WY Game and Fish wants your thoughts on the preference point system (Moose and Sheep)

[DFS]

Still not answering the question.

Buzz you have been luckier than most I have as well. People would go to their graves without drawing a tag with the increased demand and a random draw.

 

[BuzzH]

Buzz you have been luckier than most I have as well. People would go to their graves without drawing a tag with the increased demand and a random draw.

Totally disagree, I'm not lucky. I'm persistent and do my homework. I understand math, statistics, and the various draw systems. I don't chase glory tags and then complain I can't draw them.

 

[DFS]

Totally disagree, I'm not lucky. I'm persistent and do my homework. I understand math, statistics, and the various draw systems. I don't chase glory tags and then complain I can't draw them.

To be clear I’m not complaining. I do find this entertaining though.

 

[VikingsGuy]

So how do you transition out of a point system back to a random draw? Abruptly?

How about we freeze points. Go "true" random, but folks get the number of "balls in the drawing" equal to their current preference points. After a successful draw you go back to 1. That would still be a big positive for long time holders, but not the "all or nothing" of I have 9 and you have 8 so I win. And there are so many others at 9 you will never win. In fact it would be much better for the many long time but not the longest time point holders.

 

[rogerthat]

How about we freeze points. Go "true" random, but folks get the number of "balls in the drawing" equal to their current preference points. After a successful draw you go back to 1. That would still be a big positive for long time holders, but not the "all or nothing" of I have 9 and you have 8 so I win. And there are so many others at 9 you will never win. In fact it would be much better for the many long time but not the longest time point holders.

No issue with this proposal from me.

 

[BuzzH]

How about we freeze points. Go "true" random, but folks get the number of "balls in the drawing" equal to their current preference points. After a successful draw you go back to 1. That would still be a big positive for long time holders, but not the "all or nothing" of I have 9 and you have 8 so I win. And there are so many others at 9 you will never win. In fact it would be much better for the many long time but not the longest time point holders.

Won't work for long time applicants...again, math and the number of applicants increasing, actually decreases odds for long time applicants.

 

[rogerthat]

Totally disagree, I'm not lucky. I'm persistent and do my homework. I understand math, statistics, and the various draw systems. I don't chase glory tags and then complain I can't draw them.

I as well Buzz. I do numbers for a living. However your dismissing a little thing called luck. It’s why 2 people can do the exact same things and have vastly different luck especially when it comes to raffles. For example, the moose tag you drew in the random this year. 1 out of 130. You were the one this year. But there are also the guy in that draw that are your polar opposite. They will never draw they are that 1 in 130 too. They just have really bad luck. They can enter 130 or more draws with those same odds. They should draw right? But they dont

 

[VikingsGuy]

Won't work for long time applicants...again, math and the number of applicants increasing, actually decreases odds for long time applicants.

Some call that compromise. There are 335 million Americans, maybe the 5,000 high point holders have to get alone with the rest of us if we actually believe this is a shared resource/heritage.

 

[BuzzH]

I am all ears. That’s why I was trying to spur this thread along

Sure, but ground rules first.

If I'm hearing people correctly they want the following:

1. Allow all tags to be open for everyone entering the draw to have at least an opportunity at 100% of the tags.
2. We want to give long term applicants a better chance each year they apply, surpassing the number of new applicants each year (which actually decreases odds for long time applicants).
3. No portion of the tags in a guaranteed pool.

That said, one of my best friends and I have this discussion all the time, how to maintain a chance for all, but rewarding long term applicants. This was mostly his idea, but its a good one.

Bonus point system that meets 1-3:

Years 0-9 one bonus point per application.
Years 10-19 Bonus points squared
Years 20-29 Bonus points cubed
Years 30-39 Bonus points to the 4th power
Years 40-49 Bonus points to the 5th power
Years 50-59 Bonus points to the 6th power
Years 60-69 Bonus points to the 7th power
Years 70-79 Bonus points to the 8th power
Years 80+ You're dead or already drew.

Everyone can draw any tag any year, one pool. Rewards long time applicants even if the number of applicants continues to increase.

 

[rogerthat]

Sure, but ground rules first.

If I'm hearing people correctly they want the following:

1. Allow all tags to be open for everyone entering the draw to have at least an opportunity at 100% of the tags.
2. We want to give long term applicants a better chance each year they apply, surpassing the number of new applicants each year (which actually decreases odds for long time applicants).
3. No portion of the tags in a guaranteed pool.

That said, one of my best friends and I have this discussion all the time, how to maintain a chance for all, but rewarding long term applicants. This was mostly his idea, but its a good one.

Bonus point system that meets 1-3:

Years 0-9 one bonus point per application.
Years 10-19 Bonus points squared
Years 20-29 Bonus points cubed
Years 30-39 Bonus points to the 4th power
Years 40-49 Bonus points to the 5th power
Years 50-59 Bonus points to the 6th power
Years 60-69 Bonus points to the 7th power
Years 70-79 Bonus points to the 8th power
Years 80+ You're dead or already drew.

Everyone can draw any tag any year, one pool. Rewards long time applicants even if the number of applicants continues to increase.

That checks all my boxes. I suspect the one bitch will be benefiting the old gray haired bastards . If only everyone would just use just for men or shave their heads

 

[BuzzH]

I as well Buzz. I do numbers for a living. However your dismissing a little thing called luck. It’s why 2 people can do the exact same things and have vastly different luck especially when it comes to raffles. For example, the moose tag you drew in the random this year. 1 out of 130. You were the one this year. But there are also the guy in that draw that are your polar opposite. They will never draw they are that 1 in 130 too. They just have really bad luck. They can enter 130 or more draws with those same odds. They should draw right? But they dont

There are lots of folks, because they fail to understand statistics, as well as the drawing procedures of some states, that are eliminated the second they submit their applications.

Yet, they continue to whine because they cant draw. Happens in MT, WY, CO, AZ, UT every year.

Finally, if you don't want it to be about luck, then you have to have a system that doesn't rely on it...which apparently you aren't in favor of either.

 

[BuzzH]

Some call that compromise. There are 335 million Americans, maybe the 5,000 high point holders have to get alone with the rest of us if we actually believe this is a shared resource/heritage.

I'd have to call it something else, like BS.

 

[rogerthat]

There are lots of folks, because they fail to understand statistics, as well as the drawing procedures of some states, that are eliminated the second they submit their applications.

Yet, they continue to whine because they cant draw. Happens in MT, WY, CO, AZ, UT every year.

Finally, if you don't want it to be about luck, then you have to have a system that doesn't rely on it...which apparently you aren't in favor of either.

I actually am in favor of a system that isn’t about luck. However I don’t think it’s likely anyone else would be. I’m actually even fine with Wyomings current system. My plan was to out live everyone with higher points than me

I think what you just proposed would be a really good system

 

[VikingsGuy]

Sure, but ground rules first.

If I'm hearing people correctly they want the following:

1. Allow all tags to be open for everyone entering the draw to have at least an opportunity at 100% of the tags.
2. We want to give long term applicants a better chance each year they apply, surpassing the number of new applicants each year (which actually decreases odds for long time applicants).
3. No portion of the tags in a guaranteed pool.

That said, one of my best friends and I have this discussion all the time, how to maintain a chance for all, but rewarding long term applicants. This was mostly his idea, but its a good one.

Bonus point system that meets 1-3:

Years 0-9 one bonus point per application.
Years 10-19 Bonus points squared
Years 20-29 Bonus points cubed
Years 30-39 Bonus points to the 4th power
Years 40-49 Bonus points to the 5th power
Years 50-59 Bonus points to the 6th power
Years 60-69 Bonus points to the 7th power
Years 70-79 Bonus points to the 8th power
Years 80+ You're dead or already drew.

Everyone can draw any tag any year, one pool. Rewards long time applicants even if the number of applicants continues to increase.

I disagree with a system that so strongly favors incumbents when we are talking about a shared resource. Why would the system prefer a lifelong nature lover who gave $50 a yr in point cost for 20 years over a life long nature lover who gave $1,000 to the nature conservancy for 20 years thereby supporting the North American model 20 fold but took up hunting late in life?

 

[BuzzH]

I actually am in favor of a system that isn’t about luck. However I don’t think it’s likely anyone else would be. I’m actually even fine with Wyomings current system. My plan was to out live everyone with higher points than me

And that could happen, but the problem you still face is all those behind you diluting/decreasing your chances and taking your tag (see NV and MT).

Can't have it both ways.

 

[DFS]

I’m shit full of all the systems changing. Leave things alone. “Life ain’t fair”. MOGA

 

[VikingsGuy]

I'd have to call it something else, like BS.

As usual, because “Buzz says”, is always your strongest argument.

 

[BuzzH]

I disagree with a system that so strongly favors incumbents when we are talking about a shared resource. Why would the system prefer a lifelong nature lover who gave $50 a yr in point cost for 20 years over a life long nature lover who gave $1,000 to the nature conservancy for 20 years thereby supporting the North American model 20 fold but took up hunting late in life?

When the nature conservancy manages my states wildlife with their money, rather than me paying the whole tab for managing my states wildlife via license fees we can talk.

Until then, you have no traction, or even a half valid point.

 

[BuzzH]

As usual, because “Buzz says”, is always your strongest argument.

No, because I've listened to what people want for the past 40 years in regard to allocation of tags and actually trying to find solutions.

While you were doing, whatever it is you do, instead of hunting and applying out West.

You're the typical johnnie come lately that wants to burn everything down for your own benefit. You aren't fooling me, been at this wayyyy longer than you have.

 

[BrentD]

When the nature conservancy manages my states wildlife with their money, rather than me paying the whole tab for managing my states wildlife via license fees we can talk.

Until then, you have no traction.

Actually, the NRs are paying to manage your state's widlife via points and licenses. On top of that, the majority of your wildlife is living off of habitat that is bought and paid for by, well, everyone. Buzz you work so hard at being a jerk - for no reason whatsoever. There is no one that whines like you whine. Not even the NRs sitting on a pile of paid up points and rapidly declining left expectancy.

Why are you such an ungrateful bastard?