Colorado Draw Odds on this site - question

[_droptine_]

All,

Earlier this year when Colorado released the application and draw results information, I used it and compiled a spreadsheet of the odds for various hunts I am interested in.

When Brian posted that the odds site on MM had been updated, I decided to look and compare what I had calculated. I found some discrepancies in my calculations and I am trying to rectify them.

What I am seeing on MM is that if a unit says it takes 2 points for example to draw the unit for a resident hunter, and a certain percentage of the residents with 1 point will draw as well, the percentage given for those with 1 point is always less than what I calculated.

I add up the number of people that apply and are guaranteed to draw( in this example, those having 2 preference points or more ). Then I subtract that total from the total number of tags for residents that there are going into the draw and that should give you the number of tags that are remaining for the next point level ( in this case 1 point ). Lets call this new number A.

When I do the following calculation ( A / # of applicants in next point level ) * 100, I always get a percentage that is higher than is reported here on the draw odds portion of MM.

What am I missing?

Also, in percentage reported above is always exactly the same for both resident and non-resident. For example it will show that for a muzz hunt for deer 53.7% of residents with 1 point will draw. If you then look at the same unit and hunt for non-resident, it will say the 53.7% of non-residents will draw with 1 point. How is that possible for every unit?

Thanks,
Chris

 

[JDC]

Chris,

You have asked a couple of great questions so let me see if I can explain what is happening. First off, it appears that you are only considering the resident applicant in your calculations. ?Then I subtract that total from the total number of tags for residents that there are going into the draw and that should give you the number of tags that are remaining for the next point level.? To be accurate the non-resident applicants must be included in your calculation as they are taking tags down to the point level that they exhaust the non-resident allotment. In most cases, the non-resident is awarded up to 35% of the total permits. This 35% is not guaranteed however and it is possible for the resident applicants to take all of the permits in a particular hunt. That looks to be the first issue causing your numbers to be higher than those in the MM odds database.

Now for the second part. The reason the odds are the same between the residents and non-residents at the same point level is that when the probability of the non-resident tag allocation being exceeded is non-existent or statistically not probable, it becomes more of a head to head drawing between the two groups and their odds are the same. To make it easy, let's say a unit has a total of 100 permits available. In this example, non-residents could draw up to 35 tags. Now let's say that there are 50 residents that applied with 2 or more points and 24 non-residents with 2 or more points. That takes out 74 or the total tags and 24 of the possible 35 non-resident allotment. That means that there are 26 total tags remaining with no more than 11 being available to the non-resident. Now let's say that there are 24 residents and 10 non-residents with 1 point for a total of 34 applicants. With 11 permits remaining from the 35 non-resident allotment and only 10 non-resident applicants, it is not possible for the non-resident allotment to be exceeded. So in this example it is a head to head drawing and the 1 point level odds become 76.5% (26 total tags / 34 total applicants). This same phenomenon occurs when there are far more applicants than there are available permits.

The odds between the resident and non-resident begin to diverge once there are more non-resident applicants than there are possible non-resident tags.

If you would like to let me know what unit you are looking at, I would be happy to verify that this is indeed what is happening and not an error in the calculations.

Anyway, I hope that this helps clear up some of the confusion.

Jon
www.HuntersTrailhead.com

 

[ColoradoOak]

For your first question, make sure you are subtracting out the landowner tags from the total tags available before doing your calculation. Look at the Draw Summary to see "Choices drawn" to get the correct number.

Not sure about your second question...

 

[txhunter58]

Also, the actual tags allotted will never quite match up with the Odds chart. The reason is that some people don't fill out their applicatoions right, so even though those apps show up in the Odds chart, they are discarded before actual tags are awarded. So generally, since there are always some dicarded applications, a few more tags are awared for each point level than should be.

Example, lets say it takes at least one point and you get down to the last 100 applications with with 1 point and there are only 30 tags left, should be a thirty percent chance of drawing with 1 point. However, say 10 guys with more points goofed on their applications and those were thrown out, therefore 40 guys get picked for a 40% chance instead of 30%.

txhunter58
venor, ergo sum (I hunt, therefore I am)

 

[_droptine_]

Jon,

Thanks a ton for that explanation. I found out where I went wrong. I didn't realize how the drawing worked at lowest point tier. I didn't realize that it went to a head-to-head drawing.

Thanks,
Chris

 

[randeye100]

I guess I'm not to smart. When I look at the chart for unit 23 it looks like there is alot of 1 points needed for 100%. How do you read that chart. Thanks

RANDY

 

[txhunter58]

LAST EDITED ON Nov-12-09 AT 05:34AM (MST)[p]Have to know couple of things to answer your question: what species, what season, what weapon, and resident/nonresident status.

For instance, elk, unit 23, first rifle (either sex), nonresident tags:

Everyone with 1 point or more got drawn and 64% of people with no points got drawn

These figures are from the link for odds on this website and, as stated, probably won't exactly match the raw data off the Colorado website.

txhunter58

venor, ergo sum (I hunt, therefore I am)

 

[joesikora]

JDC, dude you are wicked smart. Awesome explanation.

Joe E Sikora