In the early days they asked a maths professor type whether the odds made it worth playing. Of course not came the answer…..but he continued….for a pound a week, where a chunk of the money goes to good causes and the reward if you do is so beyond the stake – he thought it wasn’t worth not playing!

The trouble is with the folks that can’t realise that a tenner a week becomes significant and a 10x chance of winning is still basically no chance.

That said a work colleague’s daughter won a 5 + bonus on one of the first weeks of the lottery when it started in 1990-something and picked up something like 75 grand…..at the age of 16. And I do know a friend of a friend that has won it outright (ok, a share of the jackpot but still likely to be 6 figure) so there are people that do win.

If it’s me this week, I’ll be sure to post it here first.

Go on then explain exactly how a syndicate would do this as it’s never actually happened.

I asked how it would have been done in the UK turns out it’s massively complicated takes a years of planning which is why it’s never happened in the UK.

Your question made no mention of the UK, you said “it’s never actually happened”. It has happened, which is why I’m right and you’re wrong.

Ah! I see you didn’t realise this thread was about the UK lottery. Now I see your confusion.

I’m glad you pointed that out as I read back and didn’t. See where he said anything the About UK either.

National Lottery. 😉

A national lottery.

My post was about lotteries in general, hence “The details of lotteries vary between regions,”, so it was obviously not limited just to the UK National lottery. In this case, I’m right and you’re wrong. Just get used to it.

I asked how it would have been done in the UK turns out it’s massively complicated takes a years of planning which is why it’s never happened in the UK.

Actually, it has happened in the UK before. Quite early on IIRC. Was on a decent rollover rather than the regular £2m jobbie. They didn’t buy all the combinations, they omitted some combinations of numbers to cut down the number of tickets required (don’t know exact details, but presumably didn’t do 1/2/3/4/5/6 etc.).

They also won the lottery. Unfortunately, so did something like another 60 people so they shared a relatively small cut of the pot and lost money on it.

There was talk of a syndicate doing it in the UK on the first big roll over but turned out it was the Sun and other papers talking shite.

As any combination of numbers is equally likely to win, I used what
I thought was an unlikely set of numbers, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, and 49 I think. My theory was that in the unlikely event of winning, I wouldn’t have to share. Probably hundreds of others doing exactly the same.

I thought was an unlikely set of numbers, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, and 49 I think. My theory was that in the unlikely event of winning, I wouldn’t have to share. Probably hundreds of others doing exactly the same.

10,000 people play 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 every week.
Source (quite an old source though)