Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited December 9, 2016, 5:30 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

Listings of Jackpot > odds?

Topic closed. 12 replies. Last post 7 years ago by jwhou.

Page 1 of 1
PrintE-mailLink
Avatar
New Member

United States
Member #83005
November 27, 2009
3 Posts
Offline
Posted: November 27, 2009, 11:45 am - IP Logged

Is there a listing where the JAckpot is greater than the odds of winning?

    Avatar
    NY
    United States
    Member #23835
    October 16, 2005
    3474 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: November 27, 2009, 2:08 pm - IP Logged

    If there is one it would probably have been mentioned, but I don't recall ever seeing anything about one. If one exists, it would be a lot of effort for very little information, because it's an extremely unusual situation.

    The way I see it, if you're going to compare the jackpot to the odds you need to look at the actual net, which is usually no more than 40% of the advertised jackpot.  The record MM jackpot paid about $230 million in cash. After paying 35% in federal taxes that would have left about $150 million. With odds of about 1 in 175 million, that still fell about 15% shy of exceeding the odds. Figure MM would have to advertise a jackpot of about $425 million for a winner to net $1 per possible combinations, and that assumes that there's only one winner and no state taxes.For smaller state games it will work about the same. Whatever the odds are, unless the advertised jackpot is at least 2.5 times higher, the maximum net will be something less than $1 per possible combination.

      Coin Toss's avatar - shape barbed.jpg
      Zeta Reticuli Star System
      United States
      Member #30470
      January 17, 2006
      10353 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: November 27, 2009, 2:49 pm - IP Logged

      Is there a listing where the JAckpot is greater than the odds of winning?

      goododds,

      Everything KY Floyd pointed out above, and let's add this, we can never assume a solo jackpot. So even if it ws one of those cases where there is more in the kitty than the odds against hitting it (happens in Pick 5 gamesa few times a year), if you did hit it, and have to split it, the payout greatehr than odds factor goes right out the window.

      Those who run the lotteries love it when players look for consistency in something that's designed not to have any.

      Lep

      There is one and only one 'proven' system, and that is to book the action. No matter the game, let the players pick their own losers.

        RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
        mid-Ohio
        United States
        Member #9
        March 24, 2001
        19830 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: November 27, 2009, 3:56 pm - IP Logged

        Is there a listing where the JAckpot is greater than the odds of winning?

        A few years back there was an international group that looked for such jackpots.  They played the Virgina lottery and won by attempting to play all of its possible combinations and were featured on the TV show "How they do that". 

        They were the only winner and did so by taking over three Seven Eleven store terminals for three days in a an attempt to run cards with all the possible combinations.  Afterward, most states changed the rules of their games to limit the length of time a group or individuals could control a terminal so it' not likely to happen again. 

        There are some pick5 games that still have jackpots that roll to over $500K and have odds of 1:575,757 (5/39) or better but they are few and far between.  Besides, many are daily games now.

         * you don't need to buy more tickets, just buy a winning ticket * 
           
                     Evil Looking       

          Avatar
          New Member

          United States
          Member #83005
          November 27, 2009
          3 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: November 27, 2009, 6:34 pm - IP Logged

          thx.

           

          i did mean lump sum > odds, but did not mean taxes.

           

          ie:

          MM is like 1:175M. Usually lump sum is ~1/2 jackpot advertised. So jackpot would have to be ~$350M for it to be > odds.

           

          But why include taxes? everyone pays taxes, no?

            Avatar
            NY
            United States
            Member #23835
            October 16, 2005
            3474 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: November 28, 2009, 1:59 am - IP Logged

            "But why include taxes? everyone pays taxes, no?"

            I took taxes into account because they determine how much you actually get. You're balancing risk and reward, and the point at which they're equal is when buying every combination would result in breaking even by recovering what was spent. In other words, buying all 175,711,536 combinations by spending $175,711,536 would win back the  $175,711,536 that was spent.  Of course much of the money is returned to players in the form of smaller prizes, but what we're most interested in is the jackpot. The point at which the number of combinations equals the pre-tax prize is arbitrary. The point at which the number of combinations equals the actual net amount has a certain sense to it.

            The odds against winning any substantial prize are steep enough that the "logic" of considering the odds is rather illogical, but of course nobody would spend their $1 for a 1 in 175,711,536 chance to win $10k. Ignoring the smaller prizes (most of whch are hardly a life changing event) the closest thing to a logical argument for buying a ticket is if the amount  you could win equals or exceeds the amount that must be paid to guarantee a win. Why else would you specify a jackpot that exceed the odds? Other than being better than playing for a smaller jackpot I can't rationalize any logic to the idea of comparing odds of 1 in 175,711,536 to a net jackpot of $114,250,000 (the approximate net after paying federal taxes).

            If you want to account for the smaller prizes the jackpot can be a bit smaller. MM and PB both put about 30% of sales into the jackpot, leaving 20% for the smaller prizes. For MM that means that spending $175,711,536 would result in $35,142,300 in smaller prizes. I'll call that $27 million after tax net. That leaves $148,711,536 for an after-tax jackpot, which would require an advertised jackpot of about $370 million. That has happened exactly once. Off the top of my head, the $365 million PB record would also have exceeded the odds in place at that time.

              Avatar
              New Member

              United States
              Member #83005
              November 27, 2009
              3 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: November 28, 2009, 10:55 am - IP Logged

              "The odds against winning any substantial prize are steep enough that the "logic" of considering the odds is rather illogical"

               

              to me, i'm rationalizing the reason to play. lotteries are a tax on the stupid unless they're playing for entertainment (ie: like $10 to watch a movie), unless the jackpot > odds.

               

              so when jackpot (pre-tax) > odds, then that's the trigger point at where i play.

               

              Makes sense in my mind :)

                Coin Toss's avatar - shape barbed.jpg
                Zeta Reticuli Star System
                United States
                Member #30470
                January 17, 2006
                10353 Posts
                Offline
                Posted: November 28, 2009, 2:00 pm - IP Logged

                goododds,

                Jackpot > than odds doesn't really happen that often, for one thing.

                For another, it doesn;t do anything to change the odds, the jackpot is more, that's all. You''re still up against odds of 176 million or 195 million to one (5 + 1) and 20 million to one in many Pick 6 games.

                You also can't assume you'll be the one to hit.

                And you can't assume no one else hits if you do. Here's why I repeatd that;

                Let's say there's a Pick 5 game with odds of 100,000 to one. No one has hit for a while and the jackpot is now $135,000. Well, you know you have a "lock" because you're going to play all the combinations for that game. You're so certain you have a lock you borrow the money to pllay them.

                It's the night of the drawing and you know you're the winner.

                And so are two other people. So the jackpot has went from $135,000 to being split three waays, or $45,000 each. The $45,000 you get is pre-tax, and you have to pay back the money you borrowed to play all the combinations.

                Far fetched? Yeah, to the point of being ridiculous, but people have said they'd do that very thing.

                I know a lot of peole don't play until a jackpot hits a certain amount, but with two or three draws a week and waiting for one to be over the odds against hitting it, you won't being playing all that often.

                Those who run the lotteries love it when players look for consistency in something that's designed not to have any.

                Lep

                There is one and only one 'proven' system, and that is to book the action. No matter the game, let the players pick their own losers.

                  Coin Toss's avatar - shape barbed.jpg
                  Zeta Reticuli Star System
                  United States
                  Member #30470
                  January 17, 2006
                  10353 Posts
                  Offline
                  Posted: November 28, 2009, 6:15 pm - IP Logged

                  Here's two examples from actual results in the Illinois Little Lotto this year.

                  It's a 5/39 game , odds against that are 575,757 to one.

                  QP means the ticket was a QP, if there's nothing behind it, then it was the player's pick.

                  The jackpot for this draw was $1,025,000, 4 players split it

                  LITTLE LOTTO PRIZE PAYOUTS FOR MONDAY, JANUARY 05, 2009
                   
                    WINNING NUMBERS: 03 - 05 - 06 - 11 - 18
                   
                    PLAYERS MATCHING 5 OF 5 NUMBERS
                      INCLUDING SUBSCRIPTION WINNERS            4
                  EACH PLAYER WILL RECEIVE           $256,250.00
                   
                         WINNING TICKETS WERE SOLD AT
                   
                         104857    ROOSEVELT SHELL
                                   5559 WEST ROOSEVELT AVE
                                   CICERO/60804
                   
                         808006    THE TOBACCO SHOP            (QP)
                                   303 S JEFFERSON
                                   JERSEYVILLE/62052

                  904995    TJS LIQUORS                 (QP)
                                   7 E PARKER ST
                                   PINCKNEYVILLE/62274
                   
                         101528    STEVES MINI MART
                                   2210 STATE STREET
                                   BURNHAM/60633

                  ______________________________________________________

                  The jackpot for this draw was $625,00, wen to one player.

                  LITTLE LOTTO PRIZE PAYOUTS FOR THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 05, 2009
                   
                  WINNING NUMBERS: 02 - 25 - 27 - 28 - 39
                   
                  PLAYERS MATCHING 5 OF 5 NUMBERS
                      INCLUDING SUBSCRIPTION WINNERS            1
                   EACH PLAYER WILL RECEIVE           $625,000.00
                   
                         WINNING TICKETS WERE SOLD AT
                   
                         101236    FAIRPLAY FINER FOODS        (QP)
                                   8631 W 95TH ST
                                   HICKORY HILLS/60457

                  Those who run the lotteries love it when players look for consistency in something that's designed not to have any.

                  Lep

                  There is one and only one 'proven' system, and that is to book the action. No matter the game, let the players pick their own losers.

                    RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
                    mid-Ohio
                    United States
                    Member #9
                    March 24, 2001
                    19830 Posts
                    Offline
                    Posted: November 29, 2009, 10:19 pm - IP Logged

                    Ohio Rolling Cash5 is a 5/39 game too but I don't ever remember its jackpot getting over $575,757.  Illinois Little Lotto must have a different formula for contributing to its jackpot 'cause it seems to get over that amount often.  It's that or players in Ohio are better at picking winners.  The jackpot always starts out at $100,000 and once in a while rolls to over $300,000.

                     * you don't need to buy more tickets, just buy a winning ticket * 
                       
                                 Evil Looking       

                      Coin Toss's avatar - shape barbed.jpg
                      Zeta Reticuli Star System
                      United States
                      Member #30470
                      January 17, 2006
                      10353 Posts
                      Offline
                      Posted: December 1, 2009, 9:28 am - IP Logged

                      RJOh,

                      Maybe population plays a part.

                      The Little Lotto gets pumped up pretty good when it gets around $360,000 or so. I'm not sure if it's the formula used to add to the jackpot or just increased play.

                      The Pick 6 on the other hand, just grinds.

                      Those who run the lotteries love it when players look for consistency in something that's designed not to have any.

                      Lep

                      There is one and only one 'proven' system, and that is to book the action. No matter the game, let the players pick their own losers.

                        Avatar
                        New Member
                        Youngsville
                        United States
                        Member #82942
                        November 25, 2009
                        6 Posts
                        Offline
                        Posted: December 4, 2009, 11:45 am - IP Logged

                        test jst a test

                          Avatar

                          United States
                          Member #83701
                          December 13, 2009
                          225 Posts
                          Offline
                          Posted: December 22, 2009, 4:48 pm - IP Logged

                          Is there a listing where the JAckpot is greater than the odds of winning?

                          Using the ratio of the jackpot to the odds as a decision maker as to whether or not to purchase a ticket has it's roots in what people remember of University probability courses.   Basically many of us were taught to sum up the product between the value of the outcome and the probability of the outcome as the expected return of an outcome and indeed this is how many large business decisions are made but when used for a typical pick style lottery, there are two fundamental flaws.

                          The first flaw is that the jackpot may be shared by more than one winning ticket and that the higher the jackpot, the more attention it attracts and the more likely that there will be multiple winners.  

                          The other is that using expectation theory is based upon statistical independence but each ticket you buy for the same draw is by definition dependent and exclusive of each other.    When Canada's Lotto 6/49 first reached the $14 million jackpot, people who used expectation theory in their daily working life to make decisions on multimillion dollar deals decided to mortgage their homes and buy tens of thousands of tickets.   None of these people won the jackpot and learned the lesson of statistical independence the hard way.   We're currently learning the lesson of statistical independence right now, the financial sector developed statistical analysis models based on classical probabilities and statistics and crafted all sorts of mortgage backed securities from sub prime loans thinking that they had sufficiently hedged their bets but failed to consider that the securities were not statistically independent hence when they started to fail, it all collapsed like dominoes.   The lesson of statistical independence is one that will recur time and time again as it's a very common mistake that almost everyone makes despite the education that we try to give them.

                          Basically, you're better off determining the minimum jackpot that could make a positive difference in your life and using that instead of a comparison between jackpot and probability.   Gunning for the lower prize will increase the probability that you would be the sole winner in the astronomical event that you actually do win.   The large attention getting jackpots are not to your advantage.

                          If you did a detailed analysis of the various lotteries, you would see that the scratch-off games are much better odds then the draw games.   But it is much messier to scratch off that latex paint.