The National Lottery - it could be you.

[Admin]

But it probably won't be you.

Here's the odds of winning with 1 line in one draw:

- Number of matching ball(s) -
- Odds of matching -


0: 1 in 2.3

1: 1 in 2.4

2: 1 in 7.5

3: 1 in 56.6

4: 1 in 1032

5: 1 in 54,200

5 + bonus: 1 in 2,330,636

6: 1 in 13,983,816

I think that most people are aware that the odds of winning the jackpot are around 14 million to one against. I'm not sure how many are aware of just how bad the odds are of the other wins.

Even matching 3 balls (a £10 win) only happens once every 57 plays (on average). That means that you have to pay £57 in bets for every £10 in return. ???

I play the lottery (it could be me ) but I only play the one line on a Saturday. There's a concern however, that the "it could be you" advertising slogan is an inappropriate appeal to emotion that encourages those who don't understand the odds of winning to play. That is those in low income groups and deprived areas - those who can least afford to lose the money.

[Eddiesilence]

I can almost hear the conversation in the House of Commons bar:

"Why don't we introduce a new tax on the poor and the gullible who don't understand what 14 million means, in order to pay for medical equipment the country desperately needs (but which we don't want to spend tax money on); and for funding prestige projects like overhauling the Royal Opera House and building the Millenium Dome?"

"Sounds good, what'll we call it?

"How about 'The National Lottery'?"

[Jessie]

I got 5 numbers twice in three months - I must have been sooooo lucky :o :o :o

I still play it regularly - "you have to be in it to win it" is another phrase :-\ :-\ :-\

Eddie -

[Admin]

I got 5 numbers twice in three months - I must have been sooooo lucky* *:o :o :o

How many lines were you putting on though?

Even the most unlikely odds will happen occasionally. That's the rationale behind playing the lottery I guess. But as Eddie has pointed out, it really amounts to a tax which disproportionately gets paid by the poor.

A slightly different story was that I was at a function with several hundred people and there was a raffle. I had one of the tickets. Now, one of my mates went home early and gave me his ticket. When the raffle was drawn the winning ticket was announced and no one came forward. I could only find one ticket but didn't think much of it.

Then they had to draw again to get a winner as no one had come forward - I won. :D

Walking home, I found the other ticket in my pocket and when I looked it was the original winning ticket. ???

I don't know whose the ticket was but I kept the prize. 8)

The odds of having both tickets which were picked as winners is 44,850 to 1 against assuming 300 people were present - and that's possibly an underestimate.

[Jessie]

How many lines were you putting on though?

That is beside the point so don't split hairs :P :P (actually it was about £20 a week but I have since seen some sense ).

In fact, I would never attempt to calculate how much I have spent on the lottery. I would have a heart attack :o :o :o

I must have paid for the whole of the overhauling of the Royal Opera House on my own

[huw-l]

I've just started listening to the Math Grad podcast http://www.mathgrad.com
He's got a couple of shows dealing with these kinds of problems.

http://www.mathgrad.com/Podcasts/mgp...6factorial.mp3
http://www.mathgrad.com/podcasts/mgp...robability.mp3

[Aardvark]

How many lines were you putting on though?

That is beside the point so don't split hairs :P :P (actually it was about £20 a week but I have since seen some sense ).

In fact, I would never attempt to calculate how much I have spent on the lottery. I would have a heart attack :o :o :o

I must have paid for the whole of the overhauling of the Royal Opera House on my own

£20 per week is £1000 per year. Over 10 years that buys a lot of premium bonds that are still worth £1000 and yet every month there are 2 x £1million pay outs.

As you guessed, I stopped buying lottery tickets years ago

[Jocky]

the "it could be you" advertising slogan is an inappropriate appeal to emotion

Pretty much all advertising slogans breach any number of logical fallacies, but then they don't claim to be scientific or logical. My (totally anecdotal) experince suggests that people spend money with their emotions rather than their brains quite a lot of the time anyway, so appeal to emotion is quite a sensible way to proceed when you're writing an advert.

How could you be so mean as to pick on the lottery, John? You're just sore because your emotions fell for it

[tkingdoll]

I'm really militant about the Lottery, I think it annoys people. In fact, I know it does.

The last office I worked at, there was a really great team environment. We were (and still are) friends, and generally had a good time. However, one day, one of my colleagues said the dreaded words...

Lottery syndicate.

I was the only team member to decline. Although I am aware that with 8 or us playing my odds were increased, they weren't increased sufficiently to entice me to give £4 per month to a profit-making organisation.

If McDonalds came along and said "give us a quid and you MIGHT get a Big Mac or you might get nothing", you'd hardly pass over your shiny coin. So why do people stuff their money into the greedy pockets of Camelot.

So, I turned down the syndicate invite and boy did I get a lot of stick.

Team: "But it's for charity!"
Me: "Firstly, I give plenty to charity already, and regularly, where most folks don't. Secondly, I could donate £4 per month to my local homeless shelter and see every single penny of it spend on the cause rather than a tiny slice".

Team: "But someone's got to win!"
Me: "Firstly, someone will only win if they have the winning combination. Secondly, the odds of winning the jackpot are so unlikely as to be near zero. I could put £4 on a six-horse race and have a 1 in 6 chance of winning."

Team: "But the jackpot is so high!"
Me: "Not when shared between 8 people, it's not. My chances of winning may increase 8-fold but the potential prize decreases proportionatly"

And so on. These arguments fell on deaf ears until I hit on a novel way of making them think:

Team: "But someone's got to win! You can't say it won't be me!"
Me: "OK. You're so sure you have a chance? I bet you £5 that you don't win a thing on the next draw."

No-one would take my bet

[Jocky]

The trouble with not entering a workplace syndicate is that if the 14 mil-to-one shot did come off, you end up as the only employee left in the place :)

You are right of course that the lottery is a commercial operation run for profit, which the Govenment have connived to disguise as a charitable cause. I have nothing against the lottery per se (except in so far as it is an example of gambling, which can be a very damaging pastime if you get hooked on it) but I do object to the dishonesty of the "It's all for charity" front.

I know someone whose sister married a Camelot millionaire. It could have been anyone, but it was her >:(

[Admin]

the odds of winning the jackpot are so unlikely as to be near zero.

The probability (a number between 0 and 1) is: 0.000000071511

Skeptics often whinge about 'insignificant digits' as they're so small they're pointless. If this number is rounded off sensibly, it becomes zero.

So in everyday terms the chances of winning the lottery are zero.

[Blue Bubble]

Different question but in the same area (I don't know the distribution of prize money - I've never ever "played" any lottery anywhere):

What is the probability of making a profit from buying lottery tickets ?

[Admin]

As with any form of gambling, you'll always lose. The lottery is purely random so it's not possible to invent a 'system' to give a winning advantage like is possible with Black Jack.

There are strategies, like picking numbers over 31 and highly clustered combinations (that people will avoid), that can decrease the chance of sharing the jackpot should your numbers come up but they don't increase the chance of winning.

I think if there are several consecutive rollovers and a huge pot it would be possible to buy all 14 million combinations and win more than you put on (although that's not guaranteed either as the pot could be shared). I think there's a limit on the number of allowed rollovers now though (I think).

That's it with gambling - it's a mug's game.

[doubting thomas]

I think there's a limit on the number of allowed rollovers now though (I think).

There has always been a rollover limit on the British lottery.

Not sure about the Euro lottery though.

[Mongrel]

I think there's a limit on the number of allowed rollovers now though (I think).

There has always been a rollover limit on the British lottery.

Not sure about the Euro lottery though.

Don't think so, or if there is it's a huge limit. A couple of months ago the Rollover prize got up to £125 mil