Point Banking in Colorado - Pay Extra?

[svivian]

 

[Overdrive]

Sounds like we agree then. The weighted system does mathematically improve one’s odds.

Not really, this Colorado system is more based on Luck than mathematics. If you're the lucky one to get a low random number your odds have gone way up no matter the number of weighted points you hold. You know the old saying "luck of the draw" this applies here as where your random app number sits.

 

[Mighty Mouse]

Anyone know the rationale behind Colorado's weighted point system for MSG? Seems like they're trying to reach a compromise between a completely random draw and a simple bonus point system.

If they want to ascribe some value to points (in the form of increased draw odds) but not too much, it would be more straightforward to simply apply an exponent less than 1 to point values instead of the current convoluted invert/convert application number to a random number then divide by points scheme. Applying an exponent less than 1 to point values (such as 1/2, aka taking the square root) would have the opposite effect of squaring bonus points like some states do to give points more weight.

 

[Overdrive]

Makes perfect sense for a boomer in your position to be against weighted MSG. You want your 100% guaranteed tag at the expense of everyone else.

Not a Boomer but I sure learned a lot from that generation and one's before them.

Don't take another's word for it, I don't care for one, it's nothing but a money grab now that they are charging for a PP and WP, it is a random draw system at best. The good ol "luck of the draw" they just slapped a new fancy name on it and baited a bunch of people, now your hooked, got to keep buying those WP so I draw.

 

[ladogg411]

, it is a random draw system at best. The good ol "luck of the draw" they just slapped a new fancy name on it

denominators are hard. I feel your pain.

 

[ladogg411]

Anyone know the rationale behind Colorado's weighted point system for MSG? Seems like they're trying to reach a compromise between a completely random draw and a simple bonus point system.

If they want to ascribe some value to points (in the form of increased draw odds) but not too much, it would be more straightforward to simply apply an exponent less than 1 to point values instead of the current convoluted invert/convert application number to a random number then divide by points scheme. Applying an exponent less than 1 to point values (such as 1/2, aka taking the square root) would have the opposite effect of squaring bonus points like some states do to give points more weight.

Toprut steps you through a good simulation as to how/why CO weighted MSG is EXACTLY the same as a simple BP model. Hard to believe, but I think they are correct that in the end - dividing is no different simple BPs. I read about their simulation multiple times before believing their result.

Of course, the minimum 3 point piece could be added to either a division model or simple BP.

Sad, that CPW confused everyone with the whole conversion/division stuff when they could have achieved the same with simple BP with a 3 point floor.

Folks aren't handling division well. So, working with exponents <1 probably also would not go well IMO.

 

[ladogg411]

Toprut steps you through a good simulation as to how/why CO weighted MSG is EXACTLY the same as a simple BP model. Hard to believe, but I think they are correct that in the end - dividing is no different simple BPs. I read about their simulation multiple times before believing their result.

Looks like Toprut makes this article avaialble for free. It's a good read:

Toprut - Western Big Game Hunting Reference

Draw odds, harvest data, interactive maps and more - Toprut is the most open and accessible western big game hunting research site ever created.

www.toprut.com

Their conclusion:
For purposes of determining current draw odds for a ram, bull moose or billy tag in Colorado, the weighted point system and the bonus point system are indistinguishable from one another.

 

[Overdrive]

denominators are hard. I feel your pain.

You must of been a product of that Common Core math. Us old folks understand math just fine.

 

[KsRancher]

You must of been a product of that Common Core math. Us old folks understand math just fine.

Apparently not

 

[KsRancher]

Read my post from above. Going off of last year on the moose draw. Statistically that guys with 11 points or more drew at a 3:1 ratio to the guys at 10 or under. Does that mean that the guys with 11 points or more got more tags over all? No it does not. But individually those guys had a higher chance of drawing the tag. Now on the probability side of things. Going forward the higher point holders are getting diluted down more. Will they still hold a advantage? Yes, but it will get less as time goes because of more people applying diluting it down.


It's like if I go out and buy one lottery ticket and you go out and buy 100 lottery tickets. The odds of you winning are 100 times of what they are for me winning. Does that mean you are going to go out there and win? Nope! Someone along the way that bought one ticket is probably going to win. Just based off of the fact that there are so many people that buy one ticket compared to the number of people that buy 100 tickets compared to the total number of options out there

 

[Jethro]

@ladogg411 that was a really good top rut article

 

[Overdrive]

Apparently not

Some easy reading to show you that all the math in the world doesn't matter, if you luck out with your application number your WP hold no value, boiling down to random luck of the draw.

https://cpw.state.co.us/Documents/Hunting/BigGame/Weighted-Preference-Points.pdf

 

[ladogg411]

Some easy reading to show you that all the math in the world doesn't matter, if you luck out with your application number your WP hold no value, boiling down to random luck of the draw.

https://cpw.state.co.us/Documents/Hunting/BigGame/Weighted-Preference-Points.pdf

On balance, the guy with the biggest number in denominator is more likely to win.

But yes, someone could win despite having the number “1” in his denominator.

Damn, I wish CPW had just used simple BPs to accomplish this same result rather than using numerators and denominators.

 

[ElDiablito]

Looks like Toprut makes this article avaialble for free. It's a good read:

Toprut - Western Big Game Hunting Reference

Draw odds, harvest data, interactive maps and more - Toprut is the most open and accessible western big game hunting research site ever created.

www.toprut.com

Their conclusion:
For purposes of determining current draw odds for a ram, bull moose or billy tag in Colorado, the weighted point system and the bonus point system are indistinguishable from one another.

Great article. And to put it even more clearly, TopRut says your odds increase linearly with weighted points.

 

[cnelk]

It’s difficult to think that lots of Weighted Points are helpful when the CPW gives the opportunity to opt out of paying for more of them.

 

[Mighty Mouse]

Looks like Toprut makes this article avaialble for free. It's a good read:

Toprut - Western Big Game Hunting Reference

Draw odds, harvest data, interactive maps and more - Toprut is the most open and accessible western big game hunting research site ever created.

www.toprut.com

Their conclusion:
For purposes of determining current draw odds for a ram, bull moose or billy tag in Colorado, the weighted point system and the bonus point system are indistinguishable from one another.

Interesting, thanks for sharing.

At first glance, I didn’t expect that the results of Colorado's weighted point system would so closely resemble the results of a simple bonus point draw. But the more I think about it, the more it makes sense. The weighted point system has a random element (the number assignment/conversion) and a randomness-mitigating element (the division by points). In a bonus point system, the randomness comes from the act of blindly drawing the (metaphorical) ticket from the hat; randomness mitigation comes from the quantity of tickets each applicant gets to put into the hat. Assuming Toprut's model is accurate, the overall distribution of tags via both systems is statistically nearly identical.

 

[Overdrive]

It’s difficult to think that lots of Weighted Points are helpful when the CPW gives the opportunity to opt out of paying for more of them.

They're only helpful to the CPW's bank account.

 

[Ucsdryder]

Ask a lot the Colorado moose hunters how they like the bonus point system.

Some have been putting in for over 2 decades and then guys draw with 3+2

What’s the alternative? Imagine if moose were preference points? You’d have kids that would never catch the point creep, maybe when they were 60. When you don’t have enough tags to fill the demand, life’s not fair.

Luckily Colorado had lots of elk opportunities, which is why going away from a preference point system would work. You could hunt yearly, statistically speaking, in a random draw in Colorado, or you could go decades without drawing, statistically. Just depends on how you want to play the game.

 

[HiMtnHntr]

I was for pp banking. But I’m using my points this year. So now I’m against it.

 

[cnelk]

I was for pp banking. But I’m using my points this year. So now I’m against it.

I participated in Point Banking when they implemented it back in ‘08(?)

It was only in effect for one year. I could see how it would get people to use their PPs. But it has to be done for at least 3 years.

And I totally get that it would cause other issues too.