:yike:The devils advocate?
Maybe they're right...
10 bucks for better odds?
Hopefully there's an actuary on this forum and can set me straight on calculating odds, but.....
Seems to me if your an opportunist, your odds just got better because it only takes one person to not enter in any one of the three draws to improve overall odds for those who do apply to all three.
If we have 10 people (regardless of entries or points) entering for deer permits, and 5 permits given out, and one hunter can only take 1 animal- whether you have 5 separate drawings for each of the 5 permits or 1 drawing for all 5 combined - aren't overall average odds of drawing a tag still 50%. 5/10 people are guaranteed to draw regardless of the drawing scenario, points, etc. Again, it assumes that everyone enters in all drawings.
If you only enter in 1 drawing- no doubt about it- your screwed.
Now factor in points, choice order, etc. The pecking order and draw odds for certain people based on points will shift that 50% around (those with < the avg points have <50% chance, those with more, have >50% chance)... but isnt it still 50% average for the whole group? Agree that some hunters odds will go down if your only puting in for just trophy, but doesn't that mean that those puting in for all three go UP???
Everyone is chiming in that most everyone's odds are screwed by this scenario.... is that really the case? If some are screwed by the new system (odds going down), aren't some people benefiting (odds go up)? Question is: who are 'those people'? Again, I've got to assume its those puting in for all 3.
If I am an opportunist type hunter who is OK paying an additional $10 for better draw odds...why wouldn't I support this? (politics aside).
So - are the majority of hunters meat? trophy? opportunits?
I'd wager the majority of hunters are opportunists. I'd also bet that those same people are OK with paying another $10 to improve thier odds.
