially since this change was motivated by greed on the part of the lottery officials and not on making the game better for the players. They should have left it alone. This has just been a year of disappointments for me, first EA kills the ESPN NFL Football series by purchasing exclusive rights to NFL names and likenesses and now Powerball odds have been jacked up to an insulting level. I mean I could have tollerated a slight increase, but a 21 percent increase in the odds.. please.
Does anyone know when this will take effect?
good question....by the way i agree with the person who would rather play pick five,i could use 100,000 dollars as much as i could 10 million and by the time i buy ten pick five tickets that would equal buying a hundred powerball tickets to get to the same odds,i ,ight spend one dollar on powerball maybe but my main allegiance will be to games that are winnable on a daily basis like pick 5,a winner won on pick 5 last night in memphis where i live,all the more reason to stick with pick 5....
also i would love lottosouth,if we could get that here in tennessee i'd quit powerball forever....
Keep in mind that the odds of winning smaller prizes are much higher with Lotto 5. They need a Match 2 prize.
Even though they plan to drop two new numbered balls into the mixing hopper on August 29, it certainly won't keep me from continuing to regularly play favorite old number sets. My main concern is the type of drawing conducted regardless of tweaking the odds. I'm just relieved and thankful that Powerball didn't change to computerized draws.
that would be commercial suicide if powerball went computerized,that would ruin the magic of the game......
jimmysand i agree,i wish we had prizes for matching two on lotto five but then again that would mean a lot more money they would be paying out and you know how stingy they are with prize payouts......
I just went to the powerball page and noticed that this is not the first time they have made the odds worse. Apparently it started off with 49 numbers. (Click the news and info link, and then click "History of Multistate Lottery Association")