Thoughts on the lotto/Euro

[Boaz]

I kind of wonder when you pay your £1/£2 for a lotto or Euro ticket then when nobody wins it, as it then rolls over why you should have to pay again for another ticket. Of course you don't have to buy another ticket but your money has already gone into it so you should still have that part of play.

Whether you have your own numbers or chosen a lucky dip, your numbers should count for any roll over as you have already bought into it.

Another thing that puzzles me is why they have to keep using different ball machines all the time. Why not stick with just the one? At least we might have more of a chance to win by using the same machine right?

That's my thoughts anyway.

What or how do you feel about it?

[Gary L]

If you look at it logically in the way that you pay a £1 to win a possible £10 million. you should pay another £1 to win a new possible £20/£30/£40 million.

plus the extra £1's you have to pay again make your winnings even more than they would have been if nobody paid their £1 again. and the rollover amount would be the same as it was the week before.

If you'd have thinked about it before I told you. you wouldn't be asking

[Rob]

I don't think you have thought this through.

The jackpot might be the headline prize, but you have also been competing for all the other prizes too. Do we cancel all of those lesser prizes? Does winning a lesser prize discount you from re-entry. What about the odds progressively changing week to week as more people enter the rollover draw?

The only real issue is the prize capping they've now applied. It would be better to limit the maximum number of draws that can rollover, and then force a prize to be split to the next prize tier down, or even perhaps scrap rollover entirely and split the prize.

And different machines, ball sets just adds to the randomness factors. That seems only right.