Free: Contests & Raffles.
What do you guys think would happen if they limited us to only 1 hunt choice in each category?Would it help, or just shift the odds around some?
Quote from: Stein on January 17, 2023, 01:56:40 PMYou can't increase everyone's odds by changing the application system only. It's a zero sum game there, if my odds go up someone's odds have to go down.ID odds are better because they have more tags, or more specifically, less people applying for a given tag than WA.This supports the argument for a set time ban from applying after you draw. I think Montana has this for some hunts, a 7 year wait IIRC.Odds go up for those who haven't drawn yet. 20 tags go out, the next year would have 20 less applicants, then 40, then 60 etc. etc.
You can't increase everyone's odds by changing the application system only. It's a zero sum game there, if my odds go up someone's odds have to go down.ID odds are better because they have more tags, or more specifically, less people applying for a given tag than WA.
Quote from: baker5150 on January 17, 2023, 02:04:24 PMQuote from: Stein on January 17, 2023, 01:56:40 PMYou can't increase everyone's odds by changing the application system only. It's a zero sum game there, if my odds go up someone's odds have to go down.ID odds are better because they have more tags, or more specifically, less people applying for a given tag than WA.This supports the argument for a set time ban from applying after you draw. I think Montana has this for some hunts, a 7 year wait IIRC.Odds go up for those who haven't drawn yet. 20 tags go out, the next year would have 20 less applicants, then 40, then 60 etc. etc.So after the first year instead of 3480 people applying for entiat rifle there would only be 3460. By year 7 it would be 3340 and hold steady there forever because each year after that you would be losing 20 but 20 more would then be eligible again after waiting there 7 years.
You do feel like your points are worth something after many years or decades, they should be. Now do I feel entitled, no, but I sure wish the points meant more and higher point holders drew more. Sure, it's gets under my skin when someone under X amount of points draws when guys with 20+ points don't even come close, that is not how it should work in my opinion. I know, I know, the guys with massive points DO have a better chance, but it should be more than 1.2% compared to .01%. I've said it before, I think a certain % of tags should only go to the highest point holders, even when I have zero I'll think the same. For the record, I'd like this point system to go away, no more points given out and when you go to zero, it's done.
Quote from: M_ray on January 17, 2023, 01:50:07 PM...just listen to those who actually put in to each state and they are telling you they draw Idaho special tags at a higher rate than WA so the proof is clear there. I prefer their system from my experience.I was thinking you would say that...that's just straight up apples to oranges, and certainly not proof. Being able to draw a good tag in Idaho versus WA could be attributable to lots of factors, like (i) how many tags were available for the hunt you wanted, and (ii) how many people in WA had more points than you did. An individual's anecdotal experience doesn't equate to math.
...just listen to those who actually put in to each state and they are telling you they draw Idaho special tags at a higher rate than WA so the proof is clear there. I prefer their system from my experience.
There are only two ways to increase odds for everyone that applies:1. Give out more tags2. Have less people in the draw
Quote from: baker5150 on January 17, 2023, 02:01:02 PMWhat do you guys think would happen if they limited us to only 1 hunt choice in each category?Would it help, or just shift the odds around some?It's been proposed on here, but some people prefer having the ability to apply for everything.It would increase your odds of drawing the tag you apply for but would obviously decrease your ability to draw all the other tags you couldn't apply for. This is my preferred "fix" as it would give people a better chance at drawing their first preference. I would actually propose you can only submit one special application total, pick what you really want and then get better odds at actually drawing it.Very much revenue negative for WDFW though, so I'm not holding my breath.
So, full disclaimer here, I haven't bought a big game license in WA for several years now.That said, sure, I'd rather pay more for a better chance.
Limiting the number of applications a person can submit, or number of choices per application, would do absolutely nothing to improve overall odds of drawing a special permit. The number of people is still the same, and the number of permits. So odds would stay the same. As someone else said, the way to improve odds is to decrease the number of people applying, or increase the number of permits.