The solution for people who are bad at math: a lawsuit.

The BBQ Pit
21

[QUOTE=Left Hand of Dorkness]
The thing is, though, your actual odds of winning are in no way affected by whether the prize has been picked up elsewhere. You either hold the winning ticket in your hand, or you don’t. The only difference it makes when the prize has been won is that you have MORE information about whether you’re holding the winning ticket.

Folks supporting this lawsuit: how do you propose that such multi-prize contests should be run, once the grand prize has been won?

Daniel
[/QUOTE]

But this is not true before you buy the ticket, which is what matters. That is, if the winning ticket is already taken.

22

[QUOTE=John Mace]
But this is not true before you buy the ticket, which is what matters. That is, if the winning ticket is already taken.
[/QUOTE]
I’m not sure I understand what you’re saying. The winning ticket, once printed, exists in a particular location at any given time. That location may be twentieth from the top of the stack at Frankie’s Stop & Go on Highway 151. If you purchase your ticket anywhere else, or if you purchase any other one in the stack, you will be purchasing a losing ticket–even if nobody knows yet which one is the winning one. Do you agree?

Daniel

23

[QUOTE=Left Hand of Dorkness]
The thing is, though, your actual odds of winning are in no way affected by whether the prize has been picked up elsewhere. You either hold the winning ticket in your hand, or you don’t. The only difference it makes when the prize has been won is that you have MORE information about whether you’re holding the winning ticket.
[/quote]
What John Mace said.

In your earlier example, it might be true that the 9 bajillionth ticket and the 11 bajillionth ticket were losers, but before the 9 bajillionth ticket was scratched, the purchaser at least has a small chance of winning; the holder of the 11 bajillionth ticket had literally zero chance. The fact that they both turned out to be losers does NOT mean that the odds of winning for each ticket were the same.
[QUOTE=Left Hand of Dorkness]
Folks supporting this lawsuit: how do you propose that such multi-prize contests should be run, once the grand prize has been won?
[/quote]
I don’t really support the lawsuit. I just support competence at mathematics.

24

[QUOTE=LilShieste]
Unfortunately, no. The deal you struck with the state is that you’ve paid $1 for the chance to win something.
[/QUOTE]

Exactly. If they were **only ** offering the chance to win $75K, then they wouldn’t offer *other * prizes. I mean, I assume that if you won $1000, you wouldn’t walk away because it’s “not what you contracted for”.

25

[QUOTE=DianaG]
Exactly. If they were **only ** offering the chance to win $75K, then they wouldn’t offer *other * prizes. I mean, I assume that if you won $1000, you wouldn’t walk away because it’s “not what you contracted for”.
[/QUOTE]

No, but that’s not what these posters are saying. What they are saying is that if I walk into the local stop and rob and buy a ticket, I have zero chance of winning the grand prize (because it’s already been awarded), therefore the state is lying to me by saying that I have a chance of winning $75k on my ticket.

If I had the chance of winning $75k, but only won a thousand, well, then I won the lesser prize. Good for me, but I COULD have won more. Not so under the ripoff scheme..

26

Who was it who said, “The way I figure it, your chances of winning the lottery are the same whether you play or not”?

27

[QUOTE=Airman Doors, USAF]
‘Zero’ chance lottery tickets stun some players

The odds were reasonable? Are you kidding me? You would think that a guy who is a business professor from a college like Washington and Lee would be better at math than that. But no, he paid the stupid tax anyway.

[/QUOTE]

“Reasonable” comes down to the expected value, doesn’t it? If you were buying the last ticket and the grand prize hadn’t be awarded, you’d have a 100% chance of buying the $75,000 winner. I’d take that. But if there’s only one grand prize and it’s already been awarded, then they already know you can’t win it and can’t lure you with that prize any more.

There was a documentary on TV once about some guys (in Virginia?) that formed a syndicate to buy up all the lottery ticket combinations when the jackpot hit a certain level. Someone correct me, but I think in a pick 6 of 50 type of setup, the formula is: 50!6!/44! or about 1 in 14M.

So if the jackpot reached $60M they figured that even if they had to share it with another winner, they would still double their money (and of course they’d win lesser prizes for getting 4 out of 6 etc.).

They set up computers to generate the numbers and print stacks and stacks of forms for the readers. At one point, they were buying them up and then state lottery computers went down and they about shit a brick…what if they hadn’t bought the winner yet? But IIRC eventually the computers came back up and they made out ok.

28

[QUOTE=mhendo]
In your earlier example, it might be true that the 9 bajillionth ticket and the 11 bajillionth ticket were losers, but before the 9 bajillionth ticket was scratched, the purchaser at least has a small chance of winning; the holder of the 11 bajillionth ticket had literally zero chance. The fact that they both turned out to be losers does NOT mean that the odds of winning for each ticket were the same.I don’t really support the lawsuit. I just support competence at mathematics.
[/QUOTE]

You only have a slight chance in advance if you pick up the 10 bajillionth ticket, in which case you have a 100% chance. If you pick up the 9th, you have a zero chance.

Probability theory is good for dealing with situations in which you have incomplete information. If I roll a 6-sided die and then cover it up and ask you what number it shows, and you guess 3, you have a 1-in-6 chance of being right. That doesn’t mean the die is 1/6 showing 3: it’s either showing a 3 or it’s not. If I uncover the die and show you that a 4 is face-up, that doesn’t actually change the odds of its being a 4: all it does is change your knowledge of the die.

Similarly, your ticket either wins or it doesn’t; there’s no odds about it. The odds only reflect your incomplete knowledge. Someone’s win (your own or someone else’s) doesn’t change your odds; it changes your knowledge.

For any game in which a ticket can
a) win different prizes, and
b) show immediately whether it’s a winner or a loser,

I don’t see any alternative way to run the game.

Daniel

29

[QUOTE=jtgain]
Not so under the ripoff scheme..
[/QUOTE]

“Ripoff scheme”? How would you suggest they change this contest to make it not a ripoff scheme?

Daniel

30

[QUOTE=Really Not All That Bright]
Hmmm.

The Florida Lottery never does that, AFAIK.

Anyway, nobody (well, not me) is saying that if the top prize is gone the game is worthless. We’re saying that if the top price is gone some of the incentive is gone, which is why said fact should be clearly disclosed. If it was, then bully for that lottery agency. Otherwise, bully for Mr. suity-pants.

ETA: It seems like this is your lottery, so I’ll take your word for it regarding the convenience store notification.
[/QUOTE]
Local agents just print out the page that NJ Lottery updates weekly. Nothing stopping Fla. agents from doing the same with their list (except…you know…people might not play as much if they did that).

31

I agree with LHoD.

Your ticket is either a winner or not. Supposing it’s not a winner, it doesn’t matter if the winning ticket has been sold or revealed or lost or whatever. It doesn’t affect your ticket. You bought and possess a losing ticket, regardless.

32

[QUOTE=Really Not All That Bright]
Hmmm.

The Florida Lottery never does that, AFAIK.

Anyway, nobody (well, not me) is saying that if the top prize is gone the game is worthless. We’re saying that if the top price is gone some of the incentive is gone, which is why said fact should be clearly disclosed. If it was, then bully for that lottery agency. Otherwise, bully for Mr. suity-pants.

ETA: It seems like this is your lottery, so I’ll take your word for it regarding the convenience store notification.
[/QUOTE]

Yes, the Florida lottery does that. ALL lotteries that have scratch-off tickets do that, as far as I know.

Here is the Florida Lottery website regarding scratch-offs. Note the information about halfway down the page: “Some prizes, including top prizes, may be sold out at the time of ticket purchase. For more information about top prizes remaining, visit the Top Prizes Remaining section below.”

At this time, none of the top prizes are totally gone, but this is relatively unusual, most of the time one or more of them have a top prize which is unavailable.

For comparison, here is the page from the Ohio Lottery website. Note that 2 games (numbers 478 and 554) are sold out for the top prize.

Believe me, the lotteries inform all the player of the odds and the risks. But very few people take the time to read the fine print or go to the website, or check with the retailer who sells them the ticket. The information is there, but most people don’t bother to read it.

33

[QUOTE=Left Hand of Dorkness]
“Ripoff scheme”? How would you suggest they change this contest to make it not a ripoff scheme?

Daniel
[/QUOTE]

When the winning ticket is sold, then the state should no longer advertise that it is possible to win the grand prize when it is no longer possible.

34

[QUOTE=jtgain]
When the winning ticket is sold, then the state should no longer advertise that it is possible to win the grand prize when it is no longer possible.
[/QUOTE]

What should they do, withdraw the remaining tickets, at considerable cost if the Grand Prize comes early? As has been amply demonstrated, it’s no secret when the Grand Prize is sold out, and as long as the tickets say “Win up to…” it’s truth in advertising. You play at your own peril, just as it has always been.

35

[QUOTE=Airman Doors, USAF]
What should they do, withdraw the remaining tickets, at considerable cost if the Grand Prize comes early? As has been amply demonstrated, it’s no secret when the Grand Prize is sold out, and as long as the tickets say “Win up to…” it’s truth in advertising. You play at your own peril, just as it has always been.
[/QUOTE]

If they have created a scheme where it is cost prohibitive to withdraw chances of winning a prize that is no longer available then the scheme needs to be re-thought and redesigned.

Yes, I know that it says “up to”, but I can’t actually win the amount of the “up to” if the ticket has already been sold, right?

36

[QUOTE=jtgain]
When the winning ticket is sold, then the state should no longer advertise that it is possible to win the grand prize when it is no longer possible.
[/QUOTE]

Are you including the text on the tickets themselves in this suggestion?

Daniel

37

[QUOTE=Left Hand of Dorkness]
Are you including the text on the tickets themselves in this suggestion?

Daniel
[/QUOTE]

Is the text of the ticket the same size and expected influential value as the adverts in the media and on the display at the lottery retailers?

38

[QUOTE=jtgain]
Is the text of the ticket the same size and expected influential value as the adverts in the media and on the display at the lottery retailers?
[/QUOTE]

I have no idea. Can you explain your answer conditionally?

Daniel

39

In this age of instantaneous communication, I think the state could let the people know before they buy.

40

[QUOTE=jtgain]
Yes, I know that it says “up to”, but I can’t actually win the amount of the “up to” if the ticket has already been sold, right?
[/QUOTE]

Millions of tickets are printed that essentially say “Win up to $75K with this ticket!” on one side and (beneath a layer of silver) “Sorry, please try again” on the other. With those tickets, you can’t actually win the amount of the “up to”; you can’t actually win anything with those tickets. Are they fraudulent?

Of course not. The “win up to x” text is suggesting that of all the tickets printed with that text, at least one of them is printed with (essentially) “You’ve won $X!” on it. It’s no guarantee that the “You’ve won X!” ticket hasn’t been sold, or is being sold in the store you’re in, or anything of the sort.

Daniel