Wyoming proposed regs

[SAJ-99]

Im thinking less than that..... Some folks drew that last year and now 400 more tags. Any math guys care to take a look? Or to hard to tell because ya never know if a bunch of point holders might jump into that pool?

OK, OK. Just because it is slow around here. Yes, probably less than 4, but here is my justification. Below is the table of last year's results for the East General Regular PP draw. You can see that 5pts was 100%, and 75% cleared between 4 and 5. Zero people with 4pts pulled a tag in this part of the draw. The quota was 244. With the increase in tags the quota would jump from 244 to 406 tags. The difference is 162. WY doesn't give us the breakdown of the point levels of the 524 with <=4, so we have to use the total PP holders to estimate. That looks like this.

4pts...110
3pts...124
2pts...128
1pt...162

So with 162 extra tags last year, everyone with 4pts would have cleared and 52 tags remained. That would go to those with <4 pts but it is not enough to totally clear those with 3. So using last year's data with the new number of tags, it will be between 3 and 4. There is no way to know exactly to the decimal where it ends up and no individual has a fraction of a point, so we have think about group points.

Things we don't/can't know
1. The number of applicants applying in groups that average between 3 and 4 pts.
2. the number of people that will move from Reg to Special or Special to Reg. Last year's price increase probably causes some things there to shift.
3. The total number of applicants (which is the cause of point creep)

If we assume some point creep, even if only 0.25, you can get a good guess. I'm sure GoHunt uses something like the past 5years trends to estimate some of the variables, particularly increase in applicants. 95% confidence is just a statistical measurement at 1.96 Std Dev. Heck, I could say the clearing level will be 3.4 + or - 0.4 and feel 95% confident. If your group averages 3.9pts, you can feel more confident than if your group averages 3.1pts.

 

[Neighwp]

The minute they publish "Predictive" odds they influence human behavior against their assumptions. It could work, but not on any real scale.....unless your just increasing all units by the same 0.5-1 Point per year, which is worthless.

 

[SAJ-99]

The minute the publish "Predictive" odds they influence human behavior against their assumptions. It could work, but not on any real scale.....unless your just increasing all units by the same 0.5-1 Point per year, which is worthless.

If the tag quota was cut in half you would want to know, right? I would say the actual prediction doesn’t influence the behavior. The reason the prediction changed does. Predicting human behavior perfectly is almost impossible, but I don’t have a problem with attempting to predict new odds with new information. I don’t think they charge more for the service and it is a competitive space, so they are trying to differentiate themselves.

 

[Neighwp]

If the tag quota was cut in half you would want to know, right? I would say the actual prediction doesn’t influence the behavior. The reason the prediction changed does. Predicting human behavior perfectly is almost impossible, but I don’t have a problem with attempting to predict new odds with new information. I don’t think they charge more for the service and it is a competitive space, so they are trying to differentiate themselves.

We are talking about two different things. I'm speaking to general tag predictions.... year over year demand and preference point requirements and random odd percentage prediction. I believe you are talking about predictive odds assuming drastic alterations in License numbers (Maybe the Eastern General Proposed Quota).

The actual prediction would influence human behavior or there would be no reason to publish the information.

To your question, I'd rather know about the quota change, which is readily available, rather than their prediction.

 

[SAJ-99]

The actual prediction would influence human behavior or there would be no reason to publish the information.

You weren't clear in your first post, and I'm not sure you have become more clear. I'm not really sure what you are getting at. If they are two things then separate them and argue them individually.

You first argued that just assuming the recent trend in point creep will continue is "worthless" (I don't believe you are paying more for the prediction anyway) and then you try to say that the prediction itself will affect the behavior of applicants. These discussions happen every year and every year people put point creep into their mental models. Everyone does it. Simply putting that in a model and publishing the result doesn't change anything.

On quota changes, even if there is a major tag change and any "prediction" is exactly what I did in post 21 (using last year), the prediction doesn't change behavior. The change in input variables did. Any change in variables simply increases the potential deviation from the prediction. The more narrow the view (general, vs unit, vs specific tag in specific unit) the less reliable the prediction becomes. It's just math. Customers ultimately determine what the value of that prediction is.