$2 PB Jackpots Now Rising More Slowly Than $1 PB Jackpots Did.Prev Topic Next Topic

New Topic New Poll

Prob988

New Jersey
United States
Member #21,205
September 4, 2005
963 Posts
Offline

Jun 5, 2012, 7:28 pm

Quote: Originally posted by KY Floyd on Jun 4, 2012
AFAIK, they have to pay for all those extra lower tier prizes out of the reserve fund or what would have been their profit. The rules specify what percentage of sales go to the prize pools for each level, with the jackpot getting about 32%. I may have missd it, but I never noticed any wiggle room about that in the official rules. The reserve fund gets 2%, but I'm not sure if it's 2% of sales (4 cents per ticket) or 2% of the 50% that goes towards prizes (2 cents per ticket). Either way, it wouldn't account for more than about $4.5 milion of the $115 million figure. I definitely don't see it coming close to accounting for what looks to me like a $10 million discrepancy in the advertised cash value for the current drawing.

Over the first 11 drawings, the sales total for the new game is actually about $27M higher than the old game run to which I referred. This is like a single extra drawing being added to the old system.

That said, there have been individual drawings where the old sales were higher than the new, 3 instances, including the last two. It would seem that it's definitely slowing.

I don't know how everyone else plays, but I'm spending far less money on powerball than I did under the old system.
RJOh

100

mid-Ohio
United States
Member #9
March 24, 2001
20,272 Posts
Offline

Jun 5, 2012, 11:36 pm

With its jackpot 10x that of MM, PB will seldom have a better chance to attract more players than it does now. The $177M jackpot will probably help some players to ignore the $2 per ticket price.

* you don't need to buy every combination, just the winning ones *
KY Floyd

NY
United States
Member #23,834
October 16, 2005
4,771 Posts
Offline

Jun 6, 2012, 12:58 am

"I don't know how everyone else plays, but I'm spending far less money on powerball than I did under the old system."

The dollar amount being sold tends to be a bit higher now for any given jackpot, but the number of tickets sold is lower. I see that as a minor advantage to a very select group of players: jackpot winners.

My chances of winning are exactly the same whether other players buy 10 tickets, 1 million tickets, or 100 million tickets, but my chances of being the only winner are better when other players buy fewer tickets. That makes the lower ticket sales an increasing advantage as the jackpot gets bigger. Compared to MM, the chances of sharing a jackpot of any given size are about half as likely for PB.

I'd prefer to win more, but as long as it's enough to fund a comfortable retirement I'd simply prefer to win. For a given amount of money I have twice as much chance of winning MM, so I'm usually going to spend my money there.

Right now NY lotto is $13.5 million and the 2nd place prize is about $300k. The cash value of MM has a bigger edge, but the odds are worse by a factor of about 7. That makes lotto the most sensible choice right now. Assuming PB continues to roll I'll throw $2 at it when it reaches $200 million.
Prob988

New Jersey
United States
Member #21,205
September 4, 2005
963 Posts
Offline

Jun 6, 2012, 4:49 am

Same here.

NJ lotto right now, seen from the expectation value point, at over 18M annuity and over 13M cash, is the best game in town here.
Guru101

Indiana
United States
Member #48,723
January 7, 2007
1,961 Posts
Offline

Jun 6, 2012, 6:19 pm

Well, given the jackpot amount, I went ahead and plucked up $2 for a QP. At the old $1 price and at this level jackpot, I would have spent $10 for 10 lines. Now, I simply refuse to play more than $2 until it reaches $250M.

I am now simply focused on winning Hoosier Lotto. The jackpot is $5,500,000 and if I won it tonight, I'd take the annuity. That's 30 payments of $183,333.33 before taxes.

Gonna win.
RJOh

100

mid-Ohio
United States
Member #9
March 24, 2001
20,272 Posts
Offline

Jun 10, 2012, 4:00 pm

Quote: Originally posted by Guru101 on Jun 6, 2012
Well, given the jackpot amount, I went ahead and plucked up $2 for a QP. At the old $1 price and at this level jackpot, I would have spent $10 for 10 lines. Now, I simply refuse to play more than $2 until it reaches $250M.

I am now simply focused on winning Hoosier Lotto. The jackpot is $5,500,000 and if I won it tonight, I'd take the annuity. That's 30 payments of $183,333.33 before taxes.

I simply refuse to play more than $2 until it reaches $250M.

It's now at $240M, it would tragic to miss out on winning it because it was $10M short.

* you don't need to buy every combination, just the winning ones *
Lucky Loser

Texas
United States
Member #86,151
January 30, 2010
1,889 Posts
Offline

Jun 11, 2012, 12:41 am

So, is it really the idea of "possibly" winning a higher jackpot, albeit, at double the cost that's cleverly drawn players back in? In other words, more money up for grabs justifies spending twice the money on essentially the same game/ odds? I mean, I'm not knocking anyone for participating but, it's like players have been cut off at the knees in terms of value...and we're talkin' about a $1 game. What used to get me (5) lines only gets me (2) now.

They want me to spend more money, double, if I want more opportunities to "possibly" win. I see where they're gettin' a free $1 somewhere along the way. Have their operating expenses increased? Low ticket sales isn't the players' fault...it's their's for not adjusting the odds to where more players will play because they see more winners on all tiers.

Finally, the logic which I'm seeing among players here is very interesting. The amount of money available to be won seems to dictate how much a player is willing to spend. What can the average individual here NOT DO with $100MIL that THEY CAN DO with over $240MIL I mean, really This scenario reminds me of the thread I started a while back..."How Much Money To (Try And) Win".

Wow. So, anything less than around $200MIL ain't gonna cut it. Yeah, I know...people can spend their money on what, and, how they want. Still, just concentrate on that logic for a moment or two. I'd be willing to bet everything I have that just $1MIL would set 99% of the people on this forum free right now...or come very, very close.

I'm sure none of this makes a lick of sense but, I just wanted to share it anyway.

L.L.
maximumfun

United States
Member #124,610
March 16, 2012
3,733 Posts
Offline

Jun 11, 2012, 8:20 am

It sure has taken powerball a while to get a run like this one... 240M$ should get people back into the game.

but at 240M$ I would also expect more multi-winner pots.

I wonder what level 'it' switches over from 'most likely a single winner' to 'more likely a multiple number of winners'?

That would make an overlap where the expected value of the GP would actually be lower (with multiple winners/per winner) than at the lower jackpot level. mind boggling. and this is why I simply play the same amount each draw... cuz that is too much 'probably/maybe/should be' for my ol' brain to process.
mcginnin56

United States
Member #111,437
May 25, 2011
6,323 Posts
Offline

Jun 11, 2012, 8:50 am

Quote: Originally posted by Lucky Loser on Jun 11, 2012
So, is it really the idea of "possibly" winning a higher jackpot, albeit, at double the cost that's cleverly drawn players back in? In other words, more money up for grabs justifies spending twice the money on essentially the same game/ odds? I mean, I'm not knocking anyone for participating but, it's like players have been cut off at the knees in terms of value...and we're talkin' about a $1 game. What used to get me (5) lines only gets me (2) now.

They want me to spend more money, double, if I want more opportunities to "possibly" win. I see where they're gettin' a free $1 somewhere along the way. Have their operating expenses increased? Low ticket sales isn't the players' fault...it's their's for not adjusting the odds to where more players will play because they see more winners on all tiers.

Finally, the logic which I'm seeing among players here is very interesting. The amount of money available to be won seems to dictate how much a player is willing to spend. What can the average individual here NOT DO with $100MIL that THEY CAN DO with over $240MIL I mean, really This scenario reminds me of the thread I started a while back..."How Much Money To (Try And) Win".

Wow. So, anything less than around $200MIL ain't gonna cut it. Yeah, I know...people can spend their money on what, and, how they want. Still, just concentrate on that logic for a moment or two. I'd be willing to bet everything I have that just $1MIL would set 99% of the people on this forum free right now...or come very, very close.

I'm sure none of this makes a lick of sense but, I just wanted to share it anyway.

L.L.

I think these huge jackpot numbers are thrown around, like they were just some pie in the sky abstractions. $1,000,000 alone, can be VERY

life changing for most folks. $25-50-75 or even a hundred million is an obscene amount of money, that I don't think most people can begin to fathom.

But as you said LL, folks will spend their money as they wish, regardless if it has no basis on logic or reason.
Prob988

New Jersey
United States
Member #21,205
September 4, 2005
963 Posts
Offline

Jun 11, 2012, 11:55 pm

Quote: Originally posted by maximumfun on Jun 11, 2012
It sure has taken powerball a while to get a run like this one... 240M$ should get people back into the game.

but at 240M$ I would also expect more multi-winner pots.

I wonder what level 'it' switches over from 'most likely a single winner' to 'more likely a multiple number of winners'?

That would make an overlap where the expected value of the GP would actually be lower (with multiple winners/per winner) than at the lower jackpot level. mind boggling. and this is why I simply play the same amount each draw... cuz that is too much 'probably/maybe/should be' for my ol' brain to process.

The last drawing at this level generated about $93M in sales.

This of course is the equivalent of 46.5M tickets.

The Poisson distribution at this level approximates the probabilty of various numbers of winners.

The following table gives this distribution at this sales level.

k, number of winners p(m,k)

0 76.58%

1 20.44%

2 2.73%

3 0.24%

4
0.02%

At this level the most probable outcome is another rollover, and the next most probable outcome is one winner.

Anything, of course, can happen.
ryanm

Morrison, IL
United States
Member #4,657
May 13, 2004
1,885 Posts
Offline

Jun 12, 2012, 7:58 am

The PB jackpot would probably have to set a new record (over $474 million cash) in order to change the most likely outcome from "single winner" to "more than one winner," since the last $325 million jackpot didn't sell even 100 million tickets.

---
maximumfun

United States
Member #124,610
March 16, 2012
3,733 Posts
Offline

Jun 12, 2012, 1:40 pm

Quote: Originally posted by Prob988 on Jun 11, 2012
The last drawing at this level generated about $93M in sales.

This of course is the equivalent of 46.5M tickets.

The Poisson distribution at this level approximates the probabilty of various numbers of winners.

The following table gives this distribution at this sales level.

k, number of winners p(m,k)

0 76.58%

1 20.44%

2 2.73%

3 0.24%

4
0.02%

At this level the most probable outcome is another rollover, and the next most probable outcome is one winner.

Anything, of course, can happen.

wow. thanks Prob988! too bad I never had a teacher like you!
DC81

MI
United States
Member #54,828
August 31, 2007
985 Posts
Offline

Jun 13, 2012, 6:54 pm

Quote: Originally posted by ryanm on Jun 12, 2012
The PB jackpot would probably have to set a new record (over $474 million cash) in order to change the most likely outcome from "single winner" to "more than one winner," since the last $325 million jackpot didn't sell even 100 million tickets.

Probably, since people are still buying a lot less tickets. I know I am.

You can't predict random.

New Topic New Poll

Subscribe to this topic

k, number of winners	p(m,k)
0	76.58%
1	20.44%
2	2.73%
3	0.24%
4	0.02%

k, number of winners	p(m,k)
0	76.58%
1	20.44%
2	2.73%
3	0.24%
4	0.02%

$2 PB Jackpots Now Rising More Slowly Than $1 PB Jackpots Did.Prev TopicNext Topic

$2 PB Jackpots Now Rising More Slowly Than $1 PB Jackpots Did.Prev Topic Next Topic