Which game is worse II

Reply #15

CASH Only — Fri, 03 Dec 2004 21:01:57 GMT

The only reason NY Lotto 6/59 is better than Unlucky for Life is the cash option. Any game returning only 40% to players should otherwise be boycotted.

Reply #14

CASH Only — Tue, 02 Nov 2004 21:47:45 GMT

Super 6 was better than Unlucky for Life.

Reply #13

DoctorEw220 — Mon, 01 Nov 2004 22:25:58 GMT

but at least super 6 only cost $1.

Reply #12

CASH Only — Mon, 01 Nov 2004 21:33:57 GMT

But two of the three plays were automatically quick-picked, as is the case with Match 6.

Reply #11

DoctorEw220 — Sun, 24 Oct 2004 17:00:58 GMT

it was a 6/69 game offered by PA. the original starting annuity jackpot was $3 million with a $1.5 million cash option. in 2002, the starting jackpot was lowered to $1 million anuity and $.5 million cash. in 2003, the starting jackpot level was $.5 million annuity and $.25 million cash. you got 3 plays for a dollar, and had to match all 6 numbers to win the jackpot.

Reply #10

LOTTOMIKE — Sun, 24 Oct 2004 09:15:50 GMT

never heard of super six what was it like

Reply #9

DoctorEw220 — Sun, 24 Oct 2004 06:31:17 GMT

when you look at how PA's 2 lotto games are now, you realize that super 6 wasn't a bad game.

Reply #8

DoctorEw220 — Sun, 24 Oct 2004 06:30:46 GMT

actually, that wasn't sarcasm. you got 3 plays for only one dollar. the jackpot got pretty big toward the end of the game because the matrix made it almost impossible to hit. granted they could have dropped the matrix a bit or bumped up the starting jackpot level, or added more prize levels, but all in all, it wasn't a bad game.

Reply #7

JimmySand9 — Sun, 24 Oct 2004 05:09:40 GMT

Quote: Originally posted by DoctorEw220 on October 23, 2004yeah. i liked the super 6 game, especially because it was virtually impossible to hit because of the 6 of 69 matrix.I'm assuming that's sarcasm. I meant games like Keystone Jackpot (the first 1-state PB-style game), Hearts Diamonds, Wild Card Lotto, Super 7 (not to be confused with Super 6), and of course Match 6.

Reply #6

DoctorEw220 — Sat, 23 Oct 2004 07:38:41 GMT

yeah. i liked the super 6 game, especially because it was virtually impossible to hit because of the 6 of 69 matrix. i think lucky for life lotto is an enormous ripoff to the players, and i think the players are catching on to it. now hopefully, PA will realize that the players have caught on, and decide to end the game.

Reply #5

JimmySand9 — Sat, 23 Oct 2004 06:26:13 GMT

Quote: Originally posted by CASH Only on October 21, 2004Six draws in Unlucky for Life and no lifetime loser since the initial drawing.Well, this game is about as poorly executed as I've ever seen any game executed, and the sales figures prove it. The odds are high, the top payout is a paltry $36,000/year. Oregon pays $16,000 more per year, and the odds are better for the same price. And $2 for just one play?! Ripoff city. I'm equally spread between cash and annuity, but the payout format is not... [ More ]

Reply #4

CASH Only — Thu, 21 Oct 2004 20:44:39 GMT

Six draws in Unlucky for Life and no lifetime loser since the initial drawing.

Reply #3

CASH Only — Sat, 02 Oct 2004 13:48:11 GMT

IMO Match 6 will still be around when Unlucky for Life ends.

Reply #2

DoctorEw220 — Thu, 16 Sep 2004 22:27:55 GMT

it's looking like match 6 is here to stay, even though the new game will happen.

Reply #1

DoctorEw220 — Thu, 16 Sep 2004 22:12:15 GMT

dude. the PA game has yet to debut, and you've already given it a bad name. seriously, try the game before you trash it.

Which game is worse II

CASH Only — Thu, 02 Sep 2004 20:54:23 GMT

Neither game has a cash option.