Donate SIGN UP

Answers

1 to 20 of 20rss feed

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by TheWinner. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I stopped playing when it went up to £2. They're going to lose even more money now.
I do not understand how you have more chance of winning when the range of numbers is increased. I must be really thick!
I suspect Camelot thinks we are, tilly.
I now buy Health Lottery tickets. I don't have much luck on there, either. :-)
Camelot are relying on us being as greedy as they are. 14,000,000/1 at present with 49 numbers and, apparently, 45,000,000/1 with 59 numbers! I really do hope players desert them in their tens of thousands.
Surely the point of a lottery is the chance to be wealthy beyond your wildest dreams ? I'd not refuse a £1M win, but I can dream that much wealth. I'd rather the odds remained slim but the jackpot keep on growing. If the good lord wants me to win they know they just have to make my numbers come up, regardless of the odds against it.
I think more people would play if it the cost went back down to £1 per line and if there were more chances of winning slighter lesser prizes.
you have more chance of being run over by a bus than winning the jackpot , this is just another way to bleed people dry ! did we the public have a say in it ?
Cloverjo, they know there sales increase hugely when there is a big rollover to be won. People want a BIG win, not a measly half a million.
Yes Dee Sa, we have a say.

If you don't like it, don't pay.
Camelot needs to go back to school, if they think that by increasing the number of balls gives people a better chance of winning !

What this will do, is to increase Camelots profits, in the same way that doubling the price of entry, from £1 to £2 did recently. Virgin should have been awarded the contract, not Camelot, as they pledged to do it without profit.
^well well. couldn't agree more.
I think the point Camelot are making is that while the chance of getting the big prize has shrunk, they have introduced a new two-ball prize -- if winning a free entry to the next game counts as a prize, anyway.

I only played the lottery once, to mark my 15th birthday -- and then again a few years later when someone bought me a ticket as a birthday present. But the material difference between odds of 1 in 14 million and 1 in 45 million is surprisingly light in some sense. You are now only about three times less likely to gain what was an already highly unlikely prize.
Strange the Canadian Company (Pension Fund) which own the lottery has increased the cost and now reduces the chances of winning 'The Big One' and yet the national lottery in Canada still only uses 49 numbers!
Plus, as a bye the bye, does Government still receive the same percentage of tax on the Lottery as it did when run by British firms?
Tizzi24, 'I stopped playing when it went up to £2.'

When they started the mid-week draw, I dropped a set of no.s Birthdays as you do but when they put it up to £2... I just thought balls! to it.
They should cap the jackpot prize and draw maybe 50 tickets of one million pounds each when it reaches 50 million. That would help more people I think.
I still play via the syndicate - but we halved the number of rows.

I changed to Thunderball for my own ticket.

Both of these are only for the Saturday draws.

I've never won anything on the Health Lottery.

I've never done the Postcode Lottery - I don't want to commit to a set number of draws.

I have entered the Free Postcode Lotter - haven't won it yet - but check every day to get my 1p bonus - sitting at £2.85!!!!!!!!

1 to 20 of 20rss feed

Do you know the answer?

National Lottery Changes

Answer Question >>