Like I said: "Not for long".

https://www.lotterypost.com/news/234736/2153048

They really didn't eliminate the opportunities for big spenders to buy thousands of lottery tickets, they just made it harder.   If any of them do buy that amount of tickets for a future drawing, you can be sure they will be more discrete and avoid reporters like the plaque.

Eventually they will change the rules.  This is just the first bureaucratic move to appease the "little guy". P.S. it is the "plague".  The federal govt. is like the the bubonic plague.

Are you kidding me ? They put a spending cap on the amount you can play at each store, when they themselves can't control spending. Sounds like big government screwing over small business. They need to let people spend their money the way they see fit.

What I don't get is why did they suspended the license of the store where they worked part-time if they did nothing wrong/illegal why punish the other merchants???????

I can't be a part of Government, I am not goofy enough!

Government can't control it's own spending so they make rules for individuals .............

On a positive note .................... I will stop by the Bentley store in Pittsburgh to look today ..............

........................... just in case .....................  $55 million or so after taxes!!!!

I agree but still cant believe this is happening. Is it even legal? punishing all the stores in the commonwealth because of a few rotten tomatoes that allowed the high roller customers to print their tickets is not right. I suspect this game will be discontinued when they realize that their new rule cannot stand after a lawsuit.

I am no lawyer but I feel this new rule interferes with interstate commerce which is contrary to the Constitution and therefore it is null and void.

Leave it to the state to legally steal from the players, and yet when players, LEGALLY, learn how to take advantage of a state given advantage, the state shuts it down.

I don't see anything worng that needs to be fixed or discontinued.  These people sock a lot of money

into the game and are still taking risk.  When the article says they cashed in 187 winning tickets and

won a little over 200K then it works out to about 1100 dollars per ticket cashed in.   Once you consider

how many tickets they probably purchased to do this I doubt they came out rich.  The person who buys a

single ticket and wins $10.00 I would say got a bigger ROI per ticket then they did.  If you purchased 100,000

tickets and averaged 10 bucks per ticket then a single play could net you a million bucks.   It might be worth

the risk but it is still a risk and having a game of chance closed because some have more to invest then others

is the big scam here.  I would love to see all the big games do something like this because my few lines I play

have the same chance as the same number of tickets they play.  I would rather win 10 bucks when I play then

to hope for a billion and win nothing.   If powerball paid $45 for a 3 of 5 then I would play that game anytime

the roll down was expected.   If I did happen to hit a 4 of 5 then it would still pay more then I could normally

expect when I play.  The only downside would be if people stoped playing waiting on a roll down.

RL

verry well said.

They want people to Play the Games, but they don't want Anyone to Win!

Because the Government is Punitive!

Massachusetts Lottery Players Unite: Boycott the Massachusetts Lottery Games!

How many Laws would be Violated Today: If All the Lottery Equipment was Thrown into Boston Harbor?

Dallas , they didn't do anything wrong, When you put a cap on how much money a store can make at one time,   well, sounds like whoops, I almost said the "S" WORD.

I'll just call it   "ocialism"

Hopefully they won't dress up like Indians if they do.

Why do moths and flies hang around garbage cans ........and ridge?..

The federal government has NOTHING to do with this at all.  It is the state.

Yes, but Mass is a democrat state.

So naturally everything is going to be ass-backwards.

Just like the federal government.

The game has to seem "fair" or no one will play it.  It is business plain and simple.  Whether you are aware of it or not, many states have some sort of rule in place to block those high rollers (I'll call them).  In one state which I will not name, a player cannot tie up a lottery terminal for more than 1 hour and it has to be 1 terminal.  Also no one player can tie up all of the lottery terminals at the same time in the same place. 

These little rules are in place to insure the integrity of the games.  All who want to play should be able to play.  The games are not for "rich" folks only.

Some people want the government to run every aspect of their lives, like a nanny.

Those people are destroying this country.

Those people would prefer that everybody win the jackpot once a month to make it "seem fair" to them.

We can't operate by what "seems fair" to the "where's my free stuff?" crowd.

We have to go by what "is fair."

Hey,  really,  I didn't know that!  Thank You!

Let me give another analogy:

The state governments run by leftist Democrats are like SEPTICEMIC PLAGUES.   

Better?

Oh yeah,  by the way when you win one of those big prizes does the federal govt. have anything do with the Massachusetts State Lottery???????????????????

The whole idea of the lottery is that many pay the prizes for the few winners.  If Mass. didn't do something the game would be destroyed.  The idea is to chance an amount that doesn't exceed your return.  I've put sets of numbers in the hundreds together, and IF I could afford to sustain that level of betting in the hundreds every day I MIGHT get a good return.  I just don't have the money to take those kinds of chances.

When I did win a prize big enough to require a trip down to the lottery office the form I filled out had questions whether I or any family member worked for the lottery or was employed at a lottery retailer.  I think that's an ethical question.  If a retailer benefits from a win at his establishment it should be the result of a win from a customers ticket, and not an employee.  That seems right and fair to me.

Well, dallascowboyfan, each state makes up their own lottery rules.  Perhaps MA's rule is that a lottery retailer's employee cannot print their own tickets. If so, winning tickets will be honored, yet retailer's licence will be suspended or revoked.

And some people actually are as stooopid as they sound... err... type. Maybe spend more of your time on the Faux "News" or "Mudge" Report or "Not-Bright Bart" sites. You'd fit in real well there, except their types are usually the ones that oppose lotteries... but also seem to love the casinos. So why do their type always cry out about lotteries being a "sin." Take Alabama... has dog racing and other types of gambling, but the right-wingnuts in the state vote down the lottery because it was a "sin." Typical hypocrites.

The state lottery made the changes to make it a fairer game for everyone who plays. Did the people do anything illegal? No. Did they cheat (as in 'take advantage of') the system? Yes. (The average person hates tax loopholes also. They also tend to favor those with most of the country's money.) When over 68% of winnings on certain draws goes to only three organizations, it needs to have a change made. Otherwise people, now knowing what has been happening, would simply quit playing the game. There is a difference between "illegal" and "just wrong," but not much when it comes to one's own morals.

Someone here called for a boycott? That would have come on that particular game if the state had not made any changes. The everyday person does not want to spend a few dollars so someone else can come in and essentially "buy the game out." (Me? I generally buy one or two tickets for Mega Millions or Powerball for most draws, because I know 1 or 2 in 175,711,536 or 1 or 2 in 195,249,054 is pretty much the same as 50 against those odds. If I'm going to win, I'll win with those 1 or 2 tickets.) You can bet that many players will be actually Praying for someone to win the big money on each "rolldown" game from this point out to prevent 3 groups from taking over 68% of the winnings. It's like the top 2% of American wage-earners own over 45% of everything, but can't pay another 3 cents on the dollar over $250,000? (Actually, according to polls, most of them wouldn't mind it. It's the people not even making that amount that cries about it.) If I win the lottery I'll be Glad to pay the additional 3 cents to the dollar the country needs. And it's not like they've done any job creation with that 3 cents over the past eight years they've had it. But they created a whole lot under Clinton, without having that extra 3 cents.

Thing is rdgrnr and jarasan, why not just leave Politics outside of this arena and let people enjoy LOTTERY comments about LOTTERY stories. You and your type do nothing to help any type of situation when all you can do is whine and cry because your side is not in control of the Government. I make my political comments solely in response to jaggoff comments made previously. Yours is NOT the best system. Neither is "mine." A Government that is willing to work together for everyone is best, but we no longer have that thanks to a small (yes, it IS small) group of loudmouths that didn't even know the name they called themselves was a common sexual phrase.

Ah, jeeeze, has it been 3 months already?

ScoobyGoofjim comes in every 3 months or so to piss and moan and whine about how terrible his life is as a pansy-ass lib.

Well, get over it ScoobyGoof, things'll get better after the next election when we throw the Girly-Man in Chief out on his pansy-ass.

So in the meantime quit whining and go get a job, ScoobyGoof. Oh, I'm sorry, there are no jobs now that your hero is in charge.

Oh well, just stay on welfare then, ScoobyGoof. It's all free money and there's no end to it.  Just ask any of your fellow freeloaders.

See ya when you come in to complain about what a loser you are again in 3 months or so!

Buh-bye, ScoobyGoofjim.

I favor both republicans and democrats. To me it depends ala independent.

I take issue with the point that you made that if 3 organizations win 68% of the winnings then a change needs to be made. I disagree. Surely even if they win a lot they have still taken a big risk on their money. Its still gambling even if they are highrollers. Its like saying that if Bill Gates with all his gazzillions decided to spend $100,000,000 inorder to hit tonights powerball jackpot then its unfair. Its not, everybody has their limit to do whatever and we should just accept it as a fact of life.

I agree with the little old lady who said that its unfair when the highrollers tie up the lottery machine for hours thus preventing the small rollers (is there such a thing?) from participating in playing, and if thats the reason for the new changes I have no problems with that.

"...small rollers (is there such a thing?)..."

Yeah, LOL, there is such a thing.

It's people who choose to play only a buck or two bychoice because that's their strategy.

Then there's the people who play only a buck or two by necessity like ScoobyGoofjim.

ScoobyGoof is mad at the world and rich people in particular, because he's been a failure at life and knows he will always be a "Small Roller" LOL.

Him needs a nanny to take care of him cuz him's helpless.    Poor ScoobyGoof. 

Realistically, the company who designed the game for the Massachusetts Lottery should have anticipated this.

rdgrnr

When someone wins a PB jackpot then about 99% goes to one player.   Even if someone played a million

tickets in a 6-46 game they still only have a 1 in 9.3 chance of hitting a JP.   It's amazing how hard it

is to pick one of 9 and select the correct one.  Every one who plays could hit the JP which would mean

these people would lose big time.  I still don't see any problem with this game, could someone explain

to me what the big deal is?  Anyone playing, even if it's only one ticket which hits a lower level prize still

benefits from the game regardless of who or how much someone else plays or wins.  Anyone wanting to

talk about low-lifes should be talking about the state that takes 50% just for selling the tickets and then

has the nerve to take another big chunk of the winnings for taxes.   I think that 100% of ticket sales should

go to prizes and the state should live off the taxes or they should take there cut up front and then not tax

the winners. 

RL

I'm hip, RL, it's just a couple people here that are into the class warfare thing that Obama is pushin.

They consider anyone who's been successful the enemy. Everyone should be a low-class failure like them.

Rich people are evil and should share their money with them.

Parasites.

I am really curious as to who penned the term loophole, it's like theres a push to turn "loophole" into a dirty word, there was no loophole, they just made it harder for people to spend their money faster.

"punishing all the stores in the commonwealth because of a few rotten tomatoes that allowed the high roller customers to print their tickets is not right"

How are they punishing other stores? By limiting them to 5,000 tickets per day in a particular game? I'd be extremely surprised if even the stores that sell the most tickets sell that many in a week, let alone a day. Before the jackpot passed the $2 million mark it increased by a maximum of just over 50k during 4 days pf sales. Assuming that the jackpot pool only gets 10% of sales that would put total sales at a bit over 500k, or 125k per day. I don't know how many lottery retailers there are in Massachusetts, but we can be sure that average daily sales per store is well under 100. It's not a big game, and it's an extremely safe bet that the 5000 tickets figure is high enough that it won't matter to any store that isn't helping somebody game the system.

"I am no lawyer but I feel this new rule interferes with interstate commerce which is contrary to the Constitution and therefore it is null and void."

You could consult with somebody who is a lawyer or you could read the Constitution for a better feeling about the law.

"Surely even if they win a lot they have still taken a big risk on their money."

You don't really think they're risking more than $200k for a 50% chance of making a $50k profit? The whole point is that there's very little risk. By buying huge numbers of tickets they're virtually ensuring themselves of a profit.

What a lot of people may not realize is that their profit comes at the expense of the regular lottery players. When the jackpot pool is split it's paid out as parimutuel prizes, so every prize they win by playing enough tickets to guarantee a profit reduces the amount of the prize won by the regular players. How many people think that the lottery should allow people with deep pockets to buy all the combinations for a jackpot game, so that if you're lucky enough to win you only get a fraction of the prize you thought you were playing for?

Has anybody done the math?  Some "computer" guy claims to know what is going on and reporters hop on board because it's a great story.  I can tell you that none of the reporters have done the math.  In one story, these big players said that they sometimes lose money.  Sounds a bit like gambling to me.  Generally, the reported win results look good, so perhaps it is all true that spending more can even out the odds, but one might actually run the math before jumping to conclusions.  In the end, the game does what it is supposed to do - make money for the state.  Even if true, is there really anything wrong with designing a lottery game that can appeal to folks willing and able to drop a half million?

A person spending $2 can still take the jackpot.

It's just whiners who hate people with money, Chuck.

They want the rich punished for the crime of being successful in life.

Gawd, I hate RICH peoples ....... $$$$$$$ ........ JJ .......

So there is now a 5,000$ cap on daily winfall ticket sales per store.  Sounds like what the state has actually done is make it so that the ONLY folks who will play will be the big spenders, and they will go from store to store, effectively shutting out the little player.  This sounds like it's going to be a long year till WinFall is ended.

Ridge

I think Todd nailed it when we said it's a betting strategy.  The game is designed to roll down and pay out more

for lower prizes and that is exactly what it does.   It is working just as it is designed as far as I can see and no

loop hole exist at all.  I would love to see these sort of games increase instead of going down the tubes so to

speak.  I think you are right that some people don't want others to succeed.   What bothers me the most is that

dissinformation will win out in the end and everyone will loose.   Success is all about being willing to step up to

bat and put it on the line,  doing this when the odds lean more toward ones favor is just being smart.   Here is

something for those others to think about,  Lets say we cancel all money and reset the whole system.  We then

give each person one million dollars and every one is happy.  It would not take very long before 90% of the wealth

would be back in the pockets of 10% of the people.  Ask yourself why and you have the solution to the problem.

It's not them it's you.       

RL

"Loophole"?   I think not.

There's more to this story than we can possibly know.  If you know the towns where the tickets were being purchased, (I do because I've been through that neck of the woods and it's very rural there), then you know they're about half way into The Commonwealth of Mass. (If you're driving into Mass from the New York border on The Mass Pike. Then ya gotta hang a left on I-91 and go North a bit.)  If someone was driving to Mass from Michigan, why not just stop at the Mass border at the first exit off The Pike in Stockbridge or even at Lee?  Why go as far into Mass as the "high rollers" did?  There's a reason for that, and my guess is it's because they are some how connected/related to the store owners. 

I dont know that the high rollers actually drove to Mass from Michigan.  They could have flown into Boston or Hartford.  But something is up with the fact those retailers are not located right on the western Mass border with New York.

But who cares!!!! More power to the folks from Michigan.  Look, I hate to wait in line as much as the next guy to buy a lottery tickets when some dude who cant afford it is buying $100 worth of tickets and is randomly rattling off  numbers to the clerk, but something tells me that aint exactly what was happening in Mass. 

We just dont know the whole story, and neither does the reporter who first wrote about it.  He/she didnt get every single detail.

I read another article on this.  These retailers violated a lot of rules.

The employees that printed tickets weren't even present, sometimes.  Printing tickets before and after business hours.
The customer was not present when some tickets were printed.  Employees aren't allowed to be hired to work the lotto machine solely for this purpose, they need to work at other times.

The stores got greedy.

Roger that.

Are you implying that you smell a Patel?

Ohio has a 649 game Classic Lotto which has gone over a year without a jackpot winner which is now at $40.4M with a cash value of $20.2M.  If it was easy for anyone with $13,983,816 to buy all the possible combinations in three days and win the jackpot plus $1,828,790 in other prizes, others probably wouldn't continue to buy tickets?

There are other states with games that investors can buy lots of tickets and possible make a profit but they are not a sure bet because states generally have rules that don't allow players with unlimited funds to control the outcomes of their games easily. 

Massachusetts probably hoped that enough big spenders would try to beat the games that they all would come up short and the state would be the only winner but it seems most of the times according to the news papers, it didn't come out that way so they had to adjust their rules.

Yeah, whats up with the 649 going for over a year with nobody winning? our 649 has hit $21.7M only once in its history and thats more than 7 years ago. It rarely goes past $5M. We're gambling mad out here in MA hahaha

If I lived in Ohio I'd be chasing that cow like there's no tomorrow. 1 in 13M odds is waaay much better than the PB & MM JP odds although some people play the latter games for the non jackpot prizes too. I do but my main motivation is the jackpot.

I don't care if someone came into a store and bought several million dollars worth of lottery tickets.This is a win-win situation.The store wins and the state wins!.And if there are multiple winners,they win too!

That may be true if those big spenders spent $100,000.00 during regular drawings trying to win the jackpot and only matched a couple of 5of6 for $8,000.00 but they only spend that kind of money to get a 5of6 at 1:40,000 odds when the rolldowns could make a 5of6 worth more than $40,000+.  Since the state doesn't want the regular players thinking they are just fatten up the jackpots for the big spenders, they had to act.  If those regular players stopped playing then there wouldn't be any $2M jackpots to roll down.

Personally, I think the state would have made more money allowing the jackpots to roll until someone won them normally.   I bet the game that replaces this one won't have a roll down.

That's not unusual.   Indiana's 6/48 game did the samething a couple of years back, it was finally won by a guy playing family birthdays after rolling up to nearly $48M.

I'm sure if someone had a strategy where spending more money would at least allowed them to break nearly even, it wouldn't have taken so long.

They knew this loop hole was there for sometime. 
I love how the lottery only took action when it became public knowledge.

What small time player would want to risk anyone on the game?
An MIT  professor even said at the $ amount some were playing their was virtualy no risk.
Only the little fellow was gambling.

I saw this story yesterday on Inside Edition. I was shocked at how much the couple was spending on tickets. Lotteries are a business like ever other business, here to make money. Winners are used to promote and market the lottery. That is why they make players take pictures and meet with the press to sell more tickets.

Yeah, I saw the broadcast of the story on Inside Edition too.

Also, they didn't name him in the story, but wasn't that MIT professor the infamous Mohan Srivastava, the one who cracked the scratch-off extended play lottery games?

Anyway, I agree the game was flawed. Even though the public asked for a capped jackpot withd rolldown, the fact is that it favored someone with a huge bankroll coming in to scoop up all the money at certain times. In a public lottery funded by the general public, that is unacceptable. Its all about the integrity of the game. Even a private gambling institution wouldn't want to have a game with such a loophole in it.

Sounds like discrimination against smart people.

These smart people weren't doing anything that you didn't have the same right to do.

They weren't usurping any of your rights.

You could have done the same exact thing they were doing if you wanted to.

So what's the beef?

When the guy was oinbterviewed on Inside Edition he said "Anyone could have done this". I guess he assumes everybody has $300,000 to throw at lotto.

They showed the MIT guy's name on the bottom of the screen when he was interviewed.

____________________________________

I've been telling you guys that when anyone stumbles upon something like this, or if someone does "break the code" that game will no longer be available as it was, or in this case the flaw will be fixed, which it was.

"When the guy was oinbterviewed on Inside Edition he said "Anyone could have done this". I guess he assumes everybody has $300,000 to throw at lotto."

What I'm saying is that if you take that premise to its logical conclusion, everyone has the same right to throw $300,000 at lotto and it is not the fault of the people who have it to throw that the ones complaining weren't smart enough to amass it.

No one was precluding them from amassing their own fortune to spend or invest or gamble in any legal manner they saw fit.

Sounds like sour grapes, jealousy and the anti-competition mentality of liberal malcontents and ne'er-do-wells.

Nope, you're wrong, not discrimination against smart people.

It is a flawed game, weighted towards someone with a large bankroll.

Imagine a simple poker game, where one person comes to the table with $100, and the other player comes to the table with $10,000. The guy with $100 bets $10 and the guy wih $10,000 bets $1000. The guy with $100 can't match that and folds, forfeiting the pot. This contiues for 9 more plays until the player who came with $100 is now broke, and the guy who came with $10,000 got a guaranteed $100 profit.

That is not how poker is played! that is a flawed game! An extreme example of the this topic, but it illustrates the point.

So you add rules and limits. You take turns betting, you give the option of all-in, you separate players with different bankrolls and betting amounts or have everyone start the poker tournament with the same amount. Its just common sense and fairness. They don't have to close down the game, just put some liits on it to make it fair.

I know you always like to bring politics into every lottery thread, but why not try arguing a topic on its merits for a change?

Nope, you're wrong, sonny boy.

"So you add rules and limits. You take turns betting, you give the option of all-in, you separate players with different bankrolls and betting amounts or have everyone start the poker tournament with the same amount. Its just common sense and fairness. They don't have to close down the game, just put some liits on it to make it fair."

There already were your beloved rules and limits - people without money can't play. You just didn't like the particular rules and limits for that particular game and wanted them altered to fit your particular financial wherewithal which was dictated by your particular lack of success in your particular life history which resulted in your being particularly flat-ass broke most of the time.

Go to school, learn something, work hard, get a job, make something of yourself instead of just sitting around with your hand out complaining all the time like the liberal you are. Nobody likes a whiner. Snap out of it, nobody owes you anything.

What don't you understand?

You need to go back and read the orginal article again.

They were greedy and cheating.... The stores were sent letters in advance to not violate the rules for the big spenders.

They were so greedy they did it anyway, hence why they got suspended.

So because everyone didn't violate a lot of rules,  it's their stupidty?

"So because everyone didn't violate a lot of rules,  it's their stupidty?"

So you punish everybody for the misdeeds of a few?

Is that your idea of being fair?

They don't have to change rules just cuz your "where's my free stuff?" crowd says so.

The market will decide if what they're doing is fair or not and let them adjust accordingly. They don't need your "Big Brother" mentality rushing in and changing everything to suit your broke-ass personal needs.

If the game is unfair, people won't play it, believe me, they'll get the message.

So full of anger and hatred, you need help man...seriously...

The few have been doing the misdeeds for years.

Stop turning it into a big brother argument.

Stop being stupid.  They are welcome to buy $300,000 tickets.  It's just harder to break the rules.
Try to insult me all you want,  your still wrong.

Simply insults and meanness to attempt to justify his opinion.

First it was they are just smarter and did nothing wrong,  now it's punishing people by limiting ticket sales.

Yeah, there's some people that just won't respond to logic and reasoning, they just react with pure emotion. They live to push other people's buttons. Don't waste your time on them.

"The few have been doing the misdeeds for years."

Then why not punish the few?

Why do you insist on having the 'Big Brother' solution of punishing everybody?

Because you're a lib and that's your nature, that's why.

You want a nanny state controlling every aspect of everybody's life.

You want a government permit and guarantee of absolute fairness and dolphin-free air  for every breath you take.

Well guess what? A lot of us like freedom and can take care of ourselves.

Try making sense if you want to make a point.

Your acting like an hysterical woman.

Yes, I think you're right but I had to at least try talking some sense into him.

I can deal with all his vicious name-calling - I just wanted to help him.

I tried to take him under my wing but some men you just can't reach.

Maybe you're right, that I shouldn't waste my time on him but it goes against my nature not to help people.

There are 2 main questions here:

1>   Were the people who used large 6 figure bets to win during rolldown periods cheating?

The answer is a flat NO. They played within the game rules and anyone from the general public with the funds and knowledge of how the game works could have placed the same bets they did. (they are not responsible for vendors who didnt follow rules) 

2>   Was the lottery correct to change the rules, making it difficult (discriminating against) high volume customers?

Absolutely. The lottery's a for-profit business, not a pubic service, so whatever rule changes they feel are necessary to keep sales up, they'll make. In this case most of their customers didn't have a bankroll large enough to take full advantage of rollovers. and if customers feel its not an even playing field, ticket sales will drop.

So why are the retailers that sold them the tickets suspended from selling tickets?
Because the high rollers themselves were the vendors.  Printing their own tickets outside store hours.

They were just smart to find someone willing to break the rules.

Now that was rational and reasonable.

Well stated, management.

"So why are the retailers that sold them the tickets suspended from selling tickets?"

To assuage the hysterical broke-ass masses who think that somehow, somewhere, someway - they were being cheated.   

Smile - you won.

did't take long did it ?

In case you missed it. Just saw this story again on the weekend edition of Inside Edition.

Oh no Win, I hope I don't have to explain it to those guys again! LOL

What don't you get? Management and myself already explained it to you quite thoroughly, go back and read.

I never said the players did anything wrong, but I agree that the lotto commission had to take action, as the game was flawed. The lottery is supposed to ba a game of chance, with equal risk and reward for all players large and small. So when a problem or loophole is discovered in a game, they have to take corrective action. It was not some "oh the government and the liberals are out to get me" hysterics that you were whining about, it was business.

Such was the case here, where the well intentioned rolldown feature on a jackpot game created a loophole where a minority of players with the knowledge and ability could have significantly reduced risk. Or with the extended play Scratch game playfield patterns was found to have a flaw, they needed to take corrective action there. Or when the pick-3 RNG was found to not be producing certain kinds of numbers, they had to take corrective action there. Otherwise the integrity of the lottery would be in question, as it would be weighted towards a minority who had the knowledge and ability to take advantage of it.

Why you would be arguing against this is beyond me. Except that you tend to want to argue about anything just for aguins sake...

"...it would be weighted towards a minority who had the knowledge and ability to take advantage of it."

There is no need to be a bigot.

Minorities have just as much right to win as you do.

Almost any lottery game can be beaten if players don't have a spending limit, it just not pratical to try.  Massachusetts roll downs made it too pratical not to try for players with $100,000+ to gamble with little risk.  The big spenders will be there as long as the roll downs exist, they just have to involve more stores with the new limits.

Ohio's Classic Lotto has a jackpot of $40M+/cash $20M and it not illegal for anyone with $14M to try and buy all the possilbe combinations in 2-3 days and win/share the jackpot with other prizes worth $1.5M but it's not pratical. It would be even less pratical to brag about it if they did it.