Is a £195 million lottery jackpot obscene?

I AGREE that the £195 million lottery win is obscene (Letters). If the way prizes are allocated had been changed, then

195 millionaires could have been created instead. Yes, some lottery players might stop playing if the monster prizes are stopped, but a great many others would return if they felt they had more of a chance of being a winner.

A. J. SMITH, Exeter. THERE are calls for the lottery jackpot to be capped because a large prize, such as the recent £195 million, is too much for one person. I disagree. Many syndicates buy tickets in the hope that if they win, all of them can retire immediately. A syndicate of 20 people winning £195 million would each receive £9.75 million. If they were to spread that around their friends and family, it would certainly give them a comfortable lifestyle, but not excessively so.

I play the lottery hoping that if I won the jackpot, I could help others, which would give me great pleasure. My half-share of a ticket would have given me £97.5 million. I would give £1 million to each of the 30 people on my Christmas list. I would then donate most of the rest to local hospices, refuges, support for young people leaving care with next to nothing and the Mail Force Ukraine Refugee Appeal. Large jackpots are only too much if the winners are plain greedy and selfish. The reality is that most do spread their luck to others. Leave the jackpot as it is. Let us keep our dreams of winning big and giving big.

ERIC CRAGGS, Shildon, Co. Durham. SURELY £195 million for one Lottery winner is ridiculous. When the rules are changed so every draw creates lots of individual millionaires, I will start buying tickets again. Yes, I’d like to win, but I’m not greedy.