So who's giving up the lotto in October?
Discussion
Slaav said:
crankedup said:
Packed in lotto when Branson lost out on the contract. Told me all I needed to know about Comealot and Government running the 'game'.
Really? If Branson had spread his filthy odour over the lottery you would have played it??? Or are you going to quote the 'not for profit' line he was trotting out ad infinitum?Have you ever read up on him? And not just the likes of Tom Bower's hatchet job
Not for profit not for profit not for profit, sorry can't keep that up ad infinitum
TwigtheWonderkid said:
EskimoArapaho said:
Those who don't do the lottery because of the odds, and/or claim "it's an idiot tax" haven't really thought it through.
Exactly. For £2 I get to while away hours on the train or in the bath planning how to spend my millions. The wife and I discuss the house we'll buy, the cars, the holiday home, etc.Best value going I reckon. I can't think of anything else that gives me as much entertainment for such a small outlay.
crankedup said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
EskimoArapaho said:
Those who don't do the lottery because of the odds, and/or claim "it's an idiot tax" haven't really thought it through.
Exactly. For £2 I get to while away hours on the train or in the bath planning how to spend my millions. The wife and I discuss the house we'll buy, the cars, the holiday home, etc.Best value going I reckon. I can't think of anything else that gives me as much entertainment for such a small outlay.
eccles said:
Cheese Mechanic said:
JagLover said:
Sigh
Perhaps it needs repeating the majority of people playing know they have an extremely tiny chance of winning, they are buying a dream not making a rational gamble. What else can you buy for £2 that would match that?
I think thats bPerhaps it needs repeating the majority of people playing know they have an extremely tiny chance of winning, they are buying a dream not making a rational gamble. What else can you buy for £2 that would match that?
ks. I go entirely by the people who clog the tills on lottery days buying such false hopes, before we even mention scratch cards. These people are plainly, often, amongst those who can least afford such, yet they live on false hopes.
Its sad.
There are folk who buy a ducky lip or two who not only know the odds of a jackpot win, but are capable of calculating the probability from first principles. It's not always a tax on the stupid, not least given that only stupid people would forget that the jackpot is only one of the prizes available.
We'll be continuing with our trivial tipple on the Lotto from October for the same reason as always - it's not a "strategy", just a harmless bit of fun which we enjoy.
turbobloke said:
eccles said:
Cheese Mechanic said:
JagLover said:
Sigh
Perhaps it needs repeating the majority of people playing know they have an extremely tiny chance of winning, they are buying a dream not making a rational gamble. What else can you buy for £2 that would match that?
I think thats bPerhaps it needs repeating the majority of people playing know they have an extremely tiny chance of winning, they are buying a dream not making a rational gamble. What else can you buy for £2 that would match that?
ks. I go entirely by the people who clog the tills on lottery days buying such false hopes, before we even mention scratch cards. These people are plainly, often, amongst those who can least afford such, yet they live on false hopes.
Its sad.
There are folk who buy a ducky lip or two who not only know the odds of a jackpot win, but are capable of calculating the probability from first principles. It's not always a tax on the stupid, not least given that only stupid people would forget that the jackpot is only one of the prizes available.
We'll be continuing with our trivial tipple on the Lotto from October for the same reason as always - it's not a "strategy", just a harmless bit of fun which we enjoy.
Richyboy said:
WTF I never opted in albeit I sometimes dream of catching a winning ticket floating around lol. Who was it that said hope is the evil of evils because it prolongs the torments of man.
Easily sorted, give up hope and retain enjoyment if you enjoy it of course.If not, then there's that "freedom of choice" thing.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
dieselgrunt said:
Those who do it for fun, why not put the £2 in a jar and have the same dreams. because it's never going to be a reality.
Calculating probability not your strong point then?If the chances are 14 million to one, with one draw a week, and buying 1 ticket a week, you'd have to wait 14 million weeks to be guaranteed a win. Or 269,230 years. "Never", for all practical purposes.
Two draws a week, five tickets per draw and your win is guaranteed in 26,923 years.
Greg66 said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
dieselgrunt said:
Those who do it for fun, why not put the £2 in a jar and have the same dreams. because it's never going to be a reality.
Calculating probability not your strong point then?If the chances are 14 million to one, with one draw a week, and buying 1 ticket a week, you'd have to wait 14 million weeks to be guaranteed a win. Or 269,230 years. "Never", for all practical purposes.
Two draws a week, five tickets per draw and your win is guaranteed in 26,923 years.
That's what I call a rebuttal! Are you a maths lecturer by any chance, Greg66?
Premium Bonds is not just a better gamble, if you can even call it a gamble: you still get your 'will I win a biggie?' feeling and the associated improbable dream time, but your money is never entirely lost, in fact, it's there to retrieve at any time you wish. No brainer.
Greg66 said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
dieselgrunt said:
Those who do it for fun, why not put the £2 in a jar and have the same dreams. because it's never going to be a reality.
Calculating probability not your strong point then?If the chances are 14 million to one, with one draw a week, and buying 1 ticket a week, you'd have to wait 14 million weeks to be guaranteed a win. Or 269,230 years. "Never", for all practical purposes.
You could use the same numbers (or take a lucky dip) for 15 million weeks and not win the jackpot, equally somebody could buy their first ticket and scoop the top prize in one go.Gargamel said:
Funny that no one mentions the charity angle of the lottery and the community projects it pays for.
I consider it a donation. with a slim chance of a return. I did win a £1000 once on the main lottery, which kept me interested.
Same here, it goes towards a lot of good causes so I consider to be doing some good along with having an incredibly small chance of winning some decent cash!I consider it a donation. with a slim chance of a return. I did win a £1000 once on the main lottery, which kept me interested.
EskimoArapaho said:
There are 3900+ British people who would disagree. Only the statistically OCD think that this is about the actual odds.
Yes, well, as the marketing strapline goes, "It could be me" (or is it "you"?). But the chanceas are overwhelmingly that it won't be.
Who would have thought that marketing would trump mathematics though?
Greg66 said:
EskimoArapaho said:
There are 3900+ British people who would disagree. Only the statistically OCD think that this is about the actual odds.
Yes, well, as the marketing strapline goes, "It could be me" (or is it "you"?). But the chanceas are overwhelmingly that it won't be.
Who would have thought that marketing would trump mathematics though?
Another aspect of the maths is that, on any Lotto draw where there's no rollover, it's 100% certain that at least one ticket wins the jackpot. And many more tickets win decent amounts.
Supernova190188 said:
Gargamel said:
Funny that no one mentions the charity angle of the lottery and the community projects it pays for.
I consider it a donation. with a slim chance of a return. I did win a £1000 once on the main lottery, which kept me interested.
Same here, it goes towards a lot of good causes so I consider to be doing some good along with having an incredibly small chance of winning some decent cash!I consider it a donation. with a slim chance of a return. I did win a £1000 once on the main lottery, which kept me interested.
turbobloke said:
As it happens, the way probability works means that under the present arrangement a Lotto jackpot win isn't guaranteed in 14 million weeks or 7 million either You could use the same numbers (or take a lucky dip) for 15 million weeks and not win the jackpot, equally somebody could buy their first ticket and scoop the top prize in one go.
I think you mean "the way the game works". Probability assumes (eg) a perfect dice. We all know from experience that you can roll two sixes in a row, rather than each of the six faces, once each, in six rolls. Over time though each face will appear an equal number of times. You could use the same numbers (or take a lucky dip) for 15 million weeks and not win the jackpot, equally somebody could buy their first ticket and scoop the top prize in one go.And so, yes, the same numbers could come up three weeks in a row in the lottery. But over repeated sets of 14m runnings, each set of six number should appear an equal number of times. But now we are approaching a million plus years of National Lottery Saturday night draws...
And yes, an individual could win this week, next week, the week after, and the week after that. Could.
turbobloke said:
The marketing isn't wrong though (it really could be anyone) and given that the probability of winning the jackpot on any one draw is widely publicised and presumably well-known, marketing hardly triumphs over maths. Fun and enjoyment triumphs over putting two quid in a jar which is after all rather boring.
Another aspect of the maths is that, on any Lotto draw where there's no rollover, it's 100% certain that at least one ticket wins the jackpot. And many more tickets win decent amounts.
Of course it's not wrong: it *could* be you. But like all good marketing, it's a rather positively slanted message. "It could be you but let's face it the overwhelming probability is that it won't be. This week or any other" is not going to get through the focus group meetings, let alone sell tickets. Another aspect of the maths is that, on any Lotto draw where there's no rollover, it's 100% certain that at least one ticket wins the jackpot. And many more tickets win decent amounts.
I wouldn't bank on the probabilities being well known or for that matter well understood. Fun and enjoyment? Well, yes, I suppose so. But sometimes I see people buying tickets and it seems pretty damned obvious to me that they should be marshalling what are plainly limited financial resources better than what really amounts to chucking money into a wishing well.
Greg66 said:
turbobloke said:
As it happens, the way probability works means that under the present arrangement a Lotto jackpot win isn't guaranteed in 14 million weeks or 7 million either You could use the same numbers (or take a lucky dip) for 15 million weeks and not win the jackpot, equally somebody could buy their first ticket and scoop the top prize in one go.
I think you mean "the way the game works". Probability assumes (eg) a perfect dice. We all know from experience that you can roll two sixes in a row, rather than each of the six faces, once each, in six rolls. Over time though each face will appear an equal number of times. You could use the same numbers (or take a lucky dip) for 15 million weeks and not win the jackpot, equally somebody could buy their first ticket and scoop the top prize in one go.In the case of the lottery, after a certain number of games there will be repetitions of previous winning lines and some combinations not yet drawn will remain losers. The Lotto game keeps changing so such long-term effects won't be seen. A jackpot win would only be guaranteed (your choice of word!) in approx 14 million years if, each time one of the many millions of combinations was drawn, that combination was excluded from future wins and only remaining combos were possible. The eventual repetition of winning lines means that as above some combinations may not appear even after 15 million weeks whereas a small number of lines may have appeared twice.
Greg66 said:
And so, yes, the same numbers could come up three weeks in a row in the lottery. But over repeated sets of 14m runnings, each set of six number should appear an equal number of times.
Not really, some may not appear at all and some twice at >10m games of the same type (though it's possible at any time).Greg66 said:
And yes, an individual could win this week, next week, the week after, and the week after that. Could.
Money is money and a pony is £25, it's fun to some people if they win small amounts of petty cash infrequently, amounts that are hardly noticeable in the wider picture - this enjoyment factor is there for some and not for others. Each to their owm as they say! Those who enjoy participating in the draws for fun can be perfectly aware of the odds, they may also be more than content for some of their money to go to good causes and some to Camelot. Personally I was delighted when Branson didn't get the Lotto contract; and if Camelot themselves are making a fortune, then good for them When the Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan bought Camelot for just below £400m at the very least the fund managers showed more nous than the BBC pension fund with its 'ideological loser' investments in the Green Blob.
Greg66 said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
dieselgrunt said:
Those who do it for fun, why not put the £2 in a jar and have the same dreams. because it's never going to be a reality.
Calculating probability not your strong point then?If the chances are 14 million to one, with one draw a week, and buying 1 ticket a week, you'd have to wait 14 million weeks to be guaranteed a win. Or 269,230 years. "Never", for all practical purposes.
Two draws a week, five tickets per draw and your win is guaranteed in 26,923 years.
And, as I've already explained, for £2 I get hours of pleasure spending my possible (but highly unlikely) winnings. Now I fully accept that you may not get pleasure from that even if you did play, but tell me, out of interest, what do you spend £2 on that gives you hours of pleasure?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff