Texas Lottery Approves Mega Millions Changes

Comment #25

CASH Only — Fri, 18 Mar 2005 14:38:17 GMT

OK almost certainly will join PB.

Comment #24

dvdiva — Fri, 18 Mar 2005 03:06:19 GMT

Quote: Originally posted by tg636 on March 16, 2005 ... Personally, I'm glad the $300-500 million jackpot never happened, since I don't think anyone really needs more than $30 million and having more winners makes it more fun....Well now we really get to the root of it. People who like free choice and those who don't. This isn't the CCCP is America and you should have a choice. If you don't like games with big jackpots and terrible odds then don't play. There are plenty of state games with small... [ More ]

Comment #23

LOTTOMIKE — Fri, 18 Mar 2005 01:47:45 GMT

will oklahoma be a powerball or mega state

Comment #22

tg636 — Wed, 16 Mar 2005 14:49:22 GMT

I agree. I would like to see no changes until 1 year after CA joins. Before they increase the odds again, they should address why the anticipated and advertised $300-500 million jackpots didn't happen even before TX CA joined. Personally, I'm glad the $300-500 million jackpot never happened, since I don't think anyone really needs more than $30 million and having more winners makes it more fun. No winner week after week is not only dreary, it reminds you how bad the odds are. But the lottery... [ More ]

Comment #21

JimmySand9 — Tue, 15 Mar 2005 21:50:48 GMT

I don't really think a change is needed right now. 1 in 135 million seems like enough for now. I agree with jsk2001 that the consortium needs to simply observe what happens in real life, because predicting players habits is about as impossible as predicting the numbers. Look at the change to the current matrix. They were predicting $400,000,000+ jackpots, and they still haven't broken the old Big Game record yet. Of course there is one player habit that can be counted on, and that's no balls=no... [ More ]

Comment #20

ryanm — Tue, 15 Mar 2005 21:30:39 GMT

Quote: Originally posted by dvdiva on March 15, 2005I doubt WA state will even have a public discussion on what changes are to be made. Too bad its only 1:175 million, might not be enough of a change considering the number of new players. With Texas deciding things I have a feeling that it's already decided unless New York or California decides differently. That extra 40 million combinations should be enough to increase the average jackpot size. Even without the changes, Mega Millions seems to... [ More ]

Comment #19

dvdiva — Tue, 15 Mar 2005 20:34:08 GMT

I personally would like to see even less Megaballs with greater odds coming from an increase in white balls with bigger prizes for 5 white balls and no Megaball.

Comment #18

dvdiva — Tue, 15 Mar 2005 20:31:28 GMT

I doubt WA state will even have a public discussion on what changes are to be made. Too bad its only 1:175 million, might not be enough of a change considering the number of new players. With Texas deciding things I have a feeling that it's already decided unless New York or California decides differently.

Comment #17

ryanm — Tue, 15 Mar 2005 20:10:08 GMT

Quote: Originally posted by fxdwg on March 14, 2005I am just one who is not fond of the big Jackpots but if they did change it. My gosh the odds are overwhelming now at 1:135 million to change it to 1:175 million wow I am sure that there would be some huge JPs. But my opinion is of little value as I am sure the lure of big JPs will win out which is OK. I am fortunate enough to live in an area that borders a Power ball state so I shall just put that extra into power ball rather than Mega Millions... [ More ]

Comment #16

orangeman — Tue, 15 Mar 2005 19:45:04 GMT

Adding four more numbers to the matrix is really not that big a deal in the big picture. Reducing the Mega ball to 46 would be good, but not important. I personally play Mega Millions as a 5-25 game and aim for the $750,000 prize. I don't hold my breath on the mega ball side of the game. Here in Texas, as you-all know, we have the Megaplier feature. I wish all states in the system could have it because, under the new matrix, you would risk $2 to win $1,000,000. Not a bad deal on a 5-56 gam... [ More ]

Comment #15

DoctorEw220 — Tue, 15 Mar 2005 04:43:01 GMT

OH is currently considering the changes.

Comment #14

Tx_Mega_Player — Tue, 15 Mar 2005 02:13:26 GMT

I for one will continue to play. I play $3.00 per draw and will continue - regardless of the odds. My chances of winning may be mathematically better at 135 million to 1, but in reality if it's meant for me to win, I'll win even if the odds are 1 billion to 1....

Comment #13

Maverick — Mon, 14 Mar 2005 21:02:46 GMT

Quote: Originally posted by jsk2001 on March 14, 2005i meant wait and see how ticket sales in california for mega millions turns out first before trying to change the matrix and such. This way we can get it right instead of just trying to guess how people in california are going to play. I'd like to see the new rules take effect Jan 2006.Odds of winning the jackpot goes up 30%The 2nd and 3rd prizes go up more than 30% so kinda nice.Exactly. I posted similar words a short time ago. My reasoning i... [ More ]

Comment #12

Maverick — Mon, 14 Mar 2005 21:01:29 GMT

Comment #11

Todd — Mon, 14 Mar 2005 19:06:44 GMT

Quote: Originally posted by jsk2001 on March 14, 2005i meant wait and see how ticket sales in california for mega millions turns out first before trying to change the matrix and such. This way we can get it right instead of just trying to guess how people in california are going to play. I'd like to see the new rules take effect Jan 2006.Odds of winning the jackpot goes up 30%The 2nd and 3rd prizes go up more than 30% so kinda nice.I agree with you. I'd rather that they wait, but lottery direct... [ More ]

Comment #10

jsk2001 — Mon, 14 Mar 2005 18:59:39 GMT

i meant wait and see how ticket sales in california for mega millions turns out first before trying to change the matrix and such. This way we can get it right instead of just trying to guess how people in california are going to play. I'd like to see the new rules take effect Jan 2006.Odds of winning the jackpot goes up 30%The 2nd and 3rd prizes go up more than 30% so kinda nice.

Comment #9

RJOh — Mon, 14 Mar 2005 18:50:56 GMT

Quote: Originally posted by MPJO on March 14, 2005And besides if you win a big jackpot and you feel it's to big you can always share it with the members on this site.Nobody ever felt the jackpot they won was too big, just the jackpots won by others.

Comment #8

MPJO — Mon, 14 Mar 2005 18:25:01 GMT

I think this is a good change since California has a population ofabout 35 million people which will bring the Mega Millionsstates total population to about 150 million people.All they need to do now is add Florida and we will see a $500 millionjackpot.And besides if you win a big jackpot and you feel it's to big you can always share it with the members on this site.

Comment #7

fxdwg — Mon, 14 Mar 2005 17:38:08 GMT

BTW For those of you who do love the big JP's I also think that this is great for you> bigger JP's and bigger second tier and third tier prizes. woo hoo! I myself just don't see it------ the overwhelming desire for huge jackpot records and such but that is just me................ I would rather see 20- 10 million dollar winners than one 200 million dollar winner

Comment #6

weshar75 — Mon, 14 Mar 2005 17:20:42 GMT

Looks like megamillions is going to set a new jackpot record with the new rule changes.

Comment #5

fxdwg — Mon, 14 Mar 2005 17:03:43 GMT

I am just one who is not fond of the big Jackpots but if they did change it. My gosh the odds are overwhelming now at 1:135 million to change it to 1:175 million wow I am sure that there would be some huge JPs. But my opinion is of little value as I am sure the lure of big JPs will win out which is OK. I am fortunate enough to live in an area that borders a Power ball state so I shall just put that extra into power ball rather than Mega Millions

Comment #4

Todd — Mon, 14 Mar 2005 16:07:36 GMT

They are going to wait. That's the point: they are readying the changes to implement once California joins.

Comment #3

jsk2001 — Mon, 14 Mar 2005 15:50:21 GMT

Maybe if all states had the megaplier i could support this. i'd rather they wait till after California joins before making any changes

Comment #2

Todd — Mon, 14 Mar 2005 15:43:39 GMT

It's not deception. Since Mega Millions is run by the states themselves, they each need to approve the changes within their state. Each state will go through a similar exercise.Mega Millions rules are not imposed by one director, they are arrived at through consensus. This story indicates that the new rules will almost certainly go through with no problems.

Comment #1

bobby623 — Mon, 14 Mar 2005 15:30:58 GMT

I'm confused.Texas is just one of 11 states. Does Greer speak for all of them?When did Greer get appointed head honcho? I thought the guy in Maryland was the executivedirector for MM.What happens should several of the states opt for a different matrix?I don't think the MM members can have different games.Hard not to think that this is more deception by TLC.

Texas Lottery Approves Mega Millions Changes

Lottery Post — Mon, 14 Mar 2005 13:22:11 GMT

Friday, the Texas Lottery Commission voted to propose rule amendments to the Mega Millions multi-state lottery game, which aim to make the game bigger than ever.

The proposed changes come after the California Lottery announced last month that it plans to become the 12th lottery member to join the multi-state game.

We welcome the opportunity to work with the California Lottery, and having them as an addition to the Mega Millions game will help generate those larger jackpots that players li... [ More ]