88 Ball Proposal - The Players Plan - Click here.
(This page contains links to all the related pages.)

VIP - Read a bill that was vetoed because it was
considered an "invitation to expand gambling."
Click here - pdf - magnify to 150%.

It's Time To Comment
& Go To Work To Stop Them!

Please, ask everybody you know to come here and comment.
It's obvious the TLC will not spread the word, so it's up to you and me!

Special note: For those of you who may have encountered "server errors"
when you clicked on "submit," please re-try. Some isp's encounter
problems communicating with each other so my server
instructed me with how to prevent this. Hopefully,
none of you will have a problem now.
Many thanks for the alert!

The First Thing We Must Do To Stop The Texas Lottery
From Adopting This Rule Is To Comment To The TLC

Our Objective

Our first task is to tell the TLC if we are for or against the proposed rule and that's all because that is what the comment period is all about. And nothing more. If they have no comments, then they assume you're in favor of what they are proposing to do to Lotto Texas (88 balls and 47.7 million-to-one odds). It is not appropriate to comment about Pick3, Texas 2 Step, Cash 5 or the scratch tickets. That is not the issue. Please understand this. OK?

Since the TLC will only accept written comments and only by fax or by US mail, I have provided an easy way for you to comment. I will see to it that the TLC receives your comments "legally" and on time.

When you "submit" your comment, you will get a copy of what you submitted. Print it and read it. If you made a mistake, then fill out another one but in the subject line at the bottom of the page, add the words "corrected comment." You can also use this comment to fax to the Governor, Lt. Governor, Speaker of the House and your sentator and state representatives.

The TLC established the comment "standards" when they adopted the 6/54 rule change in 2000. It's optional for you to provide your e-mail address, your physical address or phone number as it was not required when they received the 4700 comments from those folks that were in favor of adding the 4 balls.

I've provided a brief explanation of what's being proposed and all you have to do is select the appropriate answer. Everything you select in the grey boxes will be included in your comment. If you don't answer, then the comment will not be included.

Your Comment -

To:
RE:

From:

The proposed rule increases the odds of winning the top prize from 25.8 million-to-one to 47.7 million-to-one. To win the 1st prize, players would pick 5 numbers from a set of 44 balls then they'll pick 1 number from another set of 44 balls to win the jackpot prize (1st prize). There would be 88 balls total. This is a multi-level game commonly known as Powerball. G-Tech projects that the game will roll-over about 20 times before someone wins the top prize. So ...

Are you for OR opposed to changing Lotto Texas to: 88 balls, 47.7 million-to-one odds and a powerball or Texas 2 Step play style game?

 

Check only one
I'm OPPOSED to the odds, play style and 88 balls proposed because it makes winning the top prize harder to win. I play to WIN the jackpot.

I am FOR the proposed rule because I want to see fewer jackpot winners so the jackpots can climb.

Check IF this is what you think and believe.
I believe this style of play is discriminatory towards the consumer - it increases complexity of play and only serves to increase the unclaimed prize fund.

 

 

By "law," comments received from "groups & organizations" must be posted in the Texas Register. When the Commissioners adopted the rule to add 4 balls, the TLC listed over 3700 names of so-called "groups and organizations." The Texas Lottery was able to do this because the commenters simply wrote a company name on their comment. They wrote: Exxon, 7-Eleven, Diamond Shamrock, Racetrac, Krogers, Texaco, Shell, Albertsons, Stop N Go etc.

The 3700 organizations listed were all in favor of adding 4 balls. The TLC had thousands of comments of oppostion too, but they only listed 300 or so for our lawmakers to see.

Therefore, if you'll just give a company name, then your comment will absolutely be listed for our lawmakers to see. I realize this is a bunch of baloney, but it's the LAW.

So, give a company name to insure that your comment counts. (Be sure it's a legitmate company too!) Or, if you play in a group, you could say, "I represent a group of 25 players" (TIP - By law, it must be a group of at least 25)

 

Group/Organization/Company

A great many of you have told me that you oppose having to specify "annual pay" or "cash value option" at the time you purchase your tickets. The proposed rule states that this decision must be made at the time you purchase your lotto ticket and you cannot change your mind.

Are you for OR opposed to chosing CVO or Annual Pay at the time you purchase you lotto ticket and NOT have an option to change your mind?

 
I oppose this because it's a decision that should be made after players have had an opportunity to see what's best for them as individuals.

FOR, players should already be savvy enough to know which is best for them.

 

The proposed rule offers "guaranteed" $3 and $5 prizes. By offering "guaranteed" prizes, there is NO way players are guaranteed to receive their full share of sales - especially the way this proposed rule is written. It states the TLC will withhold a certain percentage of sales to pay the guaranteed prizes. Who knows if the percentage specified in this rule is too much or not enough? They estimated the percentage "they thought" would be needed.

To demonstrate ... since inception of Lotto Texas thru date (2-14-03), 3 of 6 guaranteed prizes totaled $452,482,055 but $488,320,263 was allocated to pay the 3 of 6 prizes. The current Lotto Texas rule specifies a set percentage of sales is to be allocated to pay 3 of 6 winners. In addition to "over allocating" the amount needed to pay these prizes, an additional $86,876,673 was kept in reserve just in case additional funds were needed to cover the "guaranteed prizes."

There are two FAIR solutions - 1) either make all prizes pari-mutuel or 2) take the funds needed right off the top from the players share of sales to pay guaranteed prizes then use the balance to pay the other prizes. It's as simple as that. Do you oppose the rule designating a set percentage of sales to pay the guaranteed prizes?

 

 

I oppose having a set percentage of sales allocated for guaranteed prizes. This could result in short changing the players and/or the state. A risk I oppose.

 

Many of you have expressed opposition to the TLC even offering $3 & $5 prizes. This proposal offers three (3) such prizes and allocates (from the players share of sales) 13.22% to pay JUST the $3 and $5 prizes while only 9.65% is allocated to the mid prizes. The first prize receives 75.20% of the prize pool. (By the way, if you add these percentages, you'll see that they don't even equal 100% of the players share of sales yet the proposed rule says "players shall receive 52% of sales." This is what you call conflicting language!) FYI - The TLC is offering these prizes because they "increase the overall odds of winning."

The presentation to the Commissioners showed that players would receive the following amounts if they match:

1st prize - 5 + 1 - Jackpot (Pari-mutuel) - Odds: 1-in-47,784,352 (Won approx every 20 draws)
2nd prize - 5 + 0 - $10,000 (Pari-mutel) - Odds : 1-in-1,111,264 (Cash5 pays more - lower odds)
3rd prize - 4 + 1 - $2,000 (Pari-mutuel) - Odds : 1-in-245,048 (Cash5 pays $50,000 for 5 numbers)
4th prize - 4 + 0 - $100 (Pari-mutuel) - Odds : 1-in-5699 (Cash5 & 2 Step pays more - lower odds)
5th prize - 3 + 1 - $100 (Pari-mutuel) - Odds : 1-in-6449 (Cash5 pays more with lower odds)
6th prize - 3 + 0 - $5 (Guaranteed) - Odds : 1-in-150 (Cash5 pays more with lower odds)
7th prize - 2 + 1 - $5 (Guaranteed) - Odds : 1-in-523 9 (2 Step pays more with lower odds)
8th prize - 1 + 1 - $3 (Guaranteed) - Odds : 1-in-116 (2 Step pays more with lower odds)

So what do you say about the 4th thru 8th prizes the proposed rule offers?

 

I like the prizes offered
I oppose the prize structure too. The prizes offered are meager sums and an insult to lottery players.

The proposed rule calls for "rounding down" the pari-mutul prizes. The best way I know to explain this is to just give you an example. Let's say there is $106,909 in the prize pool for 5 of 6 winners. And lets say there were 21 winners that are to divide the amount in the prize pool. If you divide 21 into $106,909, you get $5,090.90. Well, by "rounding down," as the rule is written, the 21 players would just receive $5,090.

While you may think this is insignificant, it isn't - because those .90 add up. They never round up. Now they do carry the money over to the next drawing for each prize category. The solution to this would be if they paid the "cents" to the players. So, if you oppose "rounding down" the prize amounts, this is in the rule too and can be addressed.

 

I oppose "rounding down" prize amounts. Each drawing is an independent event and prizes should include the cents we won for the draw.

 

 

You must give your name and your city. The rest is optional.

Your Name:
E-Mail:
Subject:
City:
Address:
Zip
Phone:

 

So you're compelled to say something else to the TLC? OK, go ahead! Say what ever you like. Suggestions - Don't type in all caps. Tell them what you'll do if they adopt this rule. You might also tell them what you think about them not having a highly visible, clear cut explanation of the proposed rule and a comment form such as this on their web site so players can EASILY comment. Finally, ask them NOT to adopt this rule. You have limited space so make good use of it.

 

Other Comments:

After your "send your comment" below, the first task has been completed.
You will see what you submitted as soon as you click "send."
Be sure you print your comment then hit "back" on your browser to
return to this page so you can move on to item 2.

First task is completed.

Now ... Click here (a pdf) to complete our next task.
I provide VITAL contact info and suggestions
for commenting to the various folks. If you make
these calls and IF our leaders don't stop the TLC,
then you'll know who not to vote for come election time!
Print this brochure - 4 pages.

VIP - Read a bill that was vetoed because it was considered an
"invitation to expand gambling." Click here - pdf - magnify to 150%.