Lottery 23rd March

tony6403

Didn't win anything.
But having checked the payout, 3 numbers would have been better than 5.

https://www.national-lottery.co.uk/results/lotto/draw-history/prize-breakdown/2113
Presumably a "0" missing ?

HappyMJ

tony6403 wrote: »

Didn't win anything.
But having checked the payout, 3 numbers would have been better than 5.

https://www.national-lottery.co.uk/results/lotto/draw-history/prize-breakdown/2113
Presumably a "0" missing ?

No...just a very common set of numbers drawn.

5 of the 6 numbers drawn are multiples of 7.

Do not ever try and pick patterns as someone else has already done it and you'll share any prize. The aim is not to share with anyone else.

tony6403

Picking 3 numbers apparently = £25.
Picking 5 = £15.
Have you looked at the link ?

HappyMJ

tony6403 wrote: »

Picking 3 numbers apparently = £25.
Picking 5 = £15.
Have you looked at the link ?

Yes lots of people would have picked the very common numbers 7, 14, 21, 28, 35 and 42 as every number is a multiple of 7. Thousands matched 5 of those 6 numbers but not many just picked 3 of those 6 numbers so the people matching 3 numbers get more of the prize pot in their division.

It's a parimutuel lottery the pot is divided by the ticket holders in each category and more people picked 5 correct numbers than the people that picked 3 correct numbers.

If it was a Thunderball draw which is a fixed odds lottery then they would have paid out much more as everyone gets a fixed prize of £5,000 for matching 5 numbers no matter how many people had winning tickets. The National Lottery doesn't work like that.

bod1467

Not quite correct ... 3 numbers is a fixed value prize of £25 (used to be £10). All the other prize values then follow what you said once the cost of the 3 numbers winners is deducted.

(Jackpot prize value is somewhat ring-fenced by the value of previous rollover prize values).

pappa_golf

The Lottery is a tax on gullibility, and some punters have just found out


After government "scrutiny", Camelot sold out to a Canadian teachers pension fund in 2014 for £389 million


the UK lottery , with profits going ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

JReacher1

Some idiot phoned the police as he only won £15. The worlds gone mad!

bod1467

This isn't the first time this has happened. In January 1995 there were 133 jackpot winners, all sharing about £16.3m so getting about £123k each. Not exactly small beer, but in some weeks the 5-and-bonus prize is that amount.

antrobus

bod1467 wrote: »

This isn't the first time this has happened. In January 1995 there were 133 jackpot winners, all sharing about £16.3m so getting about £123k each. Not exactly small beer, but in some weeks the 5-and-bonus prize is that amount.

You sometimes come across 'clever' people who say that they pick the numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 every week on the grounds that, (a) they have just as much chance of coming up as any other sequence of numbers, and (b) no one else will have thought of that.

Wrong! About 10,000 other 'clever' people have the same idea every week, so if those numbers ever do come up, the jackpot winners will be very disappointed by their £250 or so windfall.

That's the problem with lotteries. The selection of the winning numbers might be random, but the selection of numbers by contestants isn't.

shaun_from_Africa

bod1467 wrote: »

This isn't the first time this has happened. In January 1995 there were 133 jackpot winners, all sharing about £16.3m so getting about £123k each. Not exactly small beer, but in some weeks the 5-and-bonus prize is that amount.

But in that particular draw, none of the lower tier winners received more than any of the tiers above them so it's not really the same as last Wednesday's result

bod1467

I was more alluding to the happening that the prize fund was significantly lower than people expected.