Search

Lotto South v Lose for LifeReply
And my point was that if your going to spend a dollar on a lottery ticket there are better options out there. But hey, if you wanna play Lose for Life that is your choice. Just dont think 1000/wk is going to solve you financial woes, because it is a not a very large amount of money and won't go very far. In fact in 20 years living on 52k a year may put you at or below the poverty line. I wouldn't mind having an extra 36k, but the odds in Lose for Life suck for such a small amount of money.
Mar 28, 2006, 12:09 pm - tony95 - Lottery Discussion Forum

At what point (matrix) would you not playReply
I would continue to play as I run a Lottery Club. The higher the jackpot, the more my group gets excited, even though you all and I both know the odds are so stacked up against everyone. I think the thrill of the hunt is what makes many of us play these large multi-state games, even though it is not profitable at best. There's nothing wrong with dreams and hope though...so I would continue to play, even though I am aware of the odds, the tax consequences, the impact of a matrix change, etc.
Feb 7, 2006, 2:31 pm - cps10 - Lottery Discussion Forum

the future of mega millions and powerballReply
The only thing that's a rip off about the games is the annuity. I have a feeling that at some point these backloaded annuities will either go away or get much worse. At some point it might go to 40 years and have to have an asterix next to the number claiming it's for 2046 (or whatever year it is +40) dollars to account for all the inflation that will eat away at what you actually win. I also don't know if a change in the odds is needed for a high rollover. Both the Canada 6/49 and Euromilli
Feb 7, 2006, 3:34 am - dvdiva - Lottery Discussion Forum

Breakfast buddies file suit over lottery ticketReply
Interesting story and comments. The pool concept makes sense if you buy into the odds theory that the lotteries propagate, that you divide your odds by the total number of combinations and the number of combinations purchased.This is just not true. If there are 175 million combinations and you buy 55 tickets your odds of winning are 175 million MINUS 56 (including the winning ticket), not DIVIDED by 55; (that comes out to 174,999,944 to one, not 3,180,000 to one). Mathematical fact.My point is
Dec 30, 2005, 3:32 pm - Rick G - Lottery News

Lotto Georgia vs Lotto SouthReply
Well, Lotto South is up a whole 1 Million $$$$$ for Saturday's draw, setting the world on fire!!!Proves a high matrix multi state lotto game does not work in Georgia. Why should we lay down to 6/49 odds when we had 6/46 odds that worked perfectly???? Promises of a better game for us didn't work and we're sitting on our wallets again.Lotto Georgia did perform well and will perform again if it is not changed from the original 6/46 once a week format.It would be unique in the southeast and $$$$$
Dec 29, 2005, 9:55 am - konane - Lottery Discussion Forum

Get 0 out of 3 EverytimeReply
All right Paurths, here they are....( for the p-4 ).XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXI'm back in busy ness.X marks the spot. Try the root sum digit variation, along with the pointers and the nation's leaders, straight with a factor of two extrapulations found in the paradox chart I provided. The v-tracts can help reduce the odd-even factors. WinD's steam powered boat and turtle neck sweater theory might be a good contribution.OH......I almost forgot, It's got to be a full moon, and you ha
Dec 17, 2005, 6:51 pm - pacattack05 - Lottery Systems Forum

Some Oklahomans baffled by new Pick 3 lottery gameNews Story
A manager of a local convenience store shared his insight on the start-up of the state lottery's scratch-off games versus the Pick 3 game which started earlier this month: People can't figure the Pick 3 out, he said.The state has apparently figured that out. Scratch-offs are no-brainers but the Pick 3 requires you to either choose three numbers or let the computer pick them for you.The Oklahoma Lottery Commission is hoping to remedy that problem with some paid advertising messages with a common
Nov 28, 2005, 1:39 pm - Todd - Lottery News

Record Jackpot - $448 Million
It is commonly understood that the record jackpot is $363 million set in May of 2000 in the Big Game lottery. Well guess what, the record was recently broken in the US with a $448 million jackpot.There were a couple of catches though.First, the cost of a ticket was $2.Second, and more importantly, the odds of winning the $448 million jackpot were astronomical. In fact the odds were something like 1 in 25,669,770,000,000,000.With those crazy odds, I calculated how much one would have to spend to
Nov 20, 2005, 2:01 pm - Jake649 - Jackpot Games Forum

Lotto South- Potential New Draw DaysReply
Ya'll seem to be missing the point, in regards to Lotto South. It was never meant to compete directly with PB/MM, which is why the Lotto South states also offer PB/MM. If they wanted Lotto South to compete with PB/MM, they would have just dropped those large jackpot games and only had Lotto South, forcing people to put all their money into Lotto South.They have both games because they're both different, exactly as they intended it to be. They know that many people don't care for the astronomi
Nov 16, 2005, 4:17 pm - LotteryPlayer - Jackpot Games Forum

Why odds 167 and 333 in Pick 3 ?Reply
Ok, supposed you had a gigantic lottery machine with 720 unique balls in it. Each ball would have to have one of the 720 Nomatch numbers printed on it. That means that if u were to play 123 boxed one of the 6 balls with 123, 132, 213, 231, 312, or 321 would have to be drawn in order for you to win boxed. Yes, the odds of you winning in a lottery arranged like this would be one in 1 in 120 (720 divided by 6 = 120).Now if you threw 10 more balls into the machine (we will use all ten triples) the
Nov 9, 2005, 8:17 pm - Thoth - Mathematics Forum