Welcome Guest
You last visited December 11, 2016, 5:30 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

Powerball Matrix Change - April 15, 2015

Topic closed. 227 replies. Last post 1 year ago by weshar75.

 Page 13 of 16
South Carolina
United States
Member #77167
July 15, 2009
556 Posts
Offline
 Posted: May 31, 2015, 1:11 am - IP Logged

Speaking of strange definition of random,  you mentioned this earlier: "When six states sell almost half of all tickets, probability says you can expect almost half of all winners to be from  those six states"

That doesn't sound like every ticket has the same chance of winning.

Every ticket has the same chance of winning because balls are blown around in an air machine and any of them can pop up.   The more tickets a state sells, the more likely a winner will be in that group of tickets. That is why you can expect more winners from states with larger populations.

If you live in a smaller state where people seldom win MM or PB and you want to win a lottery--play a game with better odds--like a pick 5 or cash 5. Or play your numbers for a longer period of time and hope they come up later. Or buy your tickets from a state where people have a higher expectation of winning.

Good luck to us all-whatever we decide to play.

Every champion was once a contender who refused to give up.-Rocky Balboa

“Don’t let someone who gave up on their dreams talk you out of going after yours.” – Zig Ziglar

mid-Ohio
United States
Member #9
March 24, 2001
19831 Posts
Offline
 Posted: May 31, 2015, 1:42 am - IP Logged

Every ticket has the same chance of winning because balls are blown around in an air machine and any of them can pop up.   The more tickets a state sells, the more likely a winner will be in that group of tickets. That is why you can expect more winners from states with larger populations.

If you live in a smaller state where people seldom win MM or PB and you want to win a lottery--play a game with better odds--like a pick 5 or cash 5. Or play your numbers for a longer period of time and hope they come up later. Or buy your tickets from a state where people have a higher expectation of winning.

Good luck to us all-whatever we decide to play.

"If you live in a smaller state where people seldom win MM or PB and you want to win a lottery--play a game with better odds--like a pick 5 or cash 5."

Are you saying the odds of winning a MM or PB jackpot are different for players in smaller states?  How is that possible since the drawing results aren't limited to combinations only played in the larger states?  If that was true then all players from smaller states would have to do is play combinations that are usually played in the larger states and rig the system.

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

NY
United States
Member #23835
October 16, 2005
3475 Posts
Offline
 Posted: May 31, 2015, 5:23 am - IP Logged

"The reality is that they can't offer significant lower tier prizes with decent odds of winning and still generate huge jackpots in a reasonable amount of time."

Correct, which is why they are not improving the prize value of the lower prizes but merely improving the odds of winning them...without harming the amount of sales or capacity for size available for large jackpots. I actually think the fact that the rumored revised matrix has worse jackpot odds yet better overall odds than what was previously "official" is proof that the lotteries know that players want bigger jackpots, but that they would play even more if they won more often.

I mean, if jackpot was \$500 million I would play regardless how often I've won before. This is echoed by the hysteria ticket purchases we see in record runs. Now if it was 'only' \$300 million but I had won in the past few draws (i.e. better overall odds), then I might tell myself, "\$300 million is still a lot of money" and play anyway.

"they are not improving the prize value of the lower prizes but merely improving the odds of winning them...without harming the amount of sales or capacity for size available for large jackpots."

There's no free lunch. Anything that improves the lower tier prizes, whether it's better odds or increased prize value, comes from harming the jackpot. Whether it's slower growth or worse odds, the jackpot becomes less valuable as the lower tier prizes become more valuable.

"I might tell myself, "\$300 million is still a lot of money" and play anyway."

I think it's more likely that you'll continue your past strategy of placing your bets when you think you've got the best chance of maximizing the possible payout. Even without increasing the odds a jackpot of \$300 million isn't nearly as tempting when you think it will increase to \$400 or \$500 million as when you thought it was probably your last chance before it reset to the starting value. The lottery generates the huge sales when people who don't play regularly start buying tickets and when regular players start buying more tickets, and that happens when people think it's their last chance. Some regular players might roll a modest win back into some extra tickets, but there's no way that will offset the effect of taking 30 drawings to generate a sales frenzy instead of doing it in 20 to 25. The inescapable truth is that when it takes 20 drawings for a jackpot to reach \$250 million there's far less revenue than when 17 drawings created a jackpot of \$650 million. The only thing that could increase sales that much is a time machine.

NY
United States
Member #23835
October 16, 2005
3475 Posts
Offline
 Posted: May 31, 2015, 5:26 am - IP Logged

It isn't my fault that the lottery is screwing themselves,  because the same places often win.  When the odds of probability are consistently beaten,  then there is something going on behind the curtain that needs to be checked.  The fact that you can't debate honestly, and  have to insult me, doesn't help your cause, nor the lottery.

"it isn't actually random then."

Do you think that it's possible to randomly roll a single die and get a 7 or do you recognize that 0% of the rolls will result in a 7 because 0% of the sides of the die have 7 pips? If you removed half of the hearts and half of the diamonds from a deck of cards would you still expect that a randomly selected card has a 50% chance of being red, or can you wrap your feeble intellect around the idea that because there are fewer red cards there's less chance of randomly dealing one?  I could explain this to most 5 year olds, but I'm skeptical that anybody can make you understand.

Happyland
United States
Member #146344
September 1, 2013
1129 Posts
Offline
 Posted: May 31, 2015, 10:39 am - IP Logged

"they are not improving the prize value of the lower prizes but merely improving the odds of winning them...without harming the amount of sales or capacity for size available for large jackpots."

There's no free lunch. Anything that improves the lower tier prizes, whether it's better odds or increased prize value, comes from harming the jackpot. Whether it's slower growth or worse odds, the jackpot becomes less valuable as the lower tier prizes become more valuable.

"I might tell myself, "\$300 million is still a lot of money" and play anyway."

I think it's more likely that you'll continue your past strategy of placing your bets when you think you've got the best chance of maximizing the possible payout. Even without increasing the odds a jackpot of \$300 million isn't nearly as tempting when you think it will increase to \$400 or \$500 million as when you thought it was probably your last chance before it reset to the starting value. The lottery generates the huge sales when people who don't play regularly start buying tickets and when regular players start buying more tickets, and that happens when people think it's their last chance. Some regular players might roll a modest win back into some extra tickets, but there's no way that will offset the effect of taking 30 drawings to generate a sales frenzy instead of doing it in 20 to 25. The inescapable truth is that when it takes 20 drawings for a jackpot to reach \$250 million there's far less revenue than when 17 drawings created a jackpot of \$650 million. The only thing that could increase sales that much is a time machine.

"There's no free lunch. Anything that improves the lower tier prizes, whether it's better odds or increased prize value, comes from harming the jackpot. Whether it's slower growth or worse odds, the jackpot becomes less valuable as the lower tier prizes become more valuable."

Which is why the lower tier prizes are not becoming more valuable; compare the prizes offered by the matrix on the first page to the currently-drawn one. They are making the prizes less valuable in \$ terms to compensate for the higher probability of them being drawn. They did a similar strategy with MM when it changed. And I think I may have mentioned before, that the jackpot % of sales is virtually identical to the currently-drawn matrix...a difference of only a few million when it gets \$100+ million, which is hardly enough for the player to notice, let alone 'filter' out in their criteria.

I don't disagree with your logic concerning the number of rolls or jackpot levels, but I do think that combined with a harder to win jackpot, more players parlaying their bets will help decrease the time it takes for the jackpot to reach highs, those frenzy levels that generate irrational sales. Sure, if someone believes it will roll higher then they will play regardless of their result in the previous draw. But if they also won \$2 in the last draw, they might play those winnings in addition to the amount they were going to play anyway. The lottery retains more of the payout and the jackpot grows larger.

If the chances of winning the jackpot are so slim, why play when the jackpot is so small? Your chances never change, but the potential payoff does.
If a crystal ball showed you the future of the rest of your life, and in that future you will never win a jackpot, would you still play?

2016: -48.28% (13 tickets) ||
P&L % = Total Win(\$)/Total Wager(\$) - 1

Wisconsin
United States
Member #104962
January 23, 2011
1075 Posts
Offline
 Posted: May 31, 2015, 12:06 pm - IP Logged

"it isn't actually random then."

Do you think that it's possible to randomly roll a single die and get a 7 or do you recognize that 0% of the rolls will result in a 7 because 0% of the sides of the die have 7 pips? If you removed half of the hearts and half of the diamonds from a deck of cards would you still expect that a randomly selected card has a 50% chance of being red, or can you wrap your feeble intellect around the idea that because there are fewer red cards there's less chance of randomly dealing one?  I could explain this to most 5 year olds, but I'm skeptical that anybody can make you understand.

That is really intellectually dishonest debate, while you still continue to insult my intelligence because I refuse to buy the "official story" or "buy the lottery faq's"  When I see  the  odds of probability defied, again and again,  there is nothing wrong with questioning what is happening.  If it makes you feel better to insult me, so be it, don't expect me to respond back.

Trump 2016!

Marquette, MI
United States
Member #20541
August 20, 2005
705 Posts
Offline
 Posted: May 31, 2015, 5:23 pm - IP Logged

That's exactly what Kansas and one of the vendors said at Smart-Tech, that players who never win anything will eventually give up. What you're saying doesn't contradict my post. However, studies have shown that lottery players do not distinguish between odds of 100 million or odds of 200 million when it comes to mega jackpot games. It is all a longshot and the media constantly reminds them of how they will never win. But their eyes are only on the prize. Have players stopped playing Mega Millions? No, because the better overall odds has helped retained players (albeit, I am not convinced the new matrix performs better). If you consider that PB not only costs twice as much as MM but also has worse overall odds, then it is not a surprise that the lack of large jackpots makes the game suffer.

Powerballs problem is with the way they bundle their tickets.  Powerball is \$3 per ticket and they don't give you much choice on the bundle.

What they need to do is make it a \$2,\$3,\$4 or \$5 dollar per ticket game.

2 for the regular ticket and then players choice of a dollar each on a bigaplier, smallaplier, extra jackpot.

With the Bigaplier multiplying either just 2nd prize or 2nd and 3rd prizes depending on the math

Smallaplier multiplying 3rd or 4th through bottom prizes

Extra Jackpot just a yes or no option with extra money you could get if you have the option and match all six numbers  to win or share the jackpot and win or share the extra

With those options the player can chose how to play for the prizes

South Carolina
United States
Member #77167
July 15, 2009
556 Posts
Offline
 Posted: May 31, 2015, 8:09 pm - IP Logged

"If you live in a smaller state where people seldom win MM or PB and you want to win a lottery--play a game with better odds--like a pick 5 or cash 5."

Are you saying the odds of winning a MM or PB jackpot are different for players in smaller states?  How is that possible since the drawing results aren't limited to combinations only played in the larger states?  If that was true then all players from smaller states would have to do is play combinations that are usually played in the larger states and rig the system.

If a state sells 5000 tickets and another state sells 25000 tickets--the odds of a player in the larger state hitting the balls in the air machine are better.  If a person in the smaller state lucked up and picked the same numbers manually-yes he/she could win--but what is the probability of that happening?

Every champion was once a contender who refused to give up.-Rocky Balboa

“Don’t let someone who gave up on their dreams talk you out of going after yours.” – Zig Ziglar

New Member
Spearfish,SD
United States
Member #5962
July 29, 2004
8 Posts
Offline
 Posted: May 31, 2015, 8:56 pm - IP Logged

5/69 + 1/26  is what its changing to and prizes--information not stated yet by TLC.

Happyland
United States
Member #146344
September 1, 2013
1129 Posts
Offline
 Posted: May 31, 2015, 9:03 pm - IP Logged

5/69 + 1/26  is what its changing to and prizes--information not stated yet by TLC.

Well, hopefully the MUSL members have made up their minds.  The matrix posted at the start of this thread was "official," drafted in the rules of several states, and even published in major industry publication...but as you can see, it has hardly materialized.

I have also 'heard' from one commission that the game won't be launching with the new matrix until 2016; however, I actually don't believe the ailing jurisdictions would wait that long to make a move, so I think October is the best bet now. That has been the launch timeframe for MUSL game changes in recent years

We'll see

If the chances of winning the jackpot are so slim, why play when the jackpot is so small? Your chances never change, but the potential payoff does.
If a crystal ball showed you the future of the rest of your life, and in that future you will never win a jackpot, would you still play?

2016: -48.28% (13 tickets) ||
P&L % = Total Win(\$)/Total Wager(\$) - 1

Arizona
United States
Member #165073
March 24, 2015
220 Posts
Offline
 Posted: May 31, 2015, 9:33 pm - IP Logged

If a state sells 5000 tickets and another state sells 25000 tickets--the odds of a player in the larger state hitting the balls in the air machine are better.  If a person in the smaller state lucked up and picked the same numbers manually-yes he/she could win--but what is the probability of that happening?

The odds that the larger state will have a winner are better. The odds for any single player are the same, no matter which state they're in.

Zeta Reticuli Star System
United States
Member #30470
January 17, 2006
10356 Posts
Offline
 Posted: June 1, 2015, 2:44 am - IP Logged

I guess some here would say that the Powerball winners from Puerto Rico in February and April are just an urban legend.

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

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.

mid-Ohio
United States
Member #9
March 24, 2001
19831 Posts
Offline
 Posted: June 1, 2015, 8:38 am - IP Logged

The odds that the larger state will have a winner are better. The odds for any single player are the same, no matter which state they're in.

But some think if things were that simple they would have won by now inspite of the odds of them winning  being 1:275M, after all they have brought a ticket every drawings for the last couple of years.

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

San Angelo, Texas
United States
Member #1097
January 31, 2003
1394 Posts
Offline
 Posted: June 2, 2015, 7:06 pm - IP Logged

It's official!
New PB game begins Oct. 7.
Matrix is 5/69 + 1/26
Details posted at the Texas Lottery website.
Lot of changes to the multiplier.
Same price: \$2

Happyland
United States
Member #146344
September 1, 2013
1129 Posts
Offline
 Posted: June 2, 2015, 7:23 pm - IP Logged

5/69 + 1/26  is what its changing to and prizes--information not stated yet by TLC.

So I followed up on this and Texas has apparently published the proposed rule. I believe they are the first to publicize the latest changes.

Powerball matrix slated to begin October 7, 2015 (subject to change):

 Match Odds (1 in X) Prize % of Prize Pool 5 of 5 + PB 292,201,338.00 Grand Prize 68.013% 5 of 5 11,688,053.52 \$1,000,000 8.556% 4 of 5 + PB 913,129.18 \$50,000 5.476% 4 of 5 36,525.17 \$100 0.274% 3 of 5 + PB 14,494.11 \$100 0.690% 3 of 5 579.76 \$7 1.207% 2 of 5 + PB 701.33 \$7 0.998% 1 of 5 + PB 91.98 \$4 4.349% PB Only 38.32 \$4 10.437% Overall 24.87 - 100.000%

Jackpot is still 30 graduated payments. Nearly 5% more of the prize pool is being allocated to the jackpot, and 2nd prize takes the biggest hit with a +10% decrease in allocation. Power Play is actually retaining its name, and yes it still costs \$1 extra. Unlike the previously-proposed changes, it is not going to have a separate matrix. It does feature a modified multiplier, such as 10X, like I mentioned before. However, the 10X multiplier will not be available if the jackpot is over \$150 million. The idea, apparently, is to encourage play at lower jackpots with better payouts at lower jackpot levels (either that or limit liability during poor sales).

When 10X multiplier available (<\$150 million jackpot):

 Power Play Multiplier Probability of Increase 10X 2.33% 5X 4.65% 4X 6.98% 3X 30.23% 2X 55.81%

When 10X multiplier not available (\$150 million jackpot):

 Power Play Multiplier Probability of Increase 10X 0.00% 5X 4.76% 4X 7.14% 3X 30.95% 2X 57.14%

In both cases, multiplier does not apply to Jackpot or the 2nd prize, which is set at \$2,000,000 for all multipliers.

If the chances of winning the jackpot are so slim, why play when the jackpot is so small? Your chances never change, but the potential payoff does.
If a crystal ball showed you the future of the rest of your life, and in that future you will never win a jackpot, would you still play?

2016: -48.28% (13 tickets) ||
P&L % = Total Win(\$)/Total Wager(\$) - 1

 Page 13 of 16