Point system sure is great?

Every System Gets Worked!

Some Are TARDS!

Some are NON-TARDS!

Depending on the Year!

Can You Blame TARDS For Wanting To Be NON-TARDS & Earning Points on Every Species & Every Once in a Lifetime Species Every Year?

Tell Me Utah Ain't Worried about any-F'N-thing but Money!
 
My wife doesn't hunt. Her fam does. I do. Our kids do

She's super cool about it.

I can't imagine having to tell her I just got a $25k fine to shoot a sheep. Or anything for that matter
 
There was a story about this a couple years ago in the DNR's officer magazine. I wonder who the St. George guy was ?
 
Utah needs to rename the once in a lifetime tags to once in 2 life time tags, or Not a chance in hell tags. I wish they would let my kids have my points when I die so at least I could get something out of all of these points I am accumulating. I guess that's why fraud is so appealing to some people , Its actually cheaper and faster and you will get to hunt it in this lifetime!
 
There is no FAIR answer or solution to this problem. But, I think all we can do is hope they eliminate points in X amount of time and we use our points accordingly. And say that number is 10 years, they do not issue any more points from here on out. Or, just stop with issuing points and let the dice roll. I dont know.
 
MuleyKiller said:
Utah needs to rename the once in a lifetime tags to once in 2 life time tags, or Not a chance in hell tags. I wish they would let my kids have my points when I die so at least I could get something out of all of these points I am accumulating. I guess that's why fraud is so appealing to some people , Its actually cheaper and faster and you will get to hunt it in this lifetime!
Click to expand...
This isn’t even close to accurate. Apply for somewhere other than San Juan, Henry’s and oak creeks. Pick up a new weapon type and learn to hunt with that. Plenty of great hunts to be had, multiple times in your life if you are willing to step out of your comfort zone and pursue opportunities over antler size
 
Bux n Dux said:
This isn’t even close to accurate. Apply for somewhere other than San Juan, Henry’s and oak creeks. Pick up a new weapon type and learn to hunt with that. Plenty of great hunts to be had, multiple times in your life if you are willing to step out of your comfort zone and pursue opportunities over antler size
Click to expand...
Once in a lifetime hunts ! Not Limited Entry! And its very true statement. With the continued point creep in all of Utah's units and across all species, your grandkids will never hunt!
 
Bux n Dux said:
This isn’t even close to accurate. Apply for somewhere other than San Juan, Henry’s and oak creeks. Pick up a new weapon type and learn to hunt with that. Plenty of great hunts to be had, multiple times in your life if you are willing to step out of your comfort zone and pursue opportunities over antler size
Click to expand...


So gray hairs can't do the same?

Only new dudes need to "pick up a new weapon type?"

When did gray hairs become beyond reproach?
 
I’m betting most of you didn’t do well in math or you don’t understand the point system.
The only applicant whose chances are not improved in the point system, is the first time applicant.
Without a point system everyone becomes a first time applicant every year! Having the poorest odds you will face. Granted everyone has the same “chance” but it remains your worst chance.
 
MulePacker said:
I’m betting most of you didn’t do well in math or you don’t understand the point system.
The only applicant whose chances are not improved in the point system, is the first time applicant.
Without a point system everyone becomes a first time applicant every year! Having the poorest odds you will face. Granted everyone has the same “chance” but it remains your worst chance.
Click to expand...
You're getting tricked by the system. It's similar to what they do on 'Let's Make A Deal' and 'Deal Or No Deal' as well as in Vegas. It's why Vegas shows us the historical results of Roulette right above the wheel. If you see that the last ten numbers were red, you're likely to think it's about time to hit on black. In reality, the next roll has the exact same odds of being red again.

If 1,000 people apply for 10 tags, the overall odds will always by 1%. There will always be 10 Successful emails and 990 Unsuccessful emails. It doesn't matter if there are 1,000 ping pong balls in the barrel or 100,000 ping pong balls in the barrel.

Point systems don't affect the odds, all they do is try and level out the chance that one person will draw two tags before somebody else draws one. But they don't actually change the overall odds.

The only way to affect the actual odds is to change either applicants or tags. Ultimately it's a very simple math equation. I'll say it again...

THE ONLY REAL WAY TO CHANGE ODDS OF DRAWING IS TO CHANGE EITHER APPLICANTS OR TAGS! NOTHING ELSE MATTERS!

PS... On Let's Make A Deal, it is mathematically better to always switch doors!
 
grizzly said:
You're getting tricked by the system. It's similar to what they do on 'Let's Make A Deal' and 'Deal Or No Deal' as well as in Vegas. It's why Vegas shows us the historical results of Roulette right above the wheel. If you see that the last ten numbers were red, you're likely to think it's about time to hit on black. In reality, the next roll has the exact same odds of being red again.

If 1,000 people apply for 10 tags, the overall odds will always by 1%. There will always be 10 Successful emails and 990 Unsuccessful emails. It doesn't matter if there are 1,000 ping pong balls in the barrel or 100,000 ping pong balls in the barrel.

Point systems don't affect the odds, all they do is try and level out the chance that one person will draw two tags before somebody else draws one. But they don't actually change the overall odds.

The only way to affect the actual odds is to change either applicants or tags. Ultimately it's a very simple math equation. I'll say it again...

THE ONLY REAL WAY TO CHANGE ODDS OF DRAWING IS TO CHANGE EITHER APPLICANTS OR TAGS! NOTHING ELSE MATTERS!

PS... On Let's Make A Deal, it is mathematically better to always switch doors!
Click to expand...
You couldn't be more wrong. If there are 1000 people drawing at 10 tags and one guy has 1000 ping pong balls and the other 999 have one each, the odds are not the same. Applicants is the bullshit they feed you to get new people to the bottom of the pyramid. Tags divided by applicants are the odds you typically see. The actual odds are tags divided by points. I understand that this varies by state.
 
That said point systems, IMO, make it worse because they're just a grab at money to sell licenses to people who have no intent to hunt a given state in a given year. I'm one of them. I put in for the hardest to draw hunts in every state which I apply unless I know for a fact I have time to go on a certain hunt. If I draw a premium unit I'll make time.
 
idahomuleyhunter said:
You couldn't be more wrong. If there are 1000 people drawing at 10 tags and one guy has 1000 ping pong balls and the other 999 have one each, the odds are not the same. Applicants is the bullshit they feed you to get new people to the bottom of the pyramid. Tags divided by applicants are the odds you typically see. The actual odds are tags divided by points. I understand that this varies by state.
Click to expand...
Read again what I said...

grizzly said:
If 1,000 people apply for 10 tags, the overall odds will always by 1%
Click to expand...

The reason you're wrong is because once the guy with 1,000 balls draws his tag, he's removed from the equation (his odds, each time they draw the ball are ~50.02%, though they change slightly with every removed name). It is highly likely that he'll draw within the first few attempts, but not guaranteed. Once he's drawn, any subsequent draws of his name are discarded and drawn again. That leaves the other 999 guys competing for the remaining nine tags (~0.9%).

If you imagine a giant auditorium with all 1,000 guys sitting inside hoping to get lucky it makes it easier to understand.

At the end of the night, no matter how many ping pong balls are in the barrel, there will ALWAYS be ten lucky hunters and 990 unlucky hunters.

Because nobody can have more than one tag, they always average out to 1:100. The odds of any individual can be affected, but the OVERALL odds can't be altered without changing the numerator or the denominator.

__________

However, when it comes to point systems you have to take your analogy a step further though. What if you give everybody 1,000 ping pong balls? Then everybody has equal odds again. That's more like a point system.

I may be sitting on 10 elk points in Wyoming, but when 1,000 other guys also have 10 elk points, and another 1,000 have 11 elk points, and another 1,000 have nine elk points... my odds aren't that much different than if we all had one ping pong ball in the barrel. But we have to pay the money for the point because we don't want to be the guy with no elk points; then our individual odds would be negatively affected, even though the overall odds remain the same.

______________

In your post above, you said "actual the odds are tags divided by points"

We're using the comparison that ping pong balls are the points. The more points you have, the more ping pong balls you get.

If there were 10 tags and 10 applicants but one guy got 1,000 balls and the other nine guys each got one ball, using your math equation the odds would be 10/1009 (~0.99%). THAT IS INCORRECT!

In the scenario above, the odds are 100%. It would take a long time to get all 1009 balls drawn from the barrel, but ultimately all ten guys would get a tag because odds are tags (10) divided by applicants (10).

Hopefully that example helps you see why you divide tags by applicants and not tags by points.
 
Last edited:
grizzly said:
Read again what I said...



The reason you're wrong is because once the guy with 1,000 balls draws his tag, he's removed from the equation (his odds, each time they draw the ball are ~50.02%, though they change slightly with every removed name). It is highly likely that he'll draw within the first few attempts, but not guaranteed. Once he's drawn, any subsequent draws of his name are discarded and drawn again. That leaves the other 999 guys competing for the remaining nine tags (~0.9%).

If you imagine a giant auditorium with all 1,000 guys sitting inside hoping to get lucky it makes it easier to understand.

At the end of the night, no matter how many ping pong balls are in the barrel, there will ALWAYS be ten lucky hunters and 990 unlucky hunters.

Because nobody can have more than one tag, they always average out to 1:100. The odds of any individual can be affected, but the OVERALL odds can't be altered without changing the numerator or the denominator.

__________

However, when it comes to point systems you have to take your analogy a step further though. What if you give everybody 1,000 ping pong balls? Then everybody has equal odds again. That's more like a point system.

I may be sitting on 10 elk points in Wyoming, but when 1,000 other guys also have 10 elk points, and another 1,000 have 11 elk points, and another 1,000 have nine elk points... my odds aren't that much different than if we all had one ping pong ball in the barrel. But we have to pay the money for the point because we don't want to be the guy with no elk points; then our individual odds would be negatively affected, even though the overall odds remain the same.
Click to expand...

You must be an Amarillo Slim disciple:
"The odds of every bet are 50/50, you either win or you lose."

The "OVERALL odds" isn't a thing. And these oversimplified examples are ignoring the point that there aren't enough tags to go around. The ladders are staggered such that the people on top can never be caught. There isn't one person ahead of you there are thousands and most of them will die with their points. Your example would make sense if the pool rolled every few years, but it doesn't, the pyramid continues to get bigger with the top higher, those at the top approach true odds, if you're not there you never will be. Anyone entering the pool now cannot, except thru luck of longevity, improve his odds and his odds will likely never approach that of a random draw.
 
mt_sheep.png
 
Above is the 100-20 Sheep unit from Montana last year. as you can see the 558 is the number of applicants published in regs. But the draw actually includes 49919 "applicants". I understand this is without replacement, but the maximum number of points that can leave the pool are 1600. As you can see unless you're on top if the pyramid you aren't getting the .72% odds. What's more the 29 people at max points will still be there next year.
 
I'm as anti-points as anybody out there, but dividing tags by points is not the accurate way to calculate odds. The controlling number is the person behind the application, not the application itself, and once the person draws he's removed from the equation and can't draw again. No matter what you do with points in MT-100-20, it will still be .72% chance of drawing until you change tags or applicants.

The reasoning behind point systems is to get people to participate every year (?) and weight the probabilities to reward longevity, not to "increase odds" of drawing.

Because increased applicants really do reduce odds of success (by raising the denominator), point systems, which cause more people to apply annually, actually serve to decrease odds, not increase them.
 
grizzly said:
Point systems don't affect the odds, all they do is try and level out the chance that one person will draw two tags before somebody else draws one. But they don't actually change the overall odds.
Click to expand...
Eastman's explained what I said above in this way.

Screenshot_20220219-193139_Samsung Internet.jpg


They refer to point systems as "equalizing" the odds, but correctly identify in the first sentence the controlling factors as tags and applicants. As I stated above, the impetus is to make it less likely that one person draws multiple tags before another person draws his first.... not to alter the overall draw odds.

I've made it as clear as I can. If you choose to still divide tags by points, that's totally fine with me.
 
grizzly said:
Eastman's explained what I said above in this way.

View attachment 68736

They refer to point systems as "equalizing" the odds, but correctly identify in the first sentence the controlling factors as tags and applicants. As I stated above, the impetus is to make it less likely that one person draws multiple tags before another person draws his first.... not to alter the overall draw odds.

I've made it as clear as I can. If you choose to still divide tags by points, that's totally fine with me.
Click to expand...
It's math brother. Drawings are designed using random numbers. In a point squared state you get one random number for the square of your points. In Montana, as an example, if a person has 10 points he gets 10 squared=100 plus 1 that everyone gets. So 101 random numbers assigned to him. If you have 2 points you get 5 random numbers.

The guy with 10 points literally accounts for 101 random numbers. You actually have more draws in the hat. There's a reason most of the tags get drawn in the top third of point holders. Look at any one in a life units in any state, the distribution looks the same. As you'll notice the top third keeps getting higher every year. So when the guy with 10 points this year gets to 20 the odds of getting drawn with 30 will be close to the true odds and the guy with 20 is no closer than he was at 10. Actually he's likely further.
 
idahomuleyhunter said:
It's math brother. Drawings are designed using random numbers. In a point squared state you get one random number for the square of your points. In Montana, as an example, if a person has 10 points he gets 10 squared=100 plus 1 that everyone gets. So 101 random numbers assigned to him. If you have 2 points you get 5 random numbers.

The guy with 10 points literally accounts for 101 random numbers. You actually have more draws in the hat. There's a reason most of the tags get drawn in the top third of point holders. Look at any one in a life units in any state, the distribution looks the same. As you'll notice the top third keeps getting higher every year. So when the guy with 10 points this year gets to 20 the odds of getting drawn with 30 will be close to the true odds and the guy with 20 is no closer than he was at 10. Actually he's likely further.
Click to expand...
Here's a math question for you... Think about the answer and I'll give it at the end of this post.

What is 1+2+3+4+5... (to infinity)?

___________

I share that well-known math problem to make a point about the trickery of math. There's also a reason that there are classes in college teaching Probability and Statistics. They can be confusing to people. Vegas was built on it.

_____________

I understand the squared system. You're focusing on one person and not seeing the forest for the trees. The guy with 10 points will have the exact same number of chances as everybody else with 10 points. He'll have a reduced probability of drawing compared to those with 15 points, he'll have an improved probability of drawing compared to somebody with 5 points, but the overall odds for the unit will remain the same. Tags divided by applicants. Nothing more, nothing less.

No matter how many ping pong balls go in the barrel, as long as everybody can only draw once the results will always end up with a specified number of happy people (# of tags) and a specified number of unhappy people (# of applicants, less those that drew tags).

____________

This conversation started with you saying...

MulePacker said:
The only applicant whose chances are not improved in the point system, is the first time applicant.
Click to expand...
You apparently believe the 2nd-year applicant has a better chance of drawing a tag in MT-100-20 with 49,000 ping pong balls in the barrel than just 558, which is what it would be without a point system. This is not true. His probability is incrementally less to account for the increased probability of the guy with 20 points. It MUST be a zero-sum game. Odds can't be produced out of thin air simply by adding ping pong balls.

I can see that you understand how point systems work structurally, but you must not understand how for every person whose individual probability of drawing increases, somebody else has their probability decrease proportionately. Resulting in the same overall odds as if there was no point system at all.

If you admit that point systems increase applicants, then you must be aware point systems DECREASE overall draw odds. Anybody that says point systems improve draw odds is simply wrong and is falling for a common gimmick utilized by game shows and casinos everywhere. Our brains are wired to fall for these tricks, unless somebody adheres to strict laws of probability, it is easy to fall for them.

Certainly you agree that even in a squared point system if there are 10 applicants for 10 tags, the odds of drawing are 100%. Regardless of how many points anybody has. Some could have 25 points and others could be in their first year, but actual odds are still 100%. Just apply that simple concept and you'll see that overall odds really are TAGS DIVIDED BY APPLICANTS.

__________

And for the answer...

1+2+3+4+5.... = -1/12
 
Last edited:
grizzly said:
Here's a math question for you... Think about the answer and I'll give it at the end of this post.

What is 1+2+3+4+5... (to infinity)?

___________

I share that well-known math problem to make a point about the trickery of math. There's also a reason that there are classes in college teaching Probability and Statistics. They can be confusing to people. Vegas was built on it.

_____________

I understand the squared system. You're focusing on one person and not seeing the forest for the trees. The guy with 10 points will have the exact same number of chances as everybody else with 10 points. He'll have a reduced probability of drawing compared to those with 15 points, he'll have an improved probability of drawing compared to somebody with 5 points, but the overall odds for the unit will remain the same. Tags divided by applicants. Nothing more, nothing less.

No matter how many ping pong balls go in the barrel, as long as everybody can only draw once the results will always end up with a specified number of happy people (# of tags) and a specified number of unhappy people (# of applicants, less those that drew tags).

____________

This conversation started with you saying...


You apparently believe the 2nd-year applicant has a better chance of drawing a tag in MT-100-20 with 49,000 ping pong balls in the barrel than just 558, which is what it would be without a point system. This is not true. His probability is incrementally less to account for the increased probability of the guy with 20 points. It MUST be a zero-sum game. Odds can't be produced out of thin air simply by adding ping pong balls.

I can see that you understand how point systems work structurally, but you must not understand how for every person whose individual probability of drawing increases, somebody else has their probability decrease proportionately. Resulting in the same overall odds as if there was no point system at all.

If you admit that point systems increase applicants, then you must be aware point systems DECREASE overall draw odds. Anybody that says point systems improve draw odds is simply wrong and is falling for a common gimmick utilized by game shows and casinos everywhere. Our brains are wired to fall for these tricks, unless somebody adheres to strict laws of probability, it is easy to fall for them.

Certainly you agree that even in a squared point system if there are 10 applicants for 10 tags, the odds of drawing are 100%. Regardless of how many points anybody has. Some could have 25 points and others could be in their first year, but actual odds are still 100%. Just apply that simple concept and you'll see that overall odds really are TAGS DIVIDED BY APPLICANTS.

__________

And for the answer...

1+2+3+4+5.... = -1/12
Click to expand...
I agree that overall odds are tags divided by applicants. If I'm contemplating a multiyear investment in points why do I care about that? I care about my odds of drawing now and my odds of potentially drawing in the future. If I'm not in the top of the pool now my odds are significantly worse than the simple odds you're calculating and because the pool isn't rolling over my odds will never improve, I think we're in agreement on that. If I enter the Montana sheep pool this year my odds will never be as high as the overall odds you're calculating unless I outlive everyone in front of me. I.e. you're fore ever locked into your spot in the pyramid.
 
There are two different odds/probability issues at play. I'll speak to AZ because I'm not up to all the nuances of other states.

First, the number of points one has simply helps that person's odds/probability to draw a low number. With 1 BP, he gets one shot. With 10 BPs, he gets 10 numbers with only the lowest used in the draw.

Thus, the BPs have nothing to do with final draw as far as the odds; each applicant has only one point. So the odds are based on tags & applicants only.
 
Yes you only use your "best" result but the probability of your best result being better than the other guys is 10:1. I don't think AZ squares points. I think grizzly and I agree that points, in the context of one in a life species(or elk/deer units that are effectively on in a life) can only hurt your chances of drawing. The top of the pyramid approaches overall odds and everyone else's odds are progressively worse the further you are from the top. If the species has enough tags to "roll" the applicants then the point system effectively guarantees you'll be draw eventually as your odds will improve every year.
 
idahomuleyhunter said:
Yes you only use your "best" result but the probability of your best result being better than the other guys is 10:1.
Click to expand...
It's not that simple. There is no 'winning' number among that 10, per se. The 10 chances simply generate 10 random numbers, every one of which could be higher than the number generated for the one-point holder. So in reality, the 10-point guy has a 100% chance to draw a low number among the 10 he gets, and the 1-point guy has 100% chance to draw his low number. They aren't competing again each other, as they are in the actual draw.

Of course, none of the above applies to a separate 'bonus point' round where the most points count.
 
Last edited:
MulePacker said:
Grizzly
If you were to put in for a Cache Moose Tag in 2022 what are your odds?
Click to expand...

It's not knowable because it would depend on how many points I had and who else applied, but not for the reason I think you're alluding to. It's because Utah has two tag pools. If I had enough points to be in the top pool, my odds could be guaranteed, that's different from a true bonus point system; it's because the "tag/applicant" equation is so vastly different depending on the pool. If I'm in the top pool, it's 6 divided by applicants. If I'm not, it's 5 divided by applicants. Utah did two pools because the bonus point system doesn't work the way many people think it does.

Last year, with 26 points, there was 1 applicant trying to draw out of a pool of 6 available tags. Tags divided by applicants is 6/1, so clearly that hunter was guaranteed a tag.

The number of points (26) is never figured into the calculation in the way that was said above.

Utah, as we all know, has instituted a bicameral system where they have two separate draw pools. This limits the number of applicants and tags in the upper pool until a person eventually is guaranteed. Without that bicameral setup, it is possible that a person could be unlucky and never draw. They would never be guaranteed.
 
I am making the assumption that if you had 26 points last year and didn't draw that 27 this year would get you a permit. It has nothing to do with anything other than you'd be top dog for the bonus round. No calculations. Sure 6 more guys with 27 points could show up. If they exist.
 
Outdoorwriter is right, they generate a low number which is then used in the draw.

Random number assignment is the "draw". Then tags are allocated starting with the lowest number and working thru whichever states system for assignment. Utah, for example, dumps you from the one in a life pool if you draw LE deer or elk. Montana allows you to draw into every pool.
 
idahomuleyhunter said:
I am making the assumption that if you had 26 points last year and didn't draw that 27 this year would get you a permit. It has nothing to do with anything other than you'd be top dog for the bonus round. No calculations. Sure 6 more guys with 27 points could show up. If they exist.
Click to expand...

Your Cache Moose example just proved my argument that what you said below is incorrect.

idahomuleyhunter said:
The actual odds are tags divided by points.
Click to expand...

Last year, in the 25 point pool, there were 15 guys trying for the five remaining bonus tags left over after the guy with 26 points drew. There odds were 5/15 or 1/3. It is not 5/375 (15*25) which is what it would be if it was really figured as tags divided by points.

This will be the last time I say it, the true odds are always TAGS DIVIDED BY APPLICANTS. Everything else is an attempt to even out the probabilities, not to affect the overall odds.
 
OutdoorWriter said:
It's not that simple. There is no 'winning' number among that 10, per se. The 10 chances simply generate 10 random numbers, every one of which could be higher than the number generated for the one-point holder. So in reality, the 10-point guy has a 100% chance to draw a low number among the 10 he gets, and the 1-point guy has 100% chance to draw his low number. They aren't competing again each other, as they are in the actual draw.

Of course, none of the above applies to a separate 'bonus point' round where the most points count.
Click to expand...
You're right it is an over simplification. If it truly is a random distribution with equal chance for each number to be higher or lower then assign the person with one point a random number. The person with 10 points then gets 10 numbers. Each of these 10 numbers should have equal probability of being higher or lower than the person with one number, since it is random. What is the probability that the person with 10 numbers doesn't draw a single random number lower than the person with 1?
 
grizzly said:
Your Cache Moose example just proved my argument that what you said below is incorrect.



Last year, in the 25 point pool, there were 15 guys trying for the five remaining bonus tags left over after the guy with 26 points drew. There odds were 5/15 or 1/3. It is not 5/375 (15*25) which is what it would be if it was really figured as tags divided by points.

This will be the last time I say it, the true odds are always TAGS DIVIDED BY APPLICANTS. Everything else is an attempt to even out the probabilities, not to affect the overall odds.
Click to expand...
this is a different system. You're conflating a preference based system that guarantees tags to a bonus point system. Utah does both.
 
This will be the last time I say it, the true odds are always TAGS DIVIDED BY APPLICANTS. Everything else is an attempt to even out the probabilities, not to affect the overall odds.

Do you buy points? If so why? You claim the guy with one point has the same odds as the guy with 20.

If probabilities are even why do the tag distributions skew to the high point totals?
 
idahomuleyhunter said:
What is the probability that the person with 10 numbers doesn't draw a single random number lower than the person with 1?
Click to expand...
Would need to know other factors related to the number generating system to try & figure such. The only sure thing that is 100% probability is they will both get a low number. And then...that number is still meaningless unless the two hunters compete in the draw for the same hunt.

And..to further complicate it, the random numbers are regenerated at each phase of the draw. In reality, that means someone can get up to three different #s for the same critter draw.
 
Hopefully the system is in fact random. That and how the points are calculated tell you what you need to know. Assume a single die is your randomizer. The person with one roll's expectation is 3.5, the person with 10 gets 10 rolls to beat 3.5. Before either person has drawn, ie results are still unknown, the person with 10 rolls has .5^10(50% chance to not beat 3.5) of not rolling lower than 3.5. Therefore he has 1-.5^10 of rolling at least one number less than 3.5. This equates to a 99.9% chance of beating the guy with one roll. Extrapolate to a trillion sided die the odds never change.
 
OutdoorWriter said:
There are two different odds/probability issues at play. I'll speak to AZ because I'm not up to all the nuances of other states.

First, the number of points one has simply helps that person's odds/probability to draw a low number. With 1 BP, he gets one shot. With 10 BPs, he gets 10 numbers with only the lowest used in the draw.

Thus, the BPs have nothing to do with final draw as far as the odds; each applicant has only one point. So the odds are based on tags & applicants only.
Click to expand...
Does every applicant that is brand new to the drawing start out at the 1 BP mark for the draw? Or do they start out with 0 BP their first year they apply?
 
Most states you'd enter your first draw with 0 bonus points but you still get one number drawn. Arizona has some other ways to earn bonus points, so you could potentially go into the first draw with more than one, I think.
 
After 22 points for moose I'm at .04%

So unlike a new guy who would be 99.9999999% unlikely to draw,. I'm just 99.96% unlikely.

Or, 99% UNLIKELY.
 
Bux n Dux said:
Does every applicant that is brand new to the drawing start out at the 1 BP mark for the draw? Or do they start out with 0 BP their first year they apply?
Click to expand...
No BPs per se, but they get the random number generated by the app. A 2nd year app after a no draw the first time gets two #s, etc. And that's the case regardless of the BP count; the app always generates a number apart from the BPs.

There is also a loyalty BP that's awarded after 5 years in a row of applying for the same species, but it disappears if you miss a year. You can earn a permanent BP with either HE or the newer Hunter Ethics deal.

So it's possible for someone who gets drawn for a permit after he has applied for that species for 5 years to go into the next draw where he gets three random numbers: one for the app, one for HE, one for the loyalty BP.
 
Last edited:
My apologies since the post is in the Utah forum I figured we were talking of the Utah system.
I am a glass half full person and my experience has been the point system does improve odds.
I have drawn 2 LE elk tags, 1,LE Antelope tag, 1 Bear tag since the implementation of the point system. I currently possess enough points to guarantee a moose, deer and Bear permit if I so choose to use them. It may not be on my first choice unit but they still guarantee a permit for the specie designated. I would believe I’m in the minority of applicants.
The bonus points I’ve accrued are the only reason I’m in this position. Explain to me again how they don’t improve odds?
By the way I’ve drawn 2 tags in Idaho in my life both in 1978 if I remember right. Carry an Idaho license every year. Am I just unlucky or are the odds against me?
 
Last edited:
When you say you possess enough points to guarantee a draw in Utah, this means you are at the top of the point pyramid and you are not drawing into a bonus point pool but rather participating in the preference system that guarantees tags for the highest point holders. The problem with this for people who aren't at the top of the pyramid already is that they can never pass the people ahead of them thus will never be in the position you are in.

In a general bonus point pool for a species that doesn't have enough tags to clear the pool, the top rung gets higher every year and the base gets bigger. If you aren't at the top(and for most who are) you'll never have odds as good as a random draw. This is why points make no sense for once in a lifetime species. As stated above, the theory behind the system is to prevent some people from drawing multiple times before another gets drawn. In once in a lifetime this is effectively irrelevant.

In species/hunts where the pool clears bonus points do help your odds because you will separate from the pack if you go multiple years without drawing. There are many LE tags in Utah that fit this description which is likely why you've drawn multiple times.

If you have truly entered the Idaho draw every year since 1978 and not drawn you are wildly unlucky, none of the tags in the state are that long of odds, and certainly weren't thru the 80's, sorry. Enjoy the moose and deer when you choose to cash in.
 
I am not at the top of the point pool for any specie. I do have enough points that I can shop units and be placed in the 50 percent tags. It is the game I’ve played to draw all my tags. If you wish to quantify my points as preference pool points so be it but you are wrong. My ten dollar payment has been considered purchasing a bonus point, the points I currently hold are bonus points. Eventually giving me better odds!

Unlucky not so many of my best hunts have been in Idaho. Thanks to OTC tags.
 
The FIX is impossible. Limited resource with an exploding population means nothing will ever get better. Unless hogs take over the state.
 
The best odds of drawing one of these coveted tags is clearly to get a TV show, or aYouTube channel or IG account going, get thousands of followers, and apply at the expo.

Those are your best odds, it's demonstrated every year.
 
Points systems decrease the overall odds of drawing a tag by increasing the number of applicants. Read that again.

States that don't have a point system see fewer application - and reduced revenue as a result, assuming they don't whore out their draw system to a consultant.

If there are no points, people only apply if they actually want to go hunting in that state each year. Points systems incentivize hunters to put in every year, basically with a fear of missing out if you don't maintain your position "in line." Even though in many states the increased probability of drawing with more points is very small. (True preference draws are different, but an entirely different problem.)

Look at the drawing odds in a state like Idaho, for example. Idaho is a random draw state. While the odds are still tough for a sheep tag, for example, many are in the 1:30 to 1:100 range. Not a lot of chance of drawing, but about 1-3%.
With points in Montana, you typically have odds of worse than 1:1,000. Moose odds are even more telling, with many units in Idaho having odds better than 1:10. Montana odds are astronomically high, EVEN with max points.

As was previously stated, points systems were devised for two simple reasons. Reduce the possibility of one person getting lucky repeatedly in a given state, AND make more money from people who will never hunt in a given state.

Points systems have corrupted many departments and set unrealistic expectations for many hunters. They discourage new applicants, and while they do little to improve odds for those at the top of the pool, still provide a sense of entitlement to those who have a high number of points.

Bill
 
marburg said:
The best odds of drawing one of these coveted tags is clearly to get a TV show, or aYouTube channel or IG account going, get thousands of followers, and apply at the expo.

Those are your best odds, it's demonstrated every year.
Click to expand...
Haha, saw David Wise drew either a paunsy or Henry’s(I’m thinking it was one of those 2 tbh I’ve never set foot in either one) archery tag this past year. Vortex made sure to send me an email with the video, it was his 2nd year applying. Looked like he shot a nice 150” buck?
 
Delta said:
The FIX is impossible. Limited resource with an exploding population means nothing will ever get better. Unless hogs take over the state.
Click to expand...
With the “kill everything” mentality in this state, you could release 1,000 wild pigs in utah with an open season and they’d be wiped out in 3 years.
 
Bux n Dux said:
With the “kill everything” mentality in this state, you could release 1,000 wild pigs in utah with an open season and they’d be wiped out in 3 years.
Click to expand...
Factious post. Aimed at the trail camera and so called guide folks. The Texas boys can’t handle the situation, but in Utah we would grow 40” tusks. Damn hogzilla, we we grow multiple granders!!!
 
The draw system in Utah is purposefully confusing. What I know is this- if only the top point holders drew tags each year, 97% of hunters in Utah would be calling for major changes... But, since the DWR throws the rest of the point holders a bone each year with random BP tags, we all (mostly) tolerate it.

I agree that one reason they use the point system is to get people to put in for hunts they otherwise wouldn't. We say, "There's always a chance". Or how many of us hear, "Oh, my friend's sister's husband drew a Henry's deer tag with 1 point!" It keeps us appeased to some extent. :rolleyes:
 

Similar threads

Founder
Trophy Whitetail Hunts in Kansas and Indiana
Replies
0
Views
593
Founder
Founder
Founder
Montana Mule Deer, Whitetail, Antelope, Archery Elk
Replies
0
Views
582
Founder
Founder
Founder
Great Hunt Testimonial for Sonora Outfitters
Replies
0
Views
435
Founder
Founder

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

B93040C2-4768-4C89-88CE-CBBF8D0B6300.jpeg
Big Velvet Muley
D492D10A-5476-4BB9-A5D3-D06DA08A1E82.jpeg
210EDD8A-734B-4766-88C7-50497227AB55.jpeg
MUD_0451.jpeg
20230814_203944.jpg
ERiLr+pARlGn93Z+te+woQ_thumb_693f-DeNoiseAI-standard.jpg
1666177517745.jpeg
8DBB7459-A5CE-47D2-AE21-FC504D0B896C.jpeg
37907.jpeg
Big Nevada Buck.jpeg
Buck.jpg
Bearpaw Outfitters

Experience world class hunting for mule deer, elk, cougar, bear, turkey, moose, sheep and more.

Wild West Outfitters

Hunt the big bulls, bucks, bear and cats in southern Utah. Your hunt of a lifetime awaits.

J & J Outfitters

Offering quality fair-chase hunts for trophy mule deer, elk, shiras moose and mountain lions.

Shane Scott Outfitting

Quality trophy hunting in Utah. Offering FREE Utah drawing consultation. Great local guides.

Utah Big Game Outfitters

Specializing in bighorn sheep, mule deer, elk, mountain goat, lions, bears & antelope.

Apex Outfitters

We offer experienced guides who hunt Elk, Mule Deer, Antelope, Sheep, Bison, Goats, Cougar, and Bear.

Urge 2 Hunt

We offer high quality hunts on large private ranches around the state, with landowner vouchers.

Allout Guiding & Outfitting

Offering high quality mule deer, elk, bear, cougar and bison hunts in the Book Cliffs and Henry Mtns.

Lickity Split Outfitters

General season and LE fully guided hunts for mule deer, elk, moose, antelope, lion, turkey, bear and coyotes.

Back
Top Bottom