Preference points

[Bullkllr]

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.

This is absolutely untrue.  It's not about the number of people, but the number of applications.

It would for sure cut the odds for each individual permit draw. It would make people put in for permits they really want.

[bobcat]

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.

This is absolutely untrue.  It's not about the number of people, but the number of applications.

How is it untrue? Same number of people, same number of permits, equals the exact same overall odds as before. Sure certain people may end up with better odds depending on how they applied previously, and then how they apply after the change. But overall odds are still the same.

[bobcat]

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.

This is absolutely untrue.  It's not about the number of people, but the number of applications.

It would for sure cut the odds for each individual permit draw. It would make people put in for permits they really want.

But I apply for everything, and as many choices as allowed on each application. So do many others. Limiting my choices and number of application, might decrease my odds of drawing a special permit. Right?

[Bullkllr]

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.

This is absolutely untrue.  It's not about the number of people, but the number of applications.

It would for sure cut the odds for each individual permit draw. It would make people put in for permits they really want.

But I apply for everything, and as many choices as allowed on each application. So do many others. Limiting my choices and number of application, might decrease my odds of drawing a special permit. Right?

True. That's what they told us hunters wanted when they split the species categories.

[bobcat]

The best draw system we ever had ended in 1995, unfortunately. And there's no going back.  😢

[Stein]

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.

This is absolutely untrue.  It's not about the number of people, but the number of applications.

It would for sure cut the odds for each individual permit draw. It would make people put in for permits they really want.

But I apply for everything, and as many choices as allowed on each application. So do many others. Limiting my choices and number of application, might decrease my odds of drawing a special permit. Right?

No, it will increase your odds of drawing the permit you apply for and decrease the odds of the permits you can no longer apply for (go to 0%).

Think of it like this, if you apply for 10 permits with a 1% chance, you have a 10% chance of drawing A permit.  If you change the system so you can only apply for one permit, the odds would go to 10%.  Same odds, but you get to direct those odds to the permit you most want.

Obviously a great oversimplification, but the idea would be that you get a better chance at your favorite permit and pay for it by giving up your chances at all the other permits.

[WAcoueshunter]

...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.

 

It’s not hard to understand that if you have only 1 choice per species it increases odds for those putting in because it excludes some that pick a different species and that my friend is apples to apples. You might need math for that but I do not 

Oh, I get it...limiting the choices increases average overall odds for a given tag.  But junking the WA points system and limiting the choices doesn't increase the odds for the guy with 20 points in WA and 400 names in the hat.  And add in the 20 points he gives up for all the other species as well, and his odds of drawing an OIL tag goes WAY down.  Sorry man, but there's still math involved. 

[Igor]

There is some interesting math going on in this thread...................

[buglebrush]

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.

This is absolutely untrue.  It's not about the number of people, but the number of applications.

It would for sure cut the odds for each individual permit draw. It would make people put in for permits they really want.

But I apply for everything, and as many choices as allowed on each application. So do many others. Limiting my choices and number of application, might decrease my odds of drawing a special permit. Right?

No, it will increase your odds of drawing the permit you apply for and decrease the odds of the permits you can no longer apply for (go to 0%).

Think of it like this, if you apply for 10 permits with a 1% chance, you have a 10% chance of drawing A permit.  If you change the system so you can only apply for one permit, the odds would go to 10%.  Same odds, but you get to direct those odds to the permit you most want.

Obviously a great oversimplification, but the idea would be that you get a better chance at your favorite permit and pay for it by giving up your chances at all the other permits.

That isn't how the math works.  10,% odds three times isn't 30% odds. 

[buglebrush]

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.

This is absolutely untrue.  It's not about the number of people, but the number of applications.

How is it untrue? Same number of people, same number of permits, equals the exact same overall odds as before. Sure certain people may end up with better odds depending on how they applied previously, and then how they apply after the change. But overall odds are still the same.

The number of people is irrelevant.  It's the number of applications that determines odds.  If you limit each person to a single application every year, the total number of applications goes way down which drastically improves your odds of drawing a tag.  It also makes your existing points way more valuable.  WDFW won't do it because the state gets so much money scamming people with the current system. 

[Stein]

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.

This is absolutely untrue.  It's not about the number of people, but the number of applications.

It would for sure cut the odds for each individual permit draw. It would make people put in for permits they really want.

But I apply for everything, and as many choices as allowed on each application. So do many others. Limiting my choices and number of application, might decrease my odds of drawing a special permit. Right?

No, it will increase your odds of drawing the permit you apply for and decrease the odds of the permits you can no longer apply for (go to 0%).

Think of it like this, if you apply for 10 permits with a 1% chance, you have a 10% chance of drawing A permit.  If you change the system so you can only apply for one permit, the odds would go to 10%.  Same odds, but you get to direct those odds to the permit you most want.

Obviously a great oversimplification, but the idea would be that you get a better chance at your favorite permit and pay for it by giving up your chances at all the other permits.

That isn't how the math works.  10,% odds three times isn't 30% odds.

That's why I said it's an oversimplification, I should have been more clear on the numbers maybe.  It's a complex system and you have no idea who would apply for what, thus you can't calculate what the odds would be.  If you only allow everyone to apply for one special permit, the odds of drawing any of the permits would go up.  The overall system odds wouldn't change, assuming same number of tags and people.

There is no way to calculate what your odds would be, so I just pulled some numbers out of thin air to use as an example.

For your example, if you put in for three tags and have 10% for each, the probability of drawing at least one is 27%.  It gets a bit cumbersome for a dozen numbers or however many unique permit categories you can apply for these days.

[Alan K]

I've said for years, add 1 rut hunt tag for every weapon, for every species, in every GMU they inhabit. Virtually zero impact on the resource, but would spread applicants out significantly and relieve some pressure on the most sought after hunts. Could also add the same, but with late/migration hunts in place of rut.

The reality is any decent tag, no matter the system, will have odds so long you're unlikely to draw in your lifetime.

I'll take smaller odds in all categories versus still low odds on one and zero chance on all the rest, take my animals during the general season every year, and trophy hunt out of state.

One way to reduce applications would be to bump the app fee up to $25/each... 

[sagerat]

I've said for years, add 1 rut hunt tag for every weapon, for every species, in every GMU they inhabit. Virtually zero impact on the resource, but would spread applicants out significantly and relieve some pressure on the most sought after hunts. Could also add the same, but with late/migration hunts in place of rut.

The reality is any decent tag, no matter the system, will have odds so long you're unlikely to draw in your lifetime.

I'll take smaller odds in all categories versus still low odds on one and zero chance on all the rest, take my animals during the general season every year, and trophy hunt out of state.

One way to reduce applications would be to bump the app fee up to $25/each... 

I’m sure it’s coming and it won’t stop at $25. The general season we all kill our animals on will likely be on the chopping block as well. The fun is just beginning here, it’s pretty depressing when you’re trying to raise your kids to love it…

[M_ray]

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.

This is absolutely untrue.  It's not about the number of people, but the number of applications.

How is it untrue? Same number of people, same number of permits, equals the exact same overall odds as before. Sure certain people may end up with better odds depending on how they applied previously, and then how they apply after the change. But overall odds are still the same.

The number of people is irrelevant.  It's the number of applications that determines odds.  If you limit each person to a single application every year, the total number of applications goes way down which drastically improves your odds of drawing a tag.  It also makes your existing points way more valuable.  WDFW won't do it because the state gets so much money scamming people with the current system.

 

This!  we finally have a winner that I think explained it so everyone can understand!!! 


As we have said if the state charged the same amount for one choice as it currently does for multiple choices it makes the same amount. For the hunter you get better odds for your top choice for the same price as several lower chance draws.

[sagerat]

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.

This is absolutely untrue.  It's not about the number of people, but the number of applications.

How is it untrue? Same number of people, same number of permits, equals the exact same overall odds as before. Sure certain people may end up with better odds depending on how they applied previously, and then how they apply after the change. But overall odds are still the same.

The number of people is irrelevant.  It's the number of applications that determines odds.  If you limit each person to a single application every year, the total number of applications goes way down which drastically improves your odds of drawing a tag.  It also makes your existing points way more valuable.  WDFW won't do it because the state gets so much money scamming people with the current system.

 

This!  we finally have a winner that I think explained it so everyone can understand!!! 


As we have said if the state charged the same amount for one choice as it currently does for multiple choices it makes the same amount. For the hunter you get better odds for your top choice for the same price as several lower chance draws.

   This theory sounds logical and the odds would definitely improve. The problem is a lot of guys would just be done and not contribute any longer. Draw odds would improve but what would WDFW do when the income starts to slip? Cater more to the beaver lovers I suppose.