Powerball jackpot is $300,000,000

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Powerball jackpot is $300,000,000 (Page 1 of 2)

Posted: 2/15/2006 8:58:21 AM EDT

It is actually worth playing now. I bought $10 worth. When I win you guys can all come over and shoot my new machine guns.

Posted: 2/15/2006 10:01:22 AM EDT

[#1]

Stupid, but I bought one.

Posted: 2/15/2006 10:08:56 AM EDT

[#2]

Quoted:
Stupid, but I bought one.

Actually, its not stupid. At a $300,000,000 jackpot ($145,700,000 cash value) and odds of winning the jackpot of 1 in 146,107,962, it is essentially a break even proposition. That is why I felt ok about buying $10 worth.

Posted: 2/15/2006 10:12:14 AM EDT

[#3]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Stupid, but I bought one.

Actually, its not stupid. At a $300,000,000 jackpot ($145,700,000 cash value) and odds of winning the jackpot of 1 in 146,107,962, it is essentially a break even proposition. That is why I felt ok about buying $10 worth.

Assuming there is only one winner, and the 145M is after tax.

But yeah, when a pot gets to a certain size, the $1 ticket may be technically "worth" more than $1, and that's the rare occasion when a lottery ticket is actually not a stupid purchase.

Posted: 2/15/2006 10:14:53 AM EDT

[#4]

Forget it guys,i have the winning ticket right here,you can come over and shoot my machineguns.

Posted: 2/15/2006 10:16:21 AM EDT

[#5]

any way to play if you are not in any of the "powerball states"

Posted: 2/15/2006 10:17:18 AM EDT

[#6]

yeah, go to a powerball state and buy a ticket.

i've got $20 worth, only cause the wife chipped in 10 bucks too.

Posted: 2/15/2006 10:20:12 AM EDT

[#7]

Quoted:
yeah, go to a powerball state and buy a ticket.

i've got $20 worth, only cause the wife chipped in 10 bucks too.

are you still eligible if you are not a resident of that state? What if you win?

Posted: 2/15/2006 10:20:53 AM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Stupid, but I bought one.

Actually, its not stupid. At a $300,000,000 jackpot ($145,700,000 cash value) and odds of winning the jackpot of 1 in 146,107,962, it is essentially a break even proposition. That is why I felt ok about buying $10 worth.

Assuming there is only one winner, and the 145M is after tax.

But yeah, when a pot gets to a certain size, the $1 ticket may be technically "worth" more than $1, and that's the rare occasion when a lottery ticket is actually not a stupid purchase.

True, if there is more than one winner the pot odds get thrwon back into a negative expected value.

I am not sure about taxes though. I have a masters in finance, so I am inclined to agree that the effect of taxes has to be considered, but I am also an avid poker player. And in poker, if there is a $200 bet to you and the amount in the pot is $1000 you are getting 5:1 pot odds. If the odds of making your hand and winning are 3:1, you have positive expected value and you call the bet.

Pro poker players ( who have to pay paxes on their gambling winnnings) think in these terms and do not take taxes into account when making a decison at the table. I am not sure which is the most correct way of looking at the lottery.

Posted: 2/15/2006 10:22:15 AM EDT

[#9]

Quoted:
any way to play if you are not in any of the "powerball states"

www.powerball.com/images/maps/map-pb-30.gif

Sure, just send me $10 and I will buy you some tickets. If you win, I promise to send you your winning ticket.

Seriously though, you would just have to buy a ticket in a Powerball state. You don't have to live in one to win.

Posted: 2/15/2006 10:22:28 AM EDT

[#10]

Quoted:
Quoted:
yeah, go to a powerball state and buy a ticket.

i've got $20 worth, only cause the wife chipped in 10 bucks too.

are you still eligible if you are not a resident of that state? What if you win?

At the end of the day, you would be a very rich man

Posted: 2/15/2006 10:22:34 AM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:
Quoted:
yeah, go to a powerball state and buy a ticket.

i've got $20 worth, only cause the wife chipped in 10 bucks too.

are you still eligible if you are not a resident of that state? What if you win?

if you win, you win.

i have friends in non-powerball states who go on a "weekend getaway" in a powerball state when the jackpot gets high. usually visiting a friend or relative, etc. the ticket was still bought in a participating state, so the participating state still gets a chunk of the proceeds of the ticket sale. no harm, no foul.

Posted: 2/15/2006 10:26:32 AM EDT

[#12]

when are the winning numbers being read?

ive got my ticket right here

Posted: 2/15/2006 10:27:11 AM EDT

[#13]

tonight around 10:30 CST if i recall.

but then, they don't carry the broadcast here, i just have to check the numbers when i wake up.

Posted: 2/15/2006 10:29:54 AM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Stupid, but I bought one.

Actually, its not stupid. At a $300,000,000 jackpot ($145,700,000 cash value) and odds of winning the jackpot of 1 in 146,107,962, it is essentially a break even proposition. That is why I felt ok about buying $10 worth.

Even at $300,000,000 it is NOT a break even proposition. The odds are still 146,107,962 to one. Size of the jackpot does nothing to change the odds.

Apparently it is true that the lottery is just a tax on people who are bad at math.

Posted: 2/15/2006 10:33:15 AM EDT

[#15]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Stupid, but I bought one.

Actually, its not stupid. At a $300,000,000 jackpot ($145,700,000 cash value) and odds of winning the jackpot of 1 in 146,107,962, it is essentially a break even proposition. That is why I felt ok about buying $10 worth.

Even at $300,000,000 it is NOT a break even proposition. The odds are still 146,107,962 to one. Size of the jackpot does nothing to change the odds.

Apparently it is true that the lottery is just a tax on people who are bad at math.

hate to break it you, but you are the one who is bad at math. A large enough jackpot does create a break even (or better) proposition.

ETA: Look at this way. Lets say I offered you a bet where I write down a number between one and ten. If you pick the number correctly, you win; if you choose the wrong number, you lose. Your odds of winning are 1 in 10. Now, whether that is a good bet or not depends on the payout structure. If you have to pay a dollar to win five dollars, that is losing proposition (much like the lottery MOST of the time). BUT, if I was stupid enough to pay $20 on $1 bet, you have a positive expected value on making that bet, and you would take that bet every time I offered it (if you are good at math). Your odds of winning are always 1 in 10, just like in the lottery, but it the payout ratio that determines whether or not you are making a sound bet.

This situation with the lottery is no different.

Posted: 2/15/2006 10:36:26 AM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Stupid, but I bought one.

Actually, its not stupid. At a $300,000,000 jackpot ($145,700,000 cash value) and odds of winning the jackpot of 1 in 146,107,962, it is essentially a break even proposition. That is why I felt ok about buying $10 worth.

Even at $300,000,000 it is NOT a break even proposition. The odds are still 146,107,962 to one. Size of the jackpot does nothing to change the odds.

Apparently it is true that the lottery is just a tax on people who are bad at math.

hate to break it you, but you are the one who is bad at math. A large enough jackpot does create a break even (or better) proposition.

Only if you purchase every possible combination. The odds on any one ticket winning remain EXACTLY the same. BTW, I teach statistics.

Posted: 2/15/2006 10:37:04 AM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Stupid, but I bought one.

Actually, its not stupid. At a $300,000,000 jackpot ($145,700,000 cash value) and odds of winning the jackpot of 1 in 146,107,962, it is essentially a break even proposition. That is why I felt ok about buying $10 worth.

Even at $300,000,000 it is NOT a break even proposition. The odds are still 146,107,962 to one. Size of the jackpot does nothing to change the odds.

Apparently it is true that the lottery is just a tax on people who are bad at math.

I believe that thelastgunslinger is correct.

If you have a 1 in 1000000 chance of winning a $1,000,000 prize with a $1 ticket, the expected value of an entry is exactly $1.00

If you have a 1 in 1000000 chance of winning a $ 990,000 prize with a $1 ticket, the expected value of an entry is 99 cents - this is normally how lotteries work

If you have a 1 in 1000000 chance of winning a $1,100,000 prize with a $1 ticket, the expected value of an entry is $1.01 - this is the situation that thelastgunslinger is describing

Thus, when the take-home value of the pot is greater than the probability of winning (which it very rarely is), then the expected value of a ticket exceeds its price, and it is no longer a stupid decision ot buy one (from a mathematical perspective).

Of course, in practice, the calculation becomes very tricky, not just because of the need to include both federal and state taxes into the equation, but also the fact that MORE people will buy tickets when the pot gets bigger, so that while the probability of an individual having the correct number will be constant, the probability of more than one person having that number also increases - and that is particularly difficult to quantify.

But technically, I believe thelastgunslinger is correct - there should be a break-even point when the pot gets sufficiently large, even if it is very difficult to estimate.

ETA: It's not about the "odds" of winning changing, it's about the size of the "pot" changing over time, as it rolls over from non-winning rounds.

Posted: 2/15/2006 10:43:40 AM EDT

[#18]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Stupid, but I bought one.

Actually, its not stupid. At a $300,000,000 jackpot ($145,700,000 cash value) and odds of winning the jackpot of 1 in 146,107,962, it is essentially a break even proposition. That is why I felt ok about buying $10 worth.

Even at $300,000,000 it is NOT a break even proposition. The odds are still 146,107,962 to one. Size of the jackpot does nothing to change the odds.

Apparently it is true that the lottery is just a tax on people who are bad at math.

hate to break it you, but you are the one who is bad at math. A large enough jackpot does create a break even (or better) proposition.

Only if you purchase every possible combination. The odds on any one ticket winning remain EXACTLY the same. BTW, I teach statistics.

You may teach stats, but you need to brush up on your gambling theory. Yes the odds of any one ticket winning dont change, it is the ratio of the bet to payout that influences whether it is a negative/positive/break even proposition. See my example that I edited in above.

Posted: 2/15/2006 10:49:53 AM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Stupid, but I bought one.

Actually, its not stupid. At a $300,000,000 jackpot ($145,700,000 cash value) and odds of winning the jackpot of 1 in 146,107,962, it is essentially a break even proposition. That is why I felt ok about buying $10 worth.

Even at $300,000,000 it is NOT a break even proposition. The odds are still 146,107,962 to one. Size of the jackpot does nothing to change the odds.

Apparently it is true that the lottery is just a tax on people who are bad at math.

hate to break it you, but you are the one who is bad at math. A large enough jackpot does create a break even (or better) proposition.

Only if you purchase every possible combination. The odds on any one ticket winning remain EXACTLY the same. BTW, I teach statistics.

You may teach stats, but you need to brush up on your gambling theory. Yes the odds of any one ticket winning dont change, it is the ratio of the bet to payout that influences whether it is a negative/positive/break even proposition. See my example that I edited in above.

Then perhaps you could show the calculation you did that proves the big pot is at break even? You know, prove it with math. If you cannot, then you are guessing whether it is at break even, and are still not making a mathematically or statistically valid conclusion. Instead, the big payout short-circuited the need to do the math.

Posted: 2/15/2006 10:50:01 AM EDT

[#20]

Marge: Homer, the odds of winning are 380 million to 1.

Homer: Correction: 380 million to 50!!!!

Posted: 2/15/2006 10:52:47 AM EDT

[#21]

I bought 2.

Posted: 2/15/2006 10:53:24 AM EDT

[#22]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Stupid, but I bought one.

Actually, its not stupid. At a $300,000,000 jackpot ($145,700,000 cash value) and odds of winning the jackpot of 1 in 146,107,962, it is essentially a break even proposition. That is why I felt ok about buying $10 worth.

Even at $300,000,000 it is NOT a break even proposition. The odds are still 146,107,962 to one. Size of the jackpot does nothing to change the odds.

Apparently it is true that the lottery is just a tax on people who are bad at math.

hate to break it you, but you are the one who is bad at math. A large enough jackpot does create a break even (or better) proposition.

Only if you purchase every possible combination. The odds on any one ticket winning remain EXACTLY the same. BTW, I teach statistics.

You may teach stats, but you need to brush up on your gambling theory. Yes the odds of any one ticket winning dont change, it is the ratio of the bet to payout that influences whether it is a negative/positive/break even proposition. See my example that I edited in above.

Then perhaps you could show the calculation you did that proves the big pot is at break even? You know, prove it with math. If you cannot, then you are guessing whether it is at break even, and are still not making a mathemeatically or statistically valid conclusion. Instead, the big payout short-circuited the need to do the math.

It really is this simple:

Cash payout on $1 wager = $150,000,000

Odds of winning = 150,000,000 : 1

Expected value of $1 wager = $1

If you can't understand that, you shouldn't be teaching stats.

BTW, at what level do you teach stats?

Wanna play some poker?

Posted: 2/15/2006 10:55:03 AM EDT

[#23]

NERD FIGHT !!!

While I THINK I understand this issue correctly, I have learned that it is generally a bad idea to disagree with PAEBR332 since he is one of the smartest guys on arfcom.

I think it's possible you two are essentially talking about two slightly different things - namely the odds of winning, which remain unchanged, and the size of the winnings, which increase (but at the same time, the odds of having to share the winnings also increase - tricky stuff).

Posted: 2/15/2006 10:56:56 AM EDT

[#24]

Quoted:
Quoted:
yeah, go to a powerball state and buy a ticket. h,

are you still eligible if you are not a resident of that state? What if you win?

If you win Move to that state :) Make mine an M249

Posted: 2/15/2006 10:57:25 AM EDT

[#25]

Quoted:
NERD FIGHT !!!

While I THINK I understand this issue correctly, I have learned that it is generally a bad idea to disagree with PAEBR332 since he is one of the smartest guys on arfcom.

I think it's possible you two are essentially talking about two slightly different things - namely the odds of winning, which remain unchanged, and the size of the winnings, which increase (but at the same time, the odds of having to share the winnings also increase - tricky stuff).

LOL! Total nerd fight.

If you would have told me 10 years ago that I would be arguing the finer points of gambling on the internet with someone who lives a thousand miles away, I would have told you were full of shit.

I don't think we are talking about the same thing. I believe he is looking at it from the standpoint that you are always 147,000,000:1 to lose (which is correct) and then leaving it there. You truly do have include the amount that you can win relative to the amount you have to wager in order to complete the picture and determine what a lottery ticket (or any other gambling wager) is "worth".

Posted: 2/15/2006 10:57:31 AM EDT

[#26]

I think you have a better chance of being hit by lightning then bit by a rattler and finally eaten by a shark all on the same day. That being said, my nephew and I are each putting of $5 and will split our winnings.

72 mil gets ove 2 mil a year just sitting in the bank. I'd love to see an ARFCOMer win instead of a 90 year old couple with no kids for a change.

Posted: 2/15/2006 10:59:43 AM EDT

[#27]

I have to go to the store later. Maybe I'll buy a ticket. Then if I win, I'll split my winnings with PAEBR332.

Posted: 2/15/2006 11:01:17 AM EDT

[#28]

Quoted:
I have to go to the store later. Maybe I'll buy a ticket. Then if I win, I'll split my winnings with PAEBR332.

If you win, I will send you $.50 so I don't feel so bad about taking half.

Posted: 2/15/2006 11:04:00 AM EDT

[#29]

Quoted:
Quoted:
I have to go to the store later. Maybe I'll buy a ticket. Then if I win, I'll split my winnings with PAEBR332.

If you win, I will send you $.50 so I don't feel so bad about taking half.

Sounds fair to me!

Posted: 2/15/2006 11:04:37 AM EDT

[#30]

Well well, I may just have to drive over to Sharon (CT) and buy some tickets!

If I win......HOOKERS AND BLOW!!!

Posted: 2/15/2006 11:05:37 AM EDT

[#31]

Quoted:
Quoted:
I have to go to the store later. Maybe I'll buy a ticket. Then if I win, I'll split my winnings with PAEBR332.

If you win, I will send you $.50 so I don't feel so bad about taking half.

PAEBR332: Did you read my 'guess a number between one and ten' analogy? Can you not see how that amount that I pay you influences whether or not it is a solid bet? In that situation you are going to lose 9 out of 10 times, but lets say that when you do win I will pay you $100 on a $1 bet.

So 9 times out of 10 you will lose your $1, but the one time you win you get $100. Do you REALLY think that is a bad deal to take jsut because you will lose 9 out of 10 times?

Posted: 2/15/2006 11:05:52 AM EDT

[#32]

Stat analysis on tonight's lottery half way down the page

www.stat.umn.edu/~charlie/lottery/

Posted: 2/15/2006 11:06:11 AM EDT

[#33]

Save your money! It's mine!! I've already got the winning tickets.

Posted: 2/15/2006 11:07:25 AM EDT

[#34]

Quoted:
Stat analysis on tonight's lottery half way down the page

www.stat.umn.edu/~charlie/lottery/

THANK YOU!!! According to that analysis, is you discount the possibilty of other winners (which for simplicities sake is waht I have been doing) it IS a breakeven bet!

Posted: 2/15/2006 11:08:28 AM EDT

[#35]

Quoted:
It really is this simple:

Cash payout on $1 wager = $150,000,000

Odds of winning = 150,000,000 : 1

Expected value of $1 wager = $1

If you can't understand that, you shouldn't be teaching stats.

BTW, at what level do you teach stats?

Wanna play some poker?

You assume only one ticket will win. As jackpots grow, the number of players increases and the probabilty of two or more winning tickets for the same draw also increases, as DK-Prof has pointed out. The math is a tad more complex than your example would let on.

Posted: 2/15/2006 11:10:05 AM EDT

[#36]

Quoted:
Quoted:
It really is this simple:

Cash payout on $1 wager = $150,000,000

Odds of winning = 150,000,000 : 1

Expected value of $1 wager = $1

If you can't understand that, you shouldn't be teaching stats.

BTW, at what level do you teach stats?

Wanna play some poker?

You assume only one ticket will win. As jackpots grow, the number of players increases and the probabilty of two or more winning tickets for the same draw also increases, as DK-Prof has pointed out. The math is a tad more complex than your example would let on.

Fair enough, but that is NOT what you were arguing before.

Posted: 2/15/2006 11:21:42 AM EDT

[#37]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Stupid, but I bought one.

Actually, its not stupid. At a $300,000,000 jackpot ($145,700,000 cash value) and odds of winning the jackpot of 1 in 146,107,962, it is essentially a break even proposition. That is why I felt ok about buying $10 worth.

Assuming there is only one winner, and the 145M is after tax.

But yeah, when a pot gets to a certain size, the $1 ticket may be technically "worth" more than $1, and that's the rare occasion when a lottery ticket is actually not a stupid purchase.

How does the amount of the purse affect the chance of winning? Lets say the purse was only say 1,000 dollars. Wouldn't a dollar cost with a $1,000 pay off be considered a good investment?

Are the odds at winning at all influenced by the amount of the purse?

Posted: 2/15/2006 11:23:52 AM EDT

[#38]

Quoted:
I have to go to the store later. Maybe I'll buy a ticket. Then if I win, I'll split my winnings with ~~PAEBR332~~ pattymcn.

*ahem*

Posted: 2/15/2006 11:23:56 AM EDT

[#39]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Stupid, but I bought one.

Actually, its not stupid. At a $300,000,000 jackpot ($145,700,000 cash value) and odds of winning the jackpot of 1 in 146,107,962, it is essentially a break even proposition. That is why I felt ok about buying $10 worth.

Assuming there is only one winner, and the 145M is after tax.

But yeah, when a pot gets to a certain size, the $1 ticket may be technically "worth" more than $1, and that's the rare occasion when a lottery ticket is actually not a stupid purchase.

How does the amount of the purse affect the chance of winning? Lets say the purse was only say 1,000 dollars. Wouldn't a dollar cost with a $1,000 pay off be considered a good investment?

Are the odds at winning at all influenced by the amount of the purse?

Your odds of winnning do not change, but the VALUE of a ticket changes.

The amount you can win, compared to the chances of winning it, determine the value of a ticket.

Make sense?

Posted: 2/15/2006 11:25:52 AM EDT

[#40]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Stat analysis on tonight's lottery half way down the page

www.stat.umn.edu/~charlie/lottery/

THANK YOU!!! According to that analysis, is you discount the possibilty of other winners (which for simplicities sake is waht I have been doing) it IS a breakeven bet!

In other words, you ASSUME there will be only one winner, and work from there. As the calculations in the link show, that is a very poor assumption. His conclusion is AT BEST a record payout MAY be a breakeven proposition. It also ignores the fact that the Federal governments and Colorado will take 39.63% off the top in taxes, so the breakeven point has to move to something like $410,000,000 just to cover the tax bite.

Oh well, I hope you win. If you do I will take you up on your offer in the first post. Well actually, I hope DK-Prof wins. then I can buy my own machine guns.

Posted: 2/15/2006 11:26:10 AM EDT

[#41]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Stupid, but I bought one.

Actually, its not stupid. At a $300,000,000 jackpot ($145,700,000 cash value) and odds of winning the jackpot of 1 in 146,107,962, it is essentially a break even proposition. That is why I felt ok about buying $10 worth.

Assuming there is only one winner, and the 145M is after tax.

But yeah, when a pot gets to a certain size, the $1 ticket may be technically "worth" more than $1, and that's the rare occasion when a lottery ticket is actually not a stupid purchase.

How does the amount of the purse affect the chance of winning? Lets say the purse was only say 1,000 dollars. Wouldn't a dollar cost with a $1,000 pay off be considered a good investment?

Are the odds at winning at all influenced by the amount of the purse?

Your odds of winnning do not change, but the VALUE of a ticket changes.

The amount you can win, compared to the chances of winning it, determine the value of a ticket.

Make sense?

Clear as Mud. I can see a person reason that since the value of the pot is so high, they are more justified in taking the risk of losing their dollar. However that's rather non sensical considering even a pay off of $1000 is a good investment for a buck.

Posted: 2/15/2006 11:26:40 AM EDT

[#42]

Quoted:
Quoted:
I have to go to the store later. Maybe I'll buy a ticket. Then if I win, I'll split my winnings with ~~PAEBR332~~ pattymcn.

*ahem*

I will split my half with you Patty.

Posted: 2/15/2006 11:28:44 AM EDT

[#43]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I have to go to the store later. Maybe I'll buy a ticket. Then if I win, I'll split my winnings with ~~PAEBR332~~ pattymcn.

*ahem*

I will split my half with you Patty.

I'll buy a round of drinks for all of the ARFCOM members who wish to meet at the next ARFCOM shoot I attend! w00t! this is better than buying a ticket!

Posted: 2/15/2006 11:31:35 AM EDT

[#44]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Stupid, but I bought one.

Actually, its not stupid. At a $300,000,000 jackpot ($145,700,000 cash value) and odds of winning the jackpot of 1 in 146,107,962, it is essentially a break even proposition. That is why I felt ok about buying $10 worth.

Assuming there is only one winner, and the 145M is after tax.

But yeah, when a pot gets to a certain size, the $1 ticket may be technically "worth" more than $1, and that's the rare occasion when a lottery ticket is actually not a stupid purchase.

How does the amount of the purse affect the chance of winning? Lets say the purse was only say 1,000 dollars. Wouldn't a dollar cost with a $1,000 pay off be considered a good investment?

Are the odds at winning at all influenced by the amount of the purse?

Your odds of winnning do not change, but the VALUE of a ticket changes.

The amount you can win, compared to the chances of winning it, determine the value of a ticket.

Make sense?

Clear as Mud. I can see a person reason that since the value of the pot is so high, they are more justified in taking the risk of losing their dollar.

That is essentailly correct. At certain point, the value of the pot gets high enough that you can expect a positive returm on your $1. What we are trying to do here is determine the actual value of a lottery ticket. That value is a function of your chances of winning (fixed) compared to the aount you get paid relative to the size fo the jackpot (variable). When a ticket that has a 150,000,000 : 1 chance of winning and the cost is $1 to win $150,000,000 that ticket is worth exactly $1.

Posted: 2/15/2006 11:34:05 AM EDT

[#45]

You've heard of beginners luck. Well Oklahoma just joined the Powerball and and Okie will win, hopefully it will be me.

Posted: 2/15/2006 11:35:52 AM EDT

[#46]

I'm playing.

Posted: 2/15/2006 11:48:44 AM EDT

[#47]

Quoted:
Quoted:

Clear as Mud. I can see a person reason that since the value of the pot is so high, they are more justified in taking the risk of losing their dollar.

That is essentailly correct. At certain point, the value of the pot gets high enough that you can expect a positive returm on your $1. What we are trying to do here is determine the actual value of a lottery ticket. That value is a function of your chances of winning (fixed) compared to the aount you get paid relative to the size fo the jackpot (variable). When a ticket that has a 150,000,000 : 1 chance of winning and the cost is $1 to win $150,000,000 that ticket is worth exactly $1.

I'm going to have to play my blond card and say that just doesn't make sense!

Posted: 2/15/2006 11:59:42 AM EDT

[#48]

1. Some 90 year old guy with no teeth and no relatives will win.

2. He will have enough time to spend $37.54, die intestate, and the state will get it back, leaving you guys drooling at what might have been.

In the history of Powerball, every winner I've seen is a coot who's going to "keep going into work"