Search

MEGA MILLIONS = MEGA BUSTReply
Much more was, and is expected with Mega Millions and it is not producing. The odds and these small increases in the jackpot when no-one hits is most certainly going to make NY's current lotto game most attractive!, not to mention that NY's game is 2 for $1. You stated: if no winner you predict 17 million?, given the hype of Mega Millions and the number of states involvedthat's PEANUTS!. The jackpot should be at the very least doubling everytime no-one hits!.I think I will stick with the standar
May 23, 2002, 12:32 pm - Guest - Lottery Discussion Forum

$50 per week spent on MM = 1 win every 51,979 years!Reply
I won a New Car from a raffel 7 years. I beat the odds.But I didn't take the Car.. I took The Money $10,000ScottHam Radio Operator
May 20, 2002, 2:09 pm - Guest - Lottery Discussion Forum

Need Another Strategy!Reply
If any of these strategies worked, the pick 3/4 games would go broke, yet they are the real money makers for most states. Fact is the odds aren't in your favor, and if someone knows how to change it, they aren't going to sell it, they going to use it.Jack
May 20, 2002, 1:21 pm - Guest - Lottery Discussion Forum

any ideas on how to play little lotto?Reply
Thank you for your explanation, but I meant techniques or wheeling systems for hitting the little lotto. It seems that most of the discussion around here is focused on Pick-3 and Pick-4 lotteries. While I find the odds for Lotto and Big Game (now MegaMillions) too high, I wonder if anyone had done any work on developing strategies to win the Little Lotto.
May 19, 2002, 8:47 pm - bramstoker - Lottery Discussion Forum

$50 per week spent on MM = 1 win every 51,979 years!Reply
Sorry, but statistics DO mimic reality. If you spend $50 dollars per drawing, the odds that you will win three times in a row is 1 in 1.97 * 10^19. You could very well win three times in a row? Fat chance.
May 19, 2002, 12:28 pm - Guest - Lottery Discussion Forum

$50 per week spent on MM = 1 win every 51,979 years!Reply
Congrats man.See this 1 win every 51,979 years thing sounds great on paper. But statistics don't mimic reality. In fact, even though the odds are astronimically low, I could very well win three times in a row. If I do I'll be sure to send you guys some cash. ;)
May 18, 2002, 6:10 pm - Abe - Lottery Discussion Forum

Let's Play MI MillionsReply
New Jersey Pick-6 is the game to play. Odds of winning are better than MI Millions. Glad I live in NJ. MI sucks. Jackpot at 33.5 million.
May 16, 2002, 12:19 pm - Guest - Lottery Discussion Forum

Need Help Drastically!Reply
Odds of winning money in Pick-3 is a lot higher than 1:1000. Maybe getting a straight is 1:1000, but not box. Kizzy you are getting evicted? Not paying the rent, you probably foolishly spent it all on Lotto tickets.
May 15, 2002, 8:27 pm - Guest - Lottery Discussion Forum

Need Help Drastically!Reply
If you're consider playing the lottery as a source of income, then you got a problem. The states consider the lottery as a source of income because they make money on it. The odds of winning a few dollars in the pick3 is 1/1000 and nothing is going to change that. Losing money should be a hobby, not a career.Jack
May 15, 2002, 7:31 pm - Guest - Lottery Discussion Forum

Now it's officialReply
Perhaps my syntax was incorrect what I meant was the more people playing the odds of there being a winner are greater because the possibility of the combination of numbers being picked by someone is greater. Anyway it's not impossible to win just harder than before.
May 15, 2002, 4:27 pm - megamillionaire - Lottery Discussion Forum