United States
Member #261,885
June 21, 2026
21 Posts
Offline
Voted "Very Little" myself. The $5 price fundamentally changed the value math, and I don't think enough people have run the numbers on what you're actually getting for the extra $3.
The jackpot odds barely moved: the big prize went from 1 in 302,575,350 to 1 in 290,472,336 with the removal of one Mega Ball. That's about a 4% improvement. Statistically real, practically meaningless when you're that deep in the hundreds of millions. So you're not really paying $5 for better jackpot odds.
Where the $5 actually goes is the non-jackpot tiers. Every winning ticket now pays more than the $5 cost (no more breakeven prizes), and the built-in multiplier bumps every non-jackpot win by 2X to 10X. So the value proposition flipped from "cheap lottery ticket, tiny prizes" to "expensive ticket, beefier mid-tier payouts." Whether that's worth it depends entirely on whether you're chasing the jackpot (in which case the hike is a bad deal) or you actually care about the $10 to $10M middle prizes (where it's a genuine upgrade).
To JADELottery's rollover-lag point above, that tracks with the design intent. They were projecting an average jackpot north of $800M vs. the old ~$450M, which only works if rollovers run longer before someone hits. Fewer, bigger jackpots. So a slow climb to a billion is arguably the game working as designed, not underperforming.
Curious where the regulars land: is the multiplier value enough to justify 2.5x the ticket price, or does it just price out the casual players who drove ticket volume?
Texas United States
Member #55,887
October 23, 2007
22,520 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by NumberCruncher2 on Jul 18, 2026
Voted "Very Little" myself. The $5 price fundamentally changed the value math, and I don't think enough people have run the numbers on what you're actually getting for the extra $3.
The jackpot odds barely moved: the big prize went from 1 in 302,575,350 to 1 in 290,472,336 with the removal of one Mega Ball. That's about a 4% improvement. Statistically real, practically meaningless when you're that deep in the hundreds of millions. So you're not really paying $5 for better jackpot odds.
Where the $5 actually goes is the non-jackpot tiers. Every winning ticket now pays more than the $5 cost (no more breakeven prizes), and the built-in multiplier bumps every non-jackpot win by 2X to 10X. So the value proposition flipped from "cheap lottery ticket, tiny prizes" to "expensive ticket, beefier mid-tier payouts." Whether that's worth it depends entirely on whether you're chasing the jackpot (in which case the hike is a bad deal) or you actually care about the $10 to $10M middle prizes (where it's a genuine upgrade).
To JADELottery's rollover-lag point above, that tracks with the design intent. They were projecting an average jackpot north of $800M vs. the old ~$450M, which only works if rollovers run longer before someone hits. Fewer, bigger jackpots. So a slow climb to a billion is arguably the game working as designed, not underperforming.
Curious where the regulars land: is the multiplier value enough to justify 2.5x the ticket price, or does it just price out the casual players who drove ticket volume?
Back in the old days when I was making pretty good money, I spent hell bent for leather $$$ on several lottery games, MM included. Now, not so much. I'm on a strict budget, and the $5/ticket is not worth the odds of the game regardless of the jackpot. I even cut way back on PB also. At my age, just winning a few hundred thousand on the little Tx2Step would be quite fine.
JUST LOOK AT THE ODDS OF ANY JACKPOT GAME, THAT WILL TELL YOU EVERYTHING YOU NEED TO KNOW
us
Member #228,334
January 2, 2023
1,528 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by NumberCruncher2 on Jul 18, 2026
Voted "Very Little" myself. The $5 price fundamentally changed the value math, and I don't think enough people have run the numbers on what you're actually getting for the extra $3.
The jackpot odds barely moved: the big prize went from 1 in 302,575,350 to 1 in 290,472,336 with the removal of one Mega Ball. That's about a 4% improvement. Statistically real, practically meaningless when you're that deep in the hundreds of millions. So you're not really paying $5 for better jackpot odds.
Where the $5 actually goes is the non-jackpot tiers. Every winning ticket now pays more than the $5 cost (no more breakeven prizes), and the built-in multiplier bumps every non-jackpot win by 2X to 10X. So the value proposition flipped from "cheap lottery ticket, tiny prizes" to "expensive ticket, beefier mid-tier payouts." Whether that's worth it depends entirely on whether you're chasing the jackpot (in which case the hike is a bad deal) or you actually care about the $10 to $10M middle prizes (where it's a genuine upgrade).
To JADELottery's rollover-lag point above, that tracks with the design intent. They were projecting an average jackpot north of $800M vs. the old ~$450M, which only works if rollovers run longer before someone hits. Fewer, bigger jackpots. So a slow climb to a billion is arguably the game working as designed, not underperforming.
Curious where the regulars land: is the multiplier value enough to justify 2.5x the ticket price, or does it just price out the casual players who drove ticket volume?
"Curious where the regulars land: is the multiplier value enough to justify 2.5x the ticket price, or does it just price out the casual players who drove ticket volume?"
I would consider myself a regular MM player.
I do not focus a lot on the crazy odds of winning, that doesn't help me 🤣
I am driven more by the fun of planning for a win, the immediate impact that would have on me and my family line and also a desire to prove to myself that not all lottery winners are dumb losers 🤣.
Like most people, I am not happy when my MM ticket has a 2x because I can get that for $3 playing PB. However, when I get a 3x and above, I feel the $5 was a worthy purchase.
Another major consideration for me is disposable income. I play MM because my means allow me to.
Having said that, my motto in life is "Just because I can afford it does not mean I have to buy it"
I know we are all different and view things with a different mindset based on our life experiences and the paths we have walked on.
And because of that, I am happy for those that choose not to play MM as much as I am happy for those that play. The same will be true when PB moves to the UK and similar sentiments are expressed on who is in and who is shipping out.
Good luck to all.
I believe winning the lottery jackpot is a 💯 % factor of luck.
May Fortuna, goddess of chance or lot vindicate me.
United States
Member #261,885
June 21, 2026
21 Posts
Offline
Just look at theodds of any jackpot game" is honestlythe cleanest filter there is.Everything else is noise ontop of a number thatbasically doesn't move. And your pointabout Tx2Step is the one people miss:the smaller state games havedramatically better odds forprizes that would stillgenuinely change a regularperson's month. A few hundredthousand at 1 in 1.8M beats afantasy at 1 in 290M,especially on a fixed budget.Sounds like you alreadyran that math a long timeago. Do you find thesmaller in-state gamesactually pay out often enoughto feel worth it, or isit still mostly for thefun of the play?
United States
Member #261,885
June 21, 2026
21 Posts
Offline
This might be the most honest breakdown of why people actually play that I've read on here. The "2x I can get for $3 on PB, but a 3x+ feels worth the $5" line is a real, rational threshold, and it's exactly the kind of thing the lottery's pricing team is betting you won't calculate but you did. And "just because I can afford it does not mean I have to buy it" is a healthier relationship with the game than most. I lean hard on the math myself, but I'll fully admit the math doesn't capture the planning-the-win part you're describing, which is a real source of value even if it never pays out. Appreciate you laying it out.
Texas United States
Member #55,887
October 23, 2007
22,520 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by NumberCruncher2 on Jul 18, 2026
Just look at theodds of any jackpot game" is honestlythe cleanest filter there is.Everything else is noise ontop of a number thatbasically doesn't move. And your pointabout Tx2Step is the one people miss:the smaller state games havedramatically better odds forprizes that would stillgenuinely change a regularperson's month. A few hundredthousand at 1 in 1.8M beats afantasy at 1 in 290M,especially on a fixed budget.Sounds like you alreadyran that math a long timeago. Do you find thesmaller in-state gamesactually pay out often enoughto feel worth it, or isit still mostly for thefun of the play?
I can spend more, but Im now 72. A 2 Step win would be plenty for my remaining years. I do play TX Lotto, still only a buck for ticket. But the odds on that game is pretty bad. Not MM or PB bad, but....
2 Step would take care of me for the rest of my life along with a couple IRA's I have.
I used to spend 2k a year or more. Yeah, I won more, but nothing really noteworthy.
One game I played a lot back then was All or Nothing. $2 a ticket. I would play 5 tickets of the same numbers, sometimes alternating numbers. Won $10 multiple times, $50 several times, $250 was my best win. Overall odds were quite good, but top prize odds not so much.
So Im just cutting back. Lotto and 2 Step.
To me, top prize odds and overall odds of a game tells the story of the game.
Good luck whatever you play!
JUST LOOK AT THE ODDS OF ANY JACKPOT GAME, THAT WILL TELL YOU EVERYTHING YOU NEED TO KNOW
