The second way is better, of course, but it's not gonna happen, because not enough people would enter, if the prize potential was a maximum of "only" $1 million.

+5

There are problems with your idea. The spirit of what you suggest is noble, but in practice it would never work. IMO

#1 How would you assign winners? If your numbers don't match then how can you win. If your numbers match and you are the only one, then what?

#2 Ticket sales would plummet. Millions and millions buy tickets, including me, when the jackpot rises to an obscene level. I would not buy a single ticket if I could only win $1 million.

Those are my thoughts. Interesting question.

Max +s

I think the second. I think more people would enter to win if the chances were were 1 in 1000 rather than 1 in a million. I think eventually more people would be willing to play and they would actually earn more money. If I played 1000 times and won nothing I will eventually quit playing as I see it an impossiblity to win.

I don't care one way or the other. Thomas Jefferson had it right when he called a government-run lottery "a tax on the willing". Since I don't play (I'm not one of the willing), I don't have a say in how it's run or paid out.