Changes in Mega Millions

Reply #32

CASH Only — Thu, 24 Aug 2006 17:55:01 GMT

There probably were more complaints when Lotto Texas was a 5+1 game. There was NO prize for matching only the mega ball.

Reply #31

PadawanLotto — Sun, 06 Aug 2006 14:56:25 GMT

Raising the price would most likely lose some players, my Mega Lotto pool at work would most likely shut down.

Reply #30

ryanm — Sat, 05 Aug 2006 20:18:47 GMT

Yeah, I highly doubt the players would want the overall odds of winning ANYTHING to be almost as horrible as Lotto Texas (overall odds of winning any prize in Lotto Texas are only 1 in 71).

Reply #29

CASH Only — Sat, 05 Aug 2006 18:10:17 GMT

The right thing to do would be to increase the white balls, and decrease the Mega balls, giving players a better chance to win SOMETHING.

Reply #28

Just6ntlc — Sat, 05 Aug 2006 17:09:11 GMT

ryanm, I agree about the megaplier idea for all states except for California because they're pari-mutuel and it's gets too messy. Remeber, California had one ticket won about $1.4 million by matching 5/5 in August 2005. My request is to increase the odds by adding 6 more MBs to 52.

Reply #27

ryanm — Sat, 05 Aug 2006 05:31:46 GMT

The megaplier might not be a bad idea. I remember when Powerball was on its sting of low jackpots in winter 2005, most Powerball ads heavily emphasized the PowerPlay. Mega Millions would be able to do the same if it had the "megaplier" for all states (although California should not be forced to have it due to its pari-mutuel prize payouts, as it would be real messy there).

Reply #26

weshar75 — Fri, 04 Aug 2006 23:52:22 GMT

The only positive adjustment I see is to add the megaplier to the entire consortium so all the states can benefit in the extra money spent on it. You might as well be like powerball since you are rip off of powerball any way.-weshar75

Reply #25

ryanm — Fri, 04 Aug 2006 22:37:34 GMT

Remember though, for a while, Mega Millions had more $100+ million jackpots after Texas joined than it did before Texas joined, and last year, it appeared Texas was right on betting MM for the bigger jackpots. This year, Mega just seems to get hit more often than Powerball. You just never know what will happen in any lottery game, as it's all luck.

Reply #24

bobby623 — Fri, 04 Aug 2006 19:59:53 GMT

Thanks Cash 5.

I should have done some research on when the game was changed. I knew it was after Texas joined. Got that much right. LOL

My views are the same regarding future changes.

Reply #23

CASH Only — Fri, 04 Aug 2006 19:48:14 GMT

Actually, MM was changed to its current format in June 2005 when California got on board.

Reply #22

bobby623 — Fri, 04 Aug 2006 19:39:37 GMT

I didn't vote because I don't think the game will be changed any time soon, if ever.

The states in MM are making money. They certainly want more profits, but they are smart enough to know that changing the game matrix often in attempt to build jackpots to a certain level is risky.

I read the Texas lottery commission meeting minutes and they believe, and I agree, that players are more apt to spend their money on scratch tickets than take a chance on a lottery game they aren't likely to wi... [ More ]

Reply #21

Just6ntlc — Fri, 04 Aug 2006 16:47:06 GMT

To add insult to injury dvidva about the Mega Millions hitting at 31 million, the combination was 14-29-32-43-49 MB 14. The first time MM jackpot was hit with a double number since 2003 and the first since California joined Mega Millions. I think they need to either increase the number of MBs back to 3rd version [52] and keep the number of WBs at 56 or increase the price to $2 with same odds.

Reply #20

RJOh — Wed, 02 Aug 2006 09:45:02 GMT

Big jackpot chasers have to wait no matter which lottery they play because all jackpots start out small and depend on players willing to play for a small jackpot at the same odds big jackpot chasers are willing to play for a large jackpot. I doubt if any lottery could survive if it depended only on big jackpot chasers to buy tickets. Big jackpot chasers will just have to continue to wait their turn if they don't want to play when the jackpot is small.

Reply #19

dvdiva — Wed, 02 Aug 2006 05:25:03 GMT

Looks like Mega was hit again this time at 31 million. Considering the odds you would think the prizes would be a little higher. Unfortuneately considering the diversified structure of Mega (there is no centeral office like MUSL) big jackpot chasers will have to wait a long time for this to be fixed.

Reply #18

dvdiva — Wed, 02 Aug 2006 03:48:28 GMT

You mean you actually play Lotto? It's been a while since it's had a decent jackpot. I liked Lotto plus more. Quinto actually has a better jackpot most of the time and with better odds.

The problem is Mega has a hard time even getting to $50 million lately. I seriously doubt it will even break $200 million for the rest of the year.

Reply #17

Uff Da! — Wed, 02 Aug 2006 01:45:42 GMT

I choose None of the above. As it is, I only play when the jackpot is $50 million or more. If they change the matrix again or increase the price, I'll quit playing and return to playing the state Lotto. I say leave it as it is.

Reply #16

bellyache — Wed, 02 Aug 2006 00:50:00 GMT

I actually agree with you Cash Only. I think the matrix is fine how it is at the moment.

Reply #15

ryanm — Tue, 01 Aug 2006 22:31:53 GMT

I agree. Believe in the current matrix - more winners now means less winners in the future.

Reply #14

CASH Only — Tue, 25 Jul 2006 13:38:21 GMT

It's too soon after the most recent matrix change to alter the game again. MM will have high jackpots before the year is out.

Reply #13

dvdiva — Tue, 25 Jul 2006 06:07:17 GMT

Lowering the odds with no price change isn't an option for them. Sales are already stagnant due to the string of low jackpots. Also sales always go up on large jackpots compared to lower jackpots. I think a small reduction in odds combined with a price increase might work but it's hard to say.

Reply #12

konane — Tue, 25 Jul 2006 00:21:38 GMT

I used to spend 3 X as much $$ when the matrix was lower.

Now I sit on my money and don't funnel it into any other alternative game.

Am sure others are not being lead around by the elusive carrot on a string.

One of these days they're going to figure it out.

Reply #11

Shane3 — Thu, 20 Jul 2006 13:33:08 GMT

All will go back to normal if MM will just had me a nice Jackpot.......anything over $29 mill after taxes will do me just fine......all I need is to spend half the year doing charitable volunteer work and the other half is to be by the beach watching the waves roll in and reading a nice book.

Reply #10

ryanm — Thu, 20 Jul 2006 12:18:40 GMT

lol Dvdiva has 0 chance of winning Mega Millions if it keeps getting hit at low jackpot levels though, because she won't play until the jackpot is $250 million.

Reply #9

Littlemanjen — Wed, 19 Jul 2006 13:58:49 GMT

dvdiva- we just have to agree to disagree- it HAS had runups over 100, 200, 300 mil under this format, so it is simply the luck of the draw........your poll also needs to say don't change at all , to get a true poll. The worse the odds increase, the LESS people will spend, so it has a negative effect on the other side. Don't you care about YOUR chance of winning vs. the Mega Millions game making more money? Geez

Reply #8

Coin Toss — Wed, 19 Jul 2006 13:49:22 GMT

Not enough options in the poll.

Reduce the matrix, not increase it.

I do play Mega Millions, but am doing so less and less. MM making moves like the Mega Tripler (promotions, 3 X's the smaller payoffs, and I mean smaller) just don't cut it, whoop tee do, so for the promotion period you win $9 instead of $3, or even $30 instead of $10.

Bayonne Fire Department

(BFD

Reply #7

dvdiva — Wed, 19 Jul 2006 13:35:18 GMT

That's easy to answer. Money. Games that have big prizes have big sales to match. While having lower prizes won is nice a mix between high and low jackpots would be ideal. States are loosing money or are making far less than a game that has a jackpot run once in a while. It's also the reason I'm sure the participating states will have to change MM at this point. Powerball went through the exact same problem a while ago and they changed the odds. It looks like it will be MM's turn this time.... [ More ]

Reply #6

Littlemanjen — Wed, 19 Jul 2006 13:18:35 GMT

Exactly, RyanM and bambini, does everyone understand if the balls fall right, someone will win, and if not, they don't. And, 49 mil the last time I checked my bank accounts, is 15 times more than I have now, so I would gladly accept it, as would EVERY person on this website! Why change the game to get over 100 Mil

Reply #5

bambini — Wed, 19 Jul 2006 12:33:07 GMT

I think its great more players are winning at MM. The players winning these small jackpots, are regular lottery players. These are not the players, that only play when it gets to 100mil or more.

Reply #4

ryanm — Wed, 19 Jul 2006 12:17:36 GMT

No matter what Mega does, it can still get a sting of low jackpot wins. If someone is destined to win, he or she will win regardless of how high the odds are.

Reply #3

Just6ntlc — Wed, 19 Jul 2006 08:18:15 GMT

dvidva, my vote is to raise the odds. I say 5/56+1/56, 5/56+1/52, or 5/59+1/52.

Reply #2

Chamillionaire — Wed, 19 Jul 2006 06:26:58 GMT

whats up with mega millions, how many jackpots has it been since they went over $100 million? it just got hit tonight at $49 million

Reply #1

dvdiva — Wed, 19 Jul 2006 05:29:42 GMT

This poll would be for those who actually play Mega now not for those who don't play. If it's 57 balls it would have the Heinz thing going on though.

Changes in Mega Millions

dvdiva — Wed, 19 Jul 2006 05:21:40 GMT

Currently Mega is a 1/56 + 1/46 game.

It has been on a record low jackpot sting lately and it's sales have also followed suite. It's now not a matter of if but when Mega will be changed.

This is just a poll to see which option is the most palitable.

For lowering the odds I was thinking they could drop both a white ball and a mega ball bringing the odds to 1:156 million.

For raising the odds they would have to add a white ball (57 + 46) bringing the odds to 1:192 million instead of... [ More ]