Preference Points vs Bonus Points

[Carl 9.3x62]

For those of you who have applied in multiple states, do you prefer bonus points, where the more points you have the more times you are entered into the random draw, or a true preference point system, where those with the most points get drawn first? What are your pros and cons of each system?

I have only ever applied in WY so have never given it much thought, but with the potential to change from a preference point system to a bonus point system (what the task force is discussing) has got me thinking a bit. For one thing, and totally being selfish, I don't feel as comfortable sitting on a bunch of sheep points just waiting for the "perfect" time to apply. But maybe that's a good thing, for various reasons. On the other hand, having just killed a moose, i like the idea of after five years being back in the game and having a potential better chance of drawing another tag than I would if I started out with 0 preference points.

 

[ccc23454]

As it relates to a good tag(not a general) i strongly prefer bonus system.
Bonus- everyone has a chance at best tag but seniority has best odds
Preference- great if your in the front of line but tags become OIL due to point creep.

 

[Carnage2011]

Both have pros and cons. I’m bonus point systems you have a chance every year but can’t ever plan on drawing. In preference point systems there are units that you’ll never draw because you are too far behind to catch up. However, you can plan on drawing certain units fairly often.

 

[Stocker]

There’s pros and cons to both. For example Nebraska has a bonus system for elk, preference for antelope. I can plan on drawing a preference point tag on x year. I have 7 bonus elk points now which is max, I know 3 people who have drawn with 0. There’s a decent chance with the numbers of people applying I may not draw a Nebraska elk tag for another 15 years while hundreds of others draw with 0 points.

So is it more frustrating to you sitting out for a guaranteed hunt, or having a chance to draw quick but watching others draw below you.

I know my answer is clear as mud but they are their own deals that are good and bad. IMO stay with what they started with or go to random.

I apply in Wyoming, Idaho, and New Mexico as well. Use Wyoming as my guarantees on certain years and hope to get lucky elsewhere.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

Preference for systems that require more than 5 years to draw

1. Straight lottery
2. Weighted hybrid system (see CO MSG) basically 3 years of preference then switch to bonus, folks have to have skin in the game
3. bonus
4. preference

I think preference systems are great if it's 1-4 years of applying, after that they get stupid.

 

[Deleted member 16014]

There was a good breakdown of the different systems and their hypothetical effect on odds under various conditions a couple of WY task force meetings ago.

If they’re going to get rid of the 25% full random pool under a move to a weighted bonus, which I expect they would, it’s about a wash to me between the two.

Moving to weighted bonus with no fully random pool is closer to shuffling cards than substantive change once the draws have enough replications to exhibit a pattern.

While I’d love to go full random, I thought 50/50 preference/random proposed quite a while back was an OK compromise.

 

[WapitiBob]

As long as the state has a split system where a % goes to max points, people will be guaranteed a tag if they live long enough. Doesn't matter if they're bonus points or preference points. In those states, the benefit to bonus points is that you have a weighted advantage in the random side.

The proposed Wyoming change, to a random bonus structure for the big 5, is a kick to the nads for high point holders, and a gift from God for the mid point guys.

 

[JM77]

For those of you who have applied in multiple states, do you prefer bonus points, where the more points you have the more times you are entered into the random draw, or a true preference point system, where those with the most points get drawn first? What are your pros and cons of each system?

I have only ever applied in WY so have never given it much thought, but with the potential to change from a preference point system to a bonus point system (what the task force is discussing) has got me thinking a bit. For one thing, and totally being selfish, I don't feel as comfortable sitting on a bunch of sheep points just waiting for the "perfect" time to apply. But maybe that's a good thing, for various reasons. On the other hand, having just killed a moose, i like the idea of after five years being back in the game and having a potential better chance of drawing another tag than I would if I started out with 0 preference points.

If you are in the five year wait when the lifetime status becomes law, you will be "life-timed" out, the same as if you just drew the tag. At least that is what got voted in at the Task Force.

 

[VikingsGuy]

It's kind of like asking which is your favorite multi-level marketing scheme - Amway, HerbaLife or Avon? Sure we may each have one in mind that sucks a little less than the rest, but unless you got in at the top it is a losing game (one that I am sadly playing with no actual hope of getting ahead of point creep in any units I care about).

 

[RobertD]

It's kind of like asking which is your favorite multi-level marketing scheme - Amway, HerbaLife or Avon? Sure we may each have one in mind that sucks a little less than the rest, but unless you got in at the top it is a losing game (one that I am sadly playing with no actual hope of getting ahead of point creep in any units I care about).

That part

At this point I think all non-random draws are varying degrees of trash, except preference in the case of <5 year wait type tags that wllm described above. Other than those cases I prefer a bonus point system, but would rather everything just be random.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

unless you got in at the top it is a losing game

My issue is that in a number of systems it's actually not a game. For example CO bear, it's actually impossible to draw with the current system. Only the group that put in the first 2 years will draw in their lifetimes.

1500ish applicants for 1 tag in a preference point system is f-ing ridiculous.

 

[2rocky]

In a high demand hunt,

Seems like with PP your odds go from under 1% to 75/100% in the space of 1 year a long ways down the line and getting longer.

At least Bonus system (where points are Squared) Everyone is under 10% for the whole spread of points. Early points under 1% and high points closer to 10% .... Both have low probabilities for Most of the Applicants. I think more attention should be paid to subsequent choice options before you declare one better than the other. if there are high likelihood options so you can have experience hunting the species before you draw the tag of a lifetime then that seem ideal.

Remember fair isn't always EQUAL...

 

[Deleted member 18333]

The proposed Wyoming change, to a random bonus structure for the big 5, is a kick to the nads for high point holders, and a gift from God for the mid point guys.

With 22 sheep PP's and 7 moose PP's I can clearly see both sides of this coin.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

IMHO the agencies or group that is proposing a system should state the goal of the system, then math out how the system will work, and then evaluate if it achieves the goal.

That seems pretty basic. It clearly was never done. Takes about 2 seconds with a spreadsheet to see that preference points will blow up in high pressure units.

 

[Carl 9.3x62]

If you are in the five year wait when the lifetime status becomes law, you will be "life-timed" out, the same as if you just drew the tag. At least that is what got voted in at the Task Force.

I keep forgetting about the OIL change. Nevermind. I hate the change even more, haha. Just kidding. I suppose a change to bonus points will be good news for youth hunters and folks just getting into the game.

 

[Carl 9.3x62]

While I’d love to go full random, I thought 50/50 preference/random proposed quite a while back was an OK compromise.

I like this idea.

 

[FI460]

When you're on the low end of points holders I think a bonus point system feels better, even with astronomical odds.

 

[RobertD]

IMHO the agencies or group that is proposing a system should state the goal of the system, then math out how the system will work, and then evaluate if it achieves the goal.

That seems pretty basic. It clearly was never done. Takes about 2 seconds with a spreadsheet to see that preference points will blow up in high pressure units.

Yep, and with no stated goal it's easy for de facto goals to state themselves, i.e. the goal(s) become 1) make money and 2) justify your own existence

So that they're no longer about finding a good way to distribute tags, they're about finding a good way to convince people to keep putting increasing amounts of money towards tags that they are increasingly less likely to actually obtain

You brought up a good point with that one for sure

 

[Deleted member 28227]

When you're on the low end of points holders I think a bonus point system feels better, even with astronomical odds.

Meh...

The people that complain the most are those that get 'stuck' too far into the system to feel like they can bail but too far from the finish line to ever conceivably draw.

Say there are 10 tags a year given out, and you are 35.

20pts - 70 people
19pts - 100 people
18pts - 150 people
17pts - 200 people
16pts - (you're at this level)

So there are 52 years of people ahead of you before your point level has a chance. So you're are 68 points before you draw. Obviously people will die off/drop out etc, but I think realistically in that system your looking at 30 years at best case attrition. So you might draw by 65 at 46 points, maybe. If there are point holders above you that are younger or in better health your probably hosed.

This is exactly the point creep scenario that we are seeing, I guarantee that in my lifetime if CO doesn't make changes I will see people drawing tags with 40 -50 points. You can look at the draw stats, there are units that have gone up ~1pt every year since the systems were created.

You can easily model it. These systems should never have been used for those kinds of units.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

So that they're no longer about finding a good way to distribute tags, they're about finding a good way to convince people to keep putting increasing amounts of money towards tags that they are increasingly less likely to actually obtain

I'm ok with long odds, but I think the odds of some pref systems are almost zero. If you design a shitty system people are going to flip the table over eventually, and a bunch of people are going to get screwed... ie people in the WY system with max points.

I have no dog in the WY fight, I just hope you residents advocate for a sustainable system so you don't get screwed (screwed again) down the road.