Draw Odds - MM vs. HF

[ILArcher]

Has anyone noticed the huge difference between the draw odds provided by the Monster Muley site v. Huntin Fool's site ?

For instance on my New Mexico elk unit MM shows 16% odds while HF says 47% It looks like MM adds up all 1st, 2nd & 3rd choice applicants before dividing by tags. And HF just uses 1st choice applicants. In my mind it makes more sense to just use 1st choice applicants who drew? To calculate what my chances are? Any statisticians out there? It seems trying to calculate your actual odds in NM is not so easy. You must take into account many folks who's choices are used in calculations will draw their 1st or 2nd choices and never even be competing for your hunt.

Also, it will be interesting to see how much better the draw odds will be this year in NM due to cash up front and bad economy. More of these guided tags should get dumped into the unguided pool. When they went to no cash applications my unit odds went from 90% to 15%, so I am guessing applicant numbers will reduce 50% ?

 

[HuntElk4Fun]

The problem with NM is there is no way to calculate the correct odds because their drawing system is based on applications and not unit by unit. They rank applications and then go down the line looking at all 3 choices. Since it's impossible to compare choice by choice statistically and who drew when, you can't calculate true odds.

Some will argue just use 1st choice, some will argue use all 3, but the bottomline - impossible to calculate odds in NM.

I'm with you, prefer HF because if you add up all 3 alot of those guys potentially drew 1st or 2nd and aren't in the game.

The money up front is a big deal, but Wyoming charges similiar fees and still gets plenty of applicants. Plus you can put it on your CC. It will dip a bit, but not a huge amount IMO.

 

[WapitiBob]

LAST EDITED ON Mar-18-10 AT 10:02AM (MST)[p]

calculating the app pools after the 1st round of up front showed a significant change for the high priced sheep draw. The other species changed but it wasn't a significant number.
There are more than enough applicants to fill most NR app pools. There shouldn't be any guided tags going into the non guided pool other than a cpl scrub units that currently undersubscribe.
From the inquiries I have seen, 51/52 are going to get hammered.

Something to think about...A NR guided hunter knows going in, they will pay. They're paying 50% when they contract with the Outfitter and drawing a tag vs buying a LO tag is a bonus. I don't see the Guided pool decreasing much at all.

If you want to feel good about your chances, look at the 1st choice pools.
If you want to feel bad, look at all 3.

 

[grizzly]

I have had many conversations about odds calculations with the guy behind the MM odds. I don't think anybody puts more time into and does a better job than these odds. HF has its uses, but odds aren't one of them.

Just look at HF poor attempt at odds for other states and you will see they do not take it seriously.

This is one place that HF should invest some money to improve their publication.

Grizzly

 

[bulls1]

I don't think either of them are very close. It is pretty easy to figure your 1st choice odds. Go to NMDGF and look at draw results in excel form. Look at how many of the tags for your hunt were drawn by 1st choice applicants, and divide that # by how many applied as a 1st choice. You will quickly see that very few tags go to 2nd or 3rd choice apps. You will also see that your odds are alot better than MM states, and alot worse than HF. Of course you'll also find out that your odds of drawing your 2nd or 3rd choice in a top end unit is about like getting struck by lightning.

 

[ILArcher]

>I don't think either of them
>are very close. It
>is pretty easy to figure
>your 1st choice odds.
>Go to NMDGF and look
>at draw results in excel
>form. Look at how
>many of the tags for
>your hunt were drawn by
>1st choice applicants, and divide
>that # by how many
>applied as a 1st choice.
> You will quickly see
>that very few tags go
>to 2nd or 3rd choice
>apps. You will also
>see that your odds are
>alot better than MM states,
>and alot worse than HF.
> Of course you'll also
>find out that your odds
>of drawing your 2nd or
>3rd choice in a top
>end unit is about like
>getting struck by lightning.

I don't really understand why more hunts aren't drawn on 2nd and 3rd choices. That's all I've ever drawn except one year. I always put in for a longshot Gila hunt with like 2% odds for 1st choice, them a mediocre hunt 2nd choice at about 12%, then a 3rd backup choice with good odds like 50%. Seems like just common sense to me. I almost always draw my 3rd choice. It's why I like the NM does their draw.

 

[KingCrow]

Bulls1-

I believe in New Mexico that an applicant's first 3 choices are considered before the computer moves on to the next applicant. If this is true, then it is very possible and likely that you may draw your 2nd or 3rd choice on your application.

 

[glacial21]

KingCrow has it right. It's not complicated. Just rank your choices because if your number comes up they go right down your list before going to the next guy.

The true odds are always going to be somewhere in between those listed by MM and those listed by HF. Neither is more correct than the other and there is no way to calculate exact odds. The same is true for NV. Consider it a "range" of odds between those 2 points.

 

[ILArcher]

>Bulls1-
>
>I believe in New Mexico that
>an applicant's first 3 choices
>are considered before the computer
>moves on to the next
>applicant. If this is
>true, then it is very
>possible and likely that you
>may draw your 2nd
>or 3rd choice on your
>application.


I know this. That is why I've applied the way I have for 15 years.

What I'm wondering is why everyone wouldn't do this, resulting in a lot more hunts being drawn on 3rd choices for mediocre hunts like the one I target as a 3rd choice. Apparently 90% of the tags are issued to 1st choice applicants when they can draw it with a #3.

 

[BigFin]

>I know this. That is
>why I've applied the way
>I have for 15 years.
>
>
>What I'm wondering is why everyone
>wouldn't do this, resulting in
>a lot more hunts being
>drawn on 3rd choices for
>mediocre hunts like the one
>I target as a 3rd
>choice. Apparently 90% of
>the tags are issued to
>1st choice applicants when they
>can draw it with a
>#3.

+1. I wonder the same thing.

"Hunt when you can - You're gonna' run out of health before you run out of money!"