# Expo Results 2016



## polarbear (Aug 1, 2011)

Here you go.

http://www.huntexpo.com/successful-applicants.php


----------



## Clarq (Jul 21, 2011)

Cool. Hoping to hear some success stories here.


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

No dice.

I know no one who drew, but I wish those that drew the best with their hunts.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

I know a few names on the list, but nobody really close to me. Bummer. I guess I just have to drawings regular draw!


----------



## Jrdnmoore3 (Sep 1, 2013)

Good friend of mine drew the desert bighorn tag down south should be a fun hunt to tag along with


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

I recognize a couple names but not my own.


----------



## KineKilla (Jan 28, 2011)

Me and my son struck out again. Onward and upward!


----------



## MWScott72 (May 23, 2011)

Zilch...didn't even see many from my town. Must have been lots of people from Vernal and W. Point attend though...


----------



## 3arabians (Dec 9, 2014)

MWScott72 said:


> Zilch...didn't even see many from my town. Must have been lots of people from Vernal and W. Point attend though...


I know man! Seems like there is always at least one West Point winner every year. Every year I'm thinking its my turn to be one of the West Point winners. Never happens though


----------



## Mallardhead12 (Oct 17, 2011)

Another year of not winning an expo tag. Oh well ill just put in for powerball I think I have a better chance.

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk


----------



## bowgy (Oct 10, 2007)

Wow, I saved $60 plus a tank of gas to get there over last year. I think I will take that $50 and take my wife out to dinner;-):grin:


----------



## KineKilla (Jan 28, 2011)

It appears the big winner is Mark Fransen, Rexburg ID. 

He drew both a LE Elk and LE Deer tag for the bookcliffs...lucky guy.

West Point had 4 winners but Riverton leads with 7. Many towns had 6 winners. Congrats to the lucky few.


----------



## BradN (Sep 25, 2007)

No luck this year. But, I can't complain as I drew a Fishlake Any Weapon Bull tag last year, and had a great time scouting and hunting an area I previously knew nothing about.


----------



## gdog (Sep 13, 2007)

Will and Heather Farrar family pulled another Expo tag.....


----------



## bowhunt3r4l1f3 (Jan 12, 2011)

gdog said:


> Will and Heather Farrar family pulled another Expo tag.....


Yea what are the chances a couple Moss Back yuppies would draw yet another? :shock: Apparently really good...


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

bowhunt3r4l1f3 said:


> Yea what are the chances a couple Moss Back yuppies would draw yet another? :shock: Apparently really good...


Imagine what you would find if the normal draw results were made public again. They should have never stopped posting those results.

-DallanC


----------



## Tl23life21 (Sep 29, 2015)

I'm Tyson lambert I drew the early fishlake any legal weapon tag can't wait to stoked I feel like it's a dream hope to find some big Bulls


----------



## BROWN BAGGER (Sep 13, 2007)

does anyone else feel the expo has their hand in the cookie jar. With the amount of entry's
from just the hunters in this state, (which make the odds huge) sure seems to be allot of 
out of state winners. remember only 200 tags where drawn, with how many out of state successful.
those are some nice odds. ummm who runs this expo? remember all these tags where yours.
not to mention they won't publish where all the money goes.


----------



## Billy3136 (May 31, 2015)

It's all about that anticipation and excitment as you pull up that list....then reality crushes your dreams again..... Oh welll, General Season Elk it is again!


----------



## Clarq (Jul 21, 2011)

gdog said:


> Will and Heather Farrar family pulled another Expo tag.....


I wasn't going to bring that up, but the only name I even recognized off the list was Heather Farrar's. I've seen her in my dad's Mossback DVDs. Pretty sure the Farrars have already hunted the Paunsaugunt a few times...


----------



## quakeycrazy (Sep 18, 2007)

Question is, what are we going to do to stop the corruption? I don't attend the expo out of principle because SFW has been known to scheme but what upsets me is when the same people draw tags over and over when the odds don't add up. Let's get some transparency and get those tags back in the general pool.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

It would be interesting to find out just what some of the winners that drew a opportunity to purchase a tag spent on the drawings.


----------



## CPAjeff (Dec 20, 2014)

Congrats to those that drew tags!

Critter - I generally spend around $200 in expo apps every year and have done for the past few years and have yet to draw one. Maybe I should have just purchased a landowner voucher in Colorado with that money that's gone down the drain. On a positive note, of the $235 I spent this year - $164.50 went to SFW and heaven knows what they will do with it, the other $70.50 went to the DNR ... and heaven knows what they will do with it! Yet, I still apply every year.....:-?

After writing what I did above, I am just wondering if anyone has any magic beans for sale???


----------



## Clarq (Jul 21, 2011)

Critter said:


> It would be interesting to find out just what some of the winners that drew a opportunity to purchase a tag spent on the drawings.


Yeah, it would. I looked at last year's odds, and calculated that someone last year who applied for every hoofed animal hunt had around a 10% chance of getting their name drawn. Thus, it would seem that if you throw hundreds into the drawing year after year, you can reasonably expect to get a tag or two eventually. I'll bet there are a few people who apply for virtually everything. If I had the resources, I probably would too.

I only applied for the hunts I will probably never get any other way... so my odds were ~0.5%, and I can reasonably expect to never draw unless I alter my application strategy.


----------



## Mallardhead12 (Oct 17, 2011)

Being a high school student I only applied $30 so I'm not too surprised that I didn't draw anything.

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk


----------



## Tl23life21 (Sep 29, 2015)

I drew fishlake I spent 65$ and got the fishlake early rifle tag anyone that hunted that recent wanna pm me I'd love it I'm still feel like a dream can't wait to start scouting


----------



## KineKilla (Jan 28, 2011)

I spend on average $300 applying to hunt in this state every year, not including the combination license I have to have first.

It's ok, it's only $20+ a month and I'm hopeful my name will get drawn eventually. It does me no good to complain about not drawing so I try to limit my b****ing. Last year me and everyone in my 5 person hunting party didn't draw a single GS tag but we still hunted spikes and bought a late season landowner antlerless tag.


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

BROWN BAGGER said:


> does anyone else feel the expo has their hand in the cookie jar. With the amount of entry's
> from just the hunters in this state, (which make the odds huge) sure seems to be allot of
> out of state winners. remember only 200 tags where drawn, with how many out of state successful.
> those are some nice odds. ummm who runs this expo? remember all these tags where yours.
> not to mention they won't publish where all the money goes.


27 of 200. Not a lot.

It's an random draw.


----------



## bowgy (Oct 10, 2007)

CPAjeff said:


> Congrats to those that drew tags!
> 
> Critter - I generally spend around $200 in expo apps every year and have done for the past few years and have yet to draw one. Maybe I should have just purchased a landowner voucher in Colorado with that money that's gone down the drain. On a positive note, of the $235 I spent this year - $164.50 went to SFW and heaven knows what they will do with it, the other $70.50 went to the DNR ... and heaven knows what they will do with it! Yet, I still apply every year.....:-?
> 
> After writing what I did above, I am just wondering if anyone has any magic beans for sale???


No beans, but I have some beach front property in Southern Utah that I would let you have for the right price;-)


----------



## CPAjeff (Dec 20, 2014)

bowgy said:


> No beans, but I have some beach front property in Southern Utah that I would let you have for the right price;-)


Ha ha thanks!


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

Clarq said:


> Yeah, it would. I looked at last year's odds, and calculated that someone last year who applied for every hoofed animal hunt had around a 10% chance of getting their name drawn. Thus, it would seem that if you throw hundreds into the drawing year after year, you can reasonably expect to get a tag or two eventually. I'll bet there are a few people who apply for virtually everything. If I had the resources, I probably would too.
> 
> I only applied for the hunts I will probably never get any other way... so my odds were ~0.5%, and I can reasonably expect to never draw unless I alter my application strategy.


Not really sure about you're math Clarq. There are no odds even close to 1/10.------SS


----------



## Clarq (Jul 21, 2011)

Springville Shooter said:


> Not really sure about you're math Clarq. There are no odds even close to 1/10.------SS


I guess I didn't make myself clear...

I'm saying that, based on last year's odds, a person who applied for EVERY hunt involving a hoofed animal (that means ALL deer, elk, pronghorn, moose, sheep, bison and goat tags of ALL weapon types) has around a 10% chance of getting any ONE of those tags (I just double-checked and found that it's actually 8.94%).

This would be for a total of 80 hunts at a cost of $400 to apply.


----------



## hazmat (Apr 23, 2009)

Clarq said:


> I guess I didn't make myself clear...
> 
> I'm saying that, based on last year's odds, a person who applied for EVERY hunt involving a hoofed animal (that means ALL deer, elk, pronghorn, moose, sheep, bison and goat tags of ALL weapon types) has around a 10% chance of getting any ONE of those tags (I just double-checked and found that it's actually 8.94%).
> 
> This would be for a total of 80 hunts at a cost of $400 to apply.


You might want to triple check that your odds of drawing one of these expo tags are very very very slim to none. 1 in 8000 is more of a reality then 1 in 8


----------



## hazmat (Apr 23, 2009)

And it would cost 1000k to put in for all of the tags


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

Please share your formula with us. I'm no mathematician but during my cursory glance at the odds, it looked like the best odds were around 1/500 or so......many are way worse. How could the cumulative odds be better than the best sample? 

No offense and I may be way off but I think you are missing something in your calculations. If I'm somehow missing out on 8-10% odds I will be very disappointed.------SS


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

hazmat said:


> And it would cost 1000k to put in for all of the tags


:shock:??? My math must really suck........I'm not seeing this as correct either??----SS


----------



## Clarq (Jul 21, 2011)

hazmat said:


> You might want to triple check that your odds of drawing one of these expo tags are very very very slim to none. 1 in 8000 is more of a reality then 1 in 8


See for yourself... we can talk more if you do the math and reach a different conclusion.

http://www.huntexpo.com/odds.php

Even if odds were 1 in 8000 for each tag, if you applied for 80 tags then your odds would be 80:8000 or 1:100.

And there is only ONE tag that has odds worse than 1/8000.


----------



## hazmat (Apr 23, 2009)

Over 40 thousand people attended this year's hunt expo. Even if only 80 % put in for tags wich is a low number. Do you really think your odds are still 1 in 8 out of 200 tags. Sorry but your number Is way way way off. And out of that 40k that attended there is alot more who did not attend the show but just validated their tags at the window. Your odds of drawing an wasatch elk tag a few years ago were 1 in 4500. Don't even get me started on the fact that people just donated MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO A CORRUPT ORGANIZATION THAT WILL POCKET MOST OF THE MONEY FOR THEIR OWN PERSONAL WELL BEING. THIS SHOW IS A GIMMICK THAT PIMPS PUBLIC TAGS AND GIVES NOTHING BACK TO UTAH WILDLIFE. THEY ARE RIPPING YOU GUYS OFF.


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

Clarq said:


> See for yourself... we can talk more if you do the math and reach a different conclusion.
> 
> http://www.huntexpo.com/odds.php
> 
> ...


If the odds were 1 in 8000 for each tag, the average for all tags would be 80:640,000 or 1 in 8000 still....by my figgering. Although 1 in 100 is much closer to reality than 1 in 10..... I could be wrong though because I ran out of fingers and toes a long time ago.-------SS


----------



## Clarq (Jul 21, 2011)

Springville Shooter said:


> Please share your formula with us. I'm no mathematician but during my cursory glance at the odds, it looked like the best odds were around 1/500 or so......many are way worse. How could the cumulative odds be better than the best sample?
> 
> No offense and I may be way off but I think you are missing something in your calculations. If I'm somehow missing out on 8-10% odds I will be very disappointed.------SS


Let's start with an example...

If I roll a die, my odds of rolling a 1 are 1/6. My odds of rolling a 2 are also 1/6. Since these events are independent, then my odds of rolling a 1 OR a 2 are 1/6 + 1/6 = 1/3. Make sense?

Now let's take a look at the expo draw. My dad applied for northern region turkey (with odds of 2/380) and Plateau any weapon pronghorn (with odds of 5/1009). See the link above if you want to verify those numbers.

So, his odds of drawing a pronghorn tag OR a turkey tag are 2/380 + 5/1009 = 0.0102, or about 1%. So for $10, my dad bought a one percent chance of *either* starting turkey season early, *or* hunting pronghorns in September.

If you apply for 80+, then these small probabilities begin to add up.


----------



## Clarq (Jul 21, 2011)

Springville Shooter said:


> If the odds were 1 in 8000 for each tag, the average for all tags would be 80:640,000 or 1 in 8000 still....by my figgering. Although 1 in 100 is much closer to reality than 1 in 10..... I could be wrong though because I ran out of fingers and toes a long time ago.-------SS


So you're trying to tell me that if I apply for 1 tag at odds of 1:8000, then the odds of me getting my name pulled are no different than if I apply for 10 tags, each with 1:8000 odds?

True, the chance of getting any specific tag will not change. But I'll have 10 times the chance of getting *a* tag.


----------



## Clarq (Jul 21, 2011)

hazmat said:


> Over 40 thousand people attended this year's hunt expo. Even if only 80 % put in for tags wich is a low number. Do you really think your odds are still 1 in 8 out of 200 tags. Sorry but your number Is way way way off. And out of that 40k that attended there is alot more who did not attend the show but just validated their tags at the window. Your odds of drawing an wasatch elk tag a few years ago were 1 in 4500. Don't even get me started on the fact that people just donated MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO A CORRUPT ORGANIZATION THAT WILL POCKET MOST OF THE MONEY FOR THEIR OWN PERSONAL WELL BEING. THIS SHOW IS A GIMMICK THAT PIMPS PUBLIC TAGS AND GIVES NOTHING BACK TO UTAH WILDLIFE. THEY ARE RIPPING YOU GUYS OFF.


All of my calculations are based off of last year's odds. I've linked them for you. If you want to do prove my math wrong, please do. Calling me a liar (or misinformed, or whatever) is a silly thing to do if you don't actually know what you're talking about.


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

Well, the pool of applicants corresponds with the number of tags.

The problem with your dice example is that in order to be a true representation of what we are talking about, your dice would have to go from a six sided dice to a 12 sided dice for you to be able to win with two numbers. Your example would be true if you could apply 80 times for one tag.

Also think of it this way. They draw the tags one at a time. So once a drawing is over and you are unsuccessful, all those entries are null. So you basically enjoy the specific odds of each drawing totally independent of all other drawings. If you wanted to simplify it all into a total ratio, you would only have to add up all the tags and all the applicants then divide. When discussing the expo draw odds, this number does not even approach 1/10.

The good news is that your odds were way better than mine as I didn't play the game.----SS


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

Clarq said:


> All of my calculations are based off of last year's odds. I've linked them for you. If you want to do prove my math wrong, please do. Calling me a liar (or misinformed, or whatever) is a silly thing to do if you don't actually know what you're talking about.


Never called you anything, only disagreed with you and fully admitted that I could be wrong. Take it easy my friend....these things are of little consequence.------SS


----------



## Clarq (Jul 21, 2011)

Springville Shooter said:


> Never called you anything, only disagreed with you and fully admitted that I could be wrong. Take it easy my friend....these things are of little consequence.------SS


Please note that the comment you are referring to was directed at hazmat, who told me my numbers were way off without any sort of logical argument.


----------



## hazmat (Apr 23, 2009)

Clarq said:


> All of my calculations are based off of last year's odds. I've linked them for you. If you want to do prove my math wrong, please do. Calling me a liar (or misinformed, or whatever) is a silly thing to do if you don't actually know what you're talking about.


Yes Clarq if you put in for 10 tags your name is in the hat more then once. But that does not improve your odds for any single draw. Think about it for a minute over 40k people applying for tags there are only 200 tags total. Your odds are simply slim to none to draw. Definitely no where near 1 in 8.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

Your odds only work if you get 80 tags for that one pool with 8,000. 

I'm going to use around number of 1:5,000 odds. Tiger the true odds, you have to add 5,000 for every new pool you are in, so SS is exactly right. Apply for 5 different tags with 1:5000 odds doesn't mean your chances go to 5:5000. They go to 5:25000. 

That is how the math works.


----------



## hazmat (Apr 23, 2009)

Clarq if you put in for a wasatch elk tag and 8500 other hunters do the same your odds are 1 in 8500 right. So let's say you don't draw that. Your next selection is manti elk and 6500 people put in for that your odds for your 10$ spent is 2 out of 15 thousand right. Very very bad odds


----------



## hazmat (Apr 23, 2009)

That is exactly why this is nothing but a huge pay day for sfw over 40 thousand people apply for these permits the dwr only gives out 200 tags. And that's why sfw could care less about public perception of their corruption. This is a cash grab for them so they do not need you as a member.and laugh all the way to the bank


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

You got it! Just delete your last step and the correct odds are 1 in 1124.545. That's really close to what I guessed when looking at the odds. -----SS


----------



## Clarq (Jul 21, 2011)

Springville Shooter said:


> You got it! Just delete your last step and the correct odds are 1 in 1124.545. That's really close to what I guessed when looking at the odds. -----SS


Haha, yep. Just deleted that post you referenced because I finally made the connection, and was going to update. Thanks SS.


----------



## Clarq (Jul 21, 2011)

But hey, top of the page twice in a row has to count for something, right?


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

My head hurts. :frusty:


----------



## Clarq (Jul 21, 2011)

Critter said:


> My head hurts. :frusty:


Sorry.


----------



## bezog (Apr 29, 2015)

Tl23life21 said:


> I'm Tyson lambert I drew the early fishlake any legal weapon tag can't wait to stoked I feel like it's a dream hope to find some big Bulls


Congrats, Tyson! I've never been to the expo, and I was out of town this year. Looks like you beat some crazy odds to draw the tag. Good luck with the hunt!


----------



## hazmat (Apr 23, 2009)

Springville Shooter said:


> :shock:??? My math must really suck........I'm not seeing this as correct either??----SS


You are probably right SS I hate math all I know are the odds really suck at drawing one of these tags. Clarq sorry pal I wasn't trying to come off as rude.


----------



## Clarq (Jul 21, 2011)

hazmat said:


> You are probably right SS I hate math all I know are the odds really suck at drawing one of these tags. Clarq sorry pal I wasn't trying to come off as rude.


No worries. I was, in fact, wrong. I just appreciate being told why.

I know I've overstayed my welcome here, but I may as well post up the final conclusion instead of letting it remain deleted.

In 2015, there were 224909 applications for 200 tags, which means there was about one successful application for every 1125 submitted on average.


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

Each tag pool is going to be independent of one another.

If you add 4 units with 25% draw odds together, then you will draw a tag concept isn't true.

This may help you out with independent events and probabilities (



)

The issue with these type of draws is the outcome is different. A book cliffs deer tag is not the same as a book cliffs elk tag, so the successful outcome is an independent option in each draw. You can't draw a deer permit in an elk pool. Apples and Oranges, even though the end result in a permit.

It would be like calculating a flipped coin and a rolled dice for a 6. It will work well on the dice, but not for the coin. They are totally different results even though they can have numbers attached to their statistics. (These are common mistakes in news media and for activist groups in their studies)

So, the easiest way to calculate your draw odds for is to add up all the tags for the hunts that you are applying for (chances to succeed) and divide it by the number of unsuccessful applicants (chances to fail).

If I apply in Arizona (25/100) + Utah (1/100) + Nevada (5/100) and Wyoming (75/100) = (25+1+5+75)/(75+99+95+25)=0.36 or a 36% chance of pulling at least one tag. If you weighted the options, they would reflect the individual state draws.

Just calculate (chances for) / (chances against)


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

Critter said:


> My head hurts. :frusty:


Ha,Ha! Critter ran out of fingers and toes too!----SS


----------



## hazmat (Apr 23, 2009)

Clarq said:


> No worries. I was, in fact, wrong. I just appreciate being told why.
> 
> I know I've overstayed my welcome here, but I may as well post up the final conclusion instead of letting it remain deleted.
> 
> In 2015, there were 224909 applications for 200 tags, which means there was about one successful application for every 1125 submitted on average.


So her is some more math at that many applicants for 2015. If 5$ an application that's 1,124,545$ 35k people with admission fees at 20$ that's 700 thousand dollars then the 3% they make off auction tags to help pay for expenses to put the show on. Am I the only one who is wondering what sfw does with 1.8 million dollars raised from public tags.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

Springville Shooter said:


> Ha,Ha! Critter ran out of fingers and toes too!----SS


I knew that I was in trouble when I had to start lining up empty reloading brass.


----------



## Clarq (Jul 21, 2011)

MuscleWhitefish said:


> If I apply in Arizona (25/100) + Utah (1/100) + Nevada (5/100) and Wyoming (75/100) = (25+1+5+75)/(75+99+95+25)=0.36 or a 36% chance of pulling at least one tag. If you weighted the options, they would reflect the individual state draws.
> 
> Just calculate (chances for) / (chances against)


Hang on a second...

So, if you apply for Wyoming only, your odds are 75%.

But, if you apply for Wyoming AND three other states, your odds shrink to 36%?


----------



## Clarq (Jul 21, 2011)

Vanilla said:


> Your odds only work if you get 80 tags for that one pool with 8,000.
> 
> I'm going to use around number of 1:5,000 odds. Tiger the true odds, you have to add 5,000 for every new pool you are in, so SS is exactly right. Apply for 5 different tags with 1:5000 odds doesn't mean your chances go to 5:5000. They go to 5:25000.
> 
> That is how the math works.


Let's take a look. Here are the tags I applied for, along with their 2015 probabilities:

Henry Mtns Deer 1/9458
Paunsaugunt Deer 3/6923
Book Cliffs Early Elk 2/3819
Book Cliffs Late Elk 1/2509
San Juan Elk 1/4845
Desert Bighorn 1/5571
Rocky Mtn Bighorn 1/5546
Willard Peak Goat 1/3424

If I do what you said, I come up with 11/42084, or 1:3826.

If I only apply for Paunsaugunt Deer, my odds are 1:2308.

If I apply for Paunsaugunt Deer AND 7 other tags, my odds magically shrink to 1:3826?

I'm not convinced.


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

hazmat said:


> So her is some more math at that many applicants for 2015. If 5$ an application that's 1,124,545$ 35k people with admission fees at 20$ that's 700 thousand dollars then the 3% they make off auction tags to help pay for expenses to put the show on. Am I the only one who is wondering what sfw does with 1.8 million dollars raised from public tags.


Pay attention Hazmat, we already discussed this.....$1 in every $1124.55 goes to help wildlife....somehow.....though we're not sure how.-----SS


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

Clarq said:


> Hang on a second...
> 
> So, if you apply for Wyoming only, your odds are 75%.
> 
> But, if you apply for Wyoming AND three other states, your odds shrink to 36%?


It is not an easy concept to comprehend with independent events.

The formula for independent events would be P(Wy) x P(Az) x P(Ut) x P(Az) = Probability of drawing one of the four given that they are independent from one another.

My probability to draw Wyoming alone would be 75%.

My probability to draw Wyoming, Utah, Nevada, or Arizona would be 36%.

The probabilities go down, because the other states weigh the higher Wyoming probability down.

Which is why people shouldn't attempt to calculate a shot gun approach to big game draws.

Look at each event independently of one another.


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

*Expo Results*



quakeycrazy said:


> Question is, what are we going to do to stop the corruption? I don't attend the expo out of principle because SFW has been known to scheme but what upsets me is when the same people draw tags over and over when the odds don't add up. Let's get some transparency and get those tags back in the general pool.


Hunters could ween themselves off of the we need to throw millions into habitat kool aid. Utah has poured more money into habitat then any other state. And we're no better off then most of our neighbors.

It's the vehicle used by the DWR and conservation groups to fleece hunters and a de facto excuse for underperformance.

Not to mention it gives huge incentive to the powers that be to support policy that will garner record money for a tag. You know the T word trophy hunting. Why let 50 hunters on AI when you can get $400k in one whack? Henry Pauns ect.


----------



## Tl23life21 (Sep 29, 2015)

bezog said:


> Tl23life21 said:
> 
> 
> > I'm Tyson lambert I drew the early fishlake any legal weapon tag can't wait to stoked I feel like it's a dream hope to find some big Bulls
> ...


Thank you yeah pretty crazy I can't wait tell middle of June then my scouting starts


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

I'm not even going to try to read through all this thread......

Bottom line for me is,
the more hunts you put in for, the better chance to draw.

Not just the expo permits, but state regular draws , super tags, and everything else.

THATS MY MATH...........

And ya, No expo draw permits here...


----------



## Clarq (Jul 21, 2011)

MuscleWhitefish said:


> It is not an easy concept to comprehend with independent events.
> 
> The formula for independent events would be P(Wy) x P(Az) x P(Ut) x P(Az) = Probability of drawing one of the four given that they are independent from one another.
> 
> My probability to draw Wyoming alone would be 75%.


Alright. Here you are saying that the drawings in each state are entirely independent of one another. I agree. Each drawing should be examined individually. It certainly would be a fallacy to add up the probabilities of drawing and come up with 106%, like I was doing earlier.



MuscleWhitefish said:


> The probabilities go down, because the other states weigh the higher Wyoming probability down.


Now, you're trying to tell me that the outcome of the Wyoming draw DEPENDS on the probabilities of the other states I apply in.

How is that not a direct contradiction?

There is more at work here... maybe a Z test? More on that later.


----------



## Mallardhead12 (Oct 17, 2011)

I know the odds when I put in. It's the ever so slight chance that I'll draw the tag of a lifetime that Makes me do it.

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

Clarq said:


> Let's take a look. Here are the tags I applied for, along with their 2015 probabilities:
> 
> Henry Mtns Deer 1/9458
> Paunsaugunt Deer 3/6923
> ...


I don't know if you are just trying to be difficult on purpose now, or are just really confused. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and try to explain as if you're just confused.

In actuality, even the simple way I broke it down doesn't work for the expo. Your true odds of drawing, if you want to accurately look at it, can't be combined as each draw is completely independent of each other. That's why your explanation to both my example and Muscle's fails. My simplified example was talking more generally on odds, not specifically to the expo. That's why I picked a random round number to illustrate for you where YOUR math was wrong, not trying to give you the real world expo odds.

The expo odds, taking your numbers above as you posted them, are as follows:

Henry's Deer- 1:9458 End of story. Applying for another tag does not increase or decrease your odds of drawing the Henry's tag.

Book Cliffs Late elk- 1:2509. End of story. The fact that you applied for Henry's deer doesn't effect these odds, because these are two completely independent events that have no effect on each other.

So no, applying for three other states does NOT decrease Muscle's chances for drawing the Wyomin tag. You're trying to create odds in a way that just isn't possible with independent events.


----------



## Packout (Nov 20, 2007)

Iron Bear said:


> Hunters could ween themselves off of the we need to throw millions into habitat kool aid. Utah has poured more money into habitat then any other state. And we're no better off then most of our neighbors.
> 
> It's the vehicle used by the DWR and conservation groups to fleece hunters and a de facto excuse for underperformance.
> 
> Not to mention it gives huge incentive to the powers that be to support policy that will garner record money for a tag. You know the T word trophy hunting. Why let 50 hunters on AI when you can get $400k in one whack? Henry Pauns ect.


This might be the most interesting posts on this whole thread. I use the word might because the results are yet to be determined. One day we might look back and say "wow, those millions of dollars were wasted and collateral damage of lost hunting opportunity to fund the program was a wasted resource." Or we might say "wow, those millions were the best investment we could have made." The results will take decades, but the burden is placed today.

No doubt that this statement is 100% correct-- "Not to mention it gives huge incentive to the powers that be to support policy that will garner record money for a tag."


----------



## springerhunter (Apr 17, 2008)

bowgy said:


> Wow, I saved $60 plus a tank of gas to get there over last year. I think I will take that $50 and take my wife out to dinner;-):grin:


Plus...you'll actually get to see how your money is spent


----------



## Clarq (Jul 21, 2011)

Vanilla said:


> I don't know if you are just trying to be difficult on purpose now, or are just really confused. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and try to explain as if you're just confused.
> 
> In actuality, even the simple way I broke it down doesn't work for the expo. Your true odds of drawing, if you want to accurately look at it, can't be combined as each draw is completely independent of each other. That's why your explanation to both my example and Muscle's fails. My simplified example was talking more generally on odds, not specifically to the expo. That's why I picked a random round number to illustrate for you where YOUR math was wrong, not trying to give you the real world expo odds.
> 
> ...


I'm not trying to be difficult. I just did the math like you told me to do it, and found that the results don't make sense.

It is easiest to take the approach above, looking at one drawing at a time, end of story, move on. That isn't the original question I asked, however...

More soon, and then I'll shut up.


----------



## bekins24 (Sep 22, 2015)

Wouldn't the formula you are talking about for independent event probabilities then multiplying them together be the chance that all of them would happen? Thus your chance to get all of the tags would go down since not every state has as high of a chance as Wyoming? I'm no math magician but that is kind of what it seems like to me.


----------



## Clarq (Jul 21, 2011)

Alright... I went back through my old stats notes, and I think I've nailed down how my odds of getting my name pulled once can be calculated.

Like several of us have mentioned, these drawings are all independent. When two events are independent, the probabilities of two events occurring simultaneously can be calculated by multiplying the respective probabilities together. An example can help us make sense out of this.

Let's take a fair coin toss. My odds of getting heads is 1/2, and my odds of getting tails is also 1/2. Now I'll ask... What are my odds of getting AT LEAST one heads in TWO coin tosses?

There are four outcomes:

Heads and then heads
Heads and then tails
Tails and then heads
Tails and then tails

It can be seen that three of these scenarios result in me getting at least one heads. So, the probability of me getting at least one heads is 3/4. You don't need much math to figure that out, but the same math that applies to these odds applies to other independent events.

So how does the math work? It can be done different ways, but the easiest way to do it is to calculate the odds of me NOT getting at least one heads. Since these events are independent, I can multiply the odds of me not getting heads on toss 1 with the odds of not getting heads on toss 2.

(1/2) x (1/2) = 1/4

So, if I toss a coin two times, the probability of me not getting at least one head is 1/4, which means the probability of me getting at least one head is 3/4. Make sense? Check the list of outcomes, and the math agrees with what can easily be seen there.

Now... On to the example provided by MuscleWhitefish. With the numbers he provided, chances of losing in the Wyoming draw are 25%. In Utah, 99%; In Nevada, 95%; In Arizona, 75%.

So, odds of losing all of them are (0.25)x(0.99)x(0.95)x(0.75) = ~17%. This means he has about an 83% chance of getting his name drawn if those are his odds. It makes sense that this percent chance is higher than any one probability on the list of winning, since his name is in the hat four different times.

Now, on to my expo tags, listed along with the probability of losing each.

Henry's deer, (9457/9458 )
Pauns deer, (6920/6923)
Books early elk, (3817/3819)
Book late elk, (2508/2509)
San Juan elk, (4844/4845)
Desert bighorn, (5570/5571)
Rocky Mtn Bighorn, (5545/5546)
Willard Peak goat, (3423/3424)

Multiply ALL of those probabilities together, and you will find that I had a 99.77% probability of losing them all. Thus, my probability of a win was 0.23%.

Thank you ALL for helping me figure this out, and clear up my misconceptions. This is why I like the UWN so much.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

wtf... 

Is this the new "common core" math being taught at schools?


-DallanC


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

DallanC said:


> wtf...
> 
> Is this the new "common core" math being taught at schools?
> 
> -DallanC


It should be. 5 out 4 people have a problem with statistics, yet we constantly use statistics to prove things.


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

Clarq said:


> Alright. Here you are saying that the drawings in each state are entirely independent of one another. I agree. Each drawing should be examined individually. It certainly would be a fallacy to add up the probabilities of drawing and come up with 106%, like I was doing earlier.
> 
> Now, you're trying to tell me that the outcome of the Wyoming draw DEPENDS on the probabilities of the other states I apply in.
> 
> ...


No, they are independent.

Look at them as different events.

Your probability of drawing Wyoming is 75% and if you include your probabilities into other draws with lower probabilities then your probability of one successful event in the 4 is 36%.

You have to take into account of the other draws, the probability of drawing at least one will go down - because of the more chances of failure.

Now if you think critically about it. 4 independent draws give you a chance at 4 tags. One draw will give you a chance at one tag.

In 4 draws there will be more chances to be unsuccessful than in the Wyoming draw alone. There is an ability to draw more than one tag if you put into multiple draws is there. It is all about getting lucky. The issue with the probabilities is that you will be giving yourself more chances for failure and they outweigh the multiple chances to succeed.


----------



## Clarq (Jul 21, 2011)

MuscleWhitefish said:


> Your probability of drawing Wyoming is 75% and if you include your probabilities into other draws with lower probabilities then your probability of *one successful event in the 4* is 36%.


[Emphasis added]

Ok, gotcha. Better late than never, eh?

You're calculating the probability of ONE successful event out of four. I was trying to calculate the probability of AT LEAST ONE successful event out of the four. Different questions entirely.


----------



## Truelife (Feb 6, 2009)

Fetch! I didn't think I'd ever find the end. :grin:


----------



## hawkeye (Feb 18, 2008)

Well done Clarq. I have struggled in the past to calculate the odds of drawing at least one tag that I applied for. Thanks for clearing that up!

Hawkeye


----------



## 300 Wby (Aug 14, 2008)

Wow, a hunting discussion that includes a statistics and ethics class!!!!! Priceless!!!!!


----------



## Clarq (Jul 21, 2011)

MuscleWhitefish said:


> No, they are independent.
> 
> Look at them as different events.
> 
> ...


Sincere apologies to all, but...

Probability of winning Wyoming and losing the other three is (0.75)x(0.99)x(0.95)x(0.75) = 52.9%, right? And that doesn't include the other three ways you could draw exactly one tag.

Nevermind. I think I'll retire now.


----------



## Bf145809 (Jul 7, 2016)

Clarq said:


> I wasn't going to bring that up, but the only name I even recognized off the list was Heather Farrar's. I've seen her in my dad's Mossback DVDs. Pretty sure the Farrars have already hunted the Paunsaugunt a few times...


Nope actually they haven't


----------



## colorcountrygunner (Oct 6, 2009)

gdog said:


> Will and Heather Farrar family pulled another Expo tag.....


Ya don't say!


----------



## colorcountrygunner (Oct 6, 2009)

bowhunt3r4l1f3 said:


> Yea what are the chances a couple Moss Back yuppies would draw yet another? :shock: Apparently really good...


Yeah, man. Way good! Here we are in 2018 and they are still slaying the expo tags! I would love to know their secret.


----------



## colorcountrygunner (Oct 6, 2009)

DallanC said:


> Imagine what you would find if the normal draw results were made public again. They should have never stopped posting those results.
> 
> -DallanC


Nothing to see here, moving along....


----------



## High Desert Elk (Aug 21, 2012)

Well, at least I know the name of one guy I'll sharing the mountain with during the Bull LE San Juan Archery hunt once the draw results come out... 8)


----------



## grizzly (Jun 3, 2012)

Does anybody care to see what the odds of drawing ANY ONE tag would be if s/he applied for every unit possible. There aren't truly 200 possible applications because of multiple tags/unit, but it would be interesting to know if somebody applied for all available tags what their odds would be.

I bet some of the lucky ones apply for every tag, but then we could figure out there odds of drawing tags over subsequent years. I bet its astronomical.


----------



## CPAjeff (Dec 20, 2014)

grizzly said:


> Does anybody care to see what the odds of drawing ANY ONE tag would be if s/he applied for every unit possible. There aren't truly 200 possible applications because of multiple tags/unit, but it would be interesting to know if somebody applied for all available tags what their odds would be.
> 
> I bet some of the lucky ones apply for every tag, but then we could figure out there odds of drawing tags over subsequent years. I bet its astronomical.


This would be an interesting exercise in statistics but it would be skewed, depending on a person's name and their affiliation with $FW and/or the DNR. 

TOTP!!!


----------



## bowhunt3r4l1f3 (Jan 12, 2011)

I see what you did here country...resurrected an old thread where we literally said the same things as this year. Pretty funny. But also very telling!


----------



## Clarq (Jul 21, 2011)

grizzly said:


> Does anybody care to see what the odds of drawing ANY ONE tag would be if s/he applied for every unit possible. There aren't truly 200 possible applications because of multiple tags/unit, but it would be interesting to know if somebody applied for all available tags what their odds would be.
> 
> I bet some of the lucky ones apply for every tag, but then we could figure out there odds of drawing tags over subsequent years. I bet its astronomical.


Ok, I'll bite. The following numbers are based on the published 2018 odds on the hunt expo website.

Overall (including the tags reserved only for nonresidents), there were a total of:

- 200 permits
- 280,472 unique applications
- 106 separate opportunities to apply for tags

So, 1 in 1402 applications were successful, on average. If a nonresident came to the expo and applied for every expo tag, their probability of drawing one tag should be about 106/1402 = 0.0756 = 7.56% = 1 in 13.2. Not bad.

Not counting the nonresident only tags, the numbers adjust slightly. A resident who applies for every drawing he's qualified for would have odds closer to 1 in 13.9.

That's why I'm not too alarmed when I see a big name or two in the list of successful applicants. If you think about it, those who probably spend hundreds to apply for a lot of tags are either wealthy (e.g. Heather Farrar), extremely dedicated or obsessed (e.g. prominent hunting guides or pro staffers), or invested in the system (e.g. SFW members). It's natural that they're going to be more successful than the average Joe like me who applied for 13, including a bunch of hard ones.

More later...


----------



## Clarq (Jul 21, 2011)

Does anyone know how many years the expo tag drawing has gone on? That might help me figure out some odds of drawing multiple tags over multiple years.


----------



## bowhunt3r4l1f3 (Jan 12, 2011)

But Clarq, you don’t have to be ultra-wealthy to apply for all tags. I have regularly applied for nearly all big game tags at the expo. Always with the hope that I might somehow be “lucky” enough to draw. That luck has never came.


----------



## backcountry (May 19, 2016)

I don't see any obvious signs of impropriety given findings on other thread. That said, it is normally considered verboten and unethical for anyone directly associated with the an organization running a contest to be allowed participation. In this case I would think that would mean SFW employees and any major donors, board members, expo vendors, etc. Those rules exist to protect the trust that is necessary for the systems to run.

Folks without a meaningful relationship to SFW should be able to apply and from the looks of initial odds winning multiple tags over the years wouldn't be unheard of.

Complicated situation that at minimum doesn't seem to be instilling trust in its stakeholders. If I was running such a program to help wildlife and hunters I would be duly alarmed and vigilant.


----------



## grizzly (Jun 3, 2012)

I did the math for the 20 units I applied for last year... including breaking it into units. The numbers below are the odds of success as a percentage...

0.009893154 (Henrys' Mountain Deer had 1:10,108 )
0.039054872 (Henry's Mountain Management Deer had 1:5121)
0.039588282
0.058088876
0.027203482
0.138944025
0.241545894
0.116099071
0.058173357
0.109829764
0.066445183
0.018271515
0.036127168
0.291167907
0.406504065
0.016162922
0.016708438
0.015691197
0.044873233
0.02268088

Those equate to 1.75926% chance of me drawing AT LEAST ONE tag. I'm not going to take the time to figure all the odds for this year, but it is much more complex than simply dividing 106/1402.

Another way to look at is there were at least 10,729 people that applied for a tag. That estimated number is higher if an individual applied for a tag whose application didn't include Henry's Deer. At the most basic math, there were 200 tags issued to 10,729 people... which is only .02% of known applicants are celebrating with a tag in their pocket. I know those are the worst odds possible, but imagine a stadium with 10,729 people as tickets are pulled out of a barrel. By the time all 200 tags have been draw, there will always be 10,529 disappointed people leaving that stadium. Odds can improve for those that put in multiple entries, but there will always be 200 SUCCESFUL applicants and 10,529 UNSUCCESFUL applicants.

If odds were truly 1:13.9, then 1:14 people that attended would be celebrating with a tag in their pocket. Obviously this isn't true or there could only have been 2,800 attendees (1:14 = 200:2800).


----------



## Clarq (Jul 21, 2011)

bowhunt3r4l1f3 said:


> But Clarq, you don't have to be ultra-wealthy to apply for all tags. I have regularly applied for nearly all big game tags at the expo. Always with the hope that I might somehow be "lucky" enough to draw. That luck has never came.


Like I said, wealthy, dedicated, or invested.

Also, I'll point out that your odds are far worse when you apply for big game only than they are if you also throw bear, cougar, and turkey into the mix.



grizzly said:


> Another way to look at is there were at least 10,729 people that applied for a tag. That estimated number is higher if an individual applied for a tag whose application didn't include Henry's Deer. At the most basic math, there were 200 tags issued to 10,729 people... which is only .02% of known applicants are celebrating with a tag in their pocket. I know those are the worst odds possible, but imagine a stadium with 10,729 people as tickets are pulled out of a barrel. By the time all 200 tags have been draw, there will always be 10,529 disappointed people leaving that stadium. Odds can improve for those that put in multiple entries, but there will always be 200 SUCCESFUL applicants and 10,529 UNSUCCESFUL applicants.
> 
> If odds were truly 1:13.9, then 1:14 people that attended would be celebrating with a tag in their pocket. Obviously this isn't true or there could only have been 2,800 attendees (1:14 = 200:2800).


Watch your decimals. 200 successes out of 10,729 applicants is a probability of 0.0189, or 1.89% which works out to 1 in 52.6.

I never said odds were 1:14 for all applicants. Those are odds for someone who applies for literally every single tag. How many applicants do you think do that? I doubt it's more than a few dozen. Most of us apply for 5-15 big game tags, which are a lot harder to draw than a lot of the bear/cougar/turkey tags that have the best odds, and are included in those averages I calculated earlier.


----------



## grizzly (Jun 3, 2012)

Clarq, thanks for catching my decimal error.


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

Clarq said:


> See for yourself... we can talk more if you do the math and reach a different conclusion.
> 
> http://www.huntexpo.com/odds.php
> 
> ...


You can't linearly pool/add odds like that. The probability (P) of and event (A) is represented by it's sample and outcome. On a dice it's 1:6 or 1/6 in a deck of cards it's 4:52 or 4/52

The probability of 2 events happening if they are independent (which these are) is multiplied expressed as P(A&B) = P(A) x P(B)

Taking your numbers of 1:8000. The odds for each draw occurring remains the same; each draw is 1/8000. When you look at the odds for both draws occurring you get 1/8000 x 1/8000 = 1/64,000,000. YES! 1 in 64 million.

Using your numbers this means that 3 people hit the prize by drawing 2 tags each where their odds were greater that 1:64 million. and yet it happens every year. That is absolutely insane!


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

Clarq said:


> ...Watch your decimals. 200 successes out of 10,729 applicants is a probability of 0.0189, or 1.89% which works out to 1 in 52.6....


You can't calculate compute odds that way because each of the 200 draws are conducted independently and are not mutually exclusive. Yes there are 200 lucky folks and 10,729 unlucky folks but when you look at it as a function of independent probability all the numbers change.


----------



## Crndgs8 (Sep 14, 2013)

MadHunter said:


> You can't linearly pool/add odds like that. The probability (P) of and event (A) is represented by it's sample and outcome. On a dice it's 1:6 or 1/6 in a deck of cards it's 4:52 or 4/52
> 
> The probability of 2 events happening if they are independent (which these are) is multiplied expressed as P(A&B) = P(A) x P(B)
> 
> ...


Exactly


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

MadHunter said:


> You can't linearly pool/add odds like that. The probability (P) of and event (A) is represented by it's sample and outcome. On a dice it's 1:6 or 1/6 in a deck of cards it's 4:52 or 4/52
> 
> The probability of 2 events happening if they are independent (which these are) is multiplied expressed as P(A&B) = P(A) x P(B)
> 
> ...


Just to compliment this post. This formula still applies to the winners of consecutive years. Because the drawings are independent and not mutually exclusive. Your odds of winning 2 years in a row are the same as winning 2 tags in 1 year. This is how it works out; P(2017&2018 ) = P(2017) x P(2018 ).

Imagine winning 3 or more years in a row? It's in the billions.


----------



## Kwalk3 (Jun 21, 2012)

MadHunter said:


> Just to compliment this post. This formula still applies to the winners of consecutive years. Because the drawings are independent and not mutually exclusive. Your odds of winning 2 years in a row are the same as winning 2 tags in 1 year. This is how it works out; P(2017&2018 ) = P(2017) x P(2018 ).
> 
> Imagine winning 3 or more years in a row? It's in the billions.


I think you mean complement, not compliment. Though if you really did mean to heap praise on yourself, that's ok too.

Thanks for putting the numbers and probabilities in perspective though. Really gives you something to chew on as far as the odds of these events occuring randomly.


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

Kwalk3 said:


> I think you mean complement, not compliment. Though if you really did mean to heap praise on yourself, that's ok too.
> 
> Thanks for putting the numbers and probabilities in perspective though. Really gives you something to chew on as far as the odds of these events occuring randomly.


You are absolutely correct! Let's chalk that one up to auto-correct. 
I'm not one to toot my own horn. :horn:


----------



## bowhunt3r4l1f3 (Jan 12, 2011)

MadHunter said:


> Just to compliment this post. This formula still applies to the winners of consecutive years. Because the drawings are independent and not mutually exclusive. Your odds of winning 2 years in a row are the same as winning 2 tags in 1 year. This is how it works out; P(2017&2018 ) = P(2017) x P(2018 ).
> 
> Imagine winning 3 or more years in a row? It's in the billions.


Oh weird, the Farrar's & John Bair literally have beat odds in the billions? But somehow it sounds totally sound to 80% of those on here and MM.


----------



## backcountry (May 19, 2016)

bowhunt3r4l1f3 said:


> MadHunter said:
> 
> 
> > Just to compliment this post. This formula still applies to the winners of consecutive years. Because the drawings are independent and not mutually exclusive. Your odds of winning 2 years in a row are the same as winning 2 tags in 1 year. This is how it works out; P(2017&2018 ) = P(2017) x P(2018 ).
> ...


But the Farrar's did not win even the last two years in a row according to the 2017 data. Which information are you referring to?

I'm not sure 80% of those here believe the "situation sounds totally sound" so much as many have expressed skepticism that the current data is indicative of fraud. I'm in the concerned camp but want more info, ie greater transparency, before confidently making claims.


----------



## Clarq (Jul 21, 2011)

Uh... we kind of worked some of these number kinks out a couple of years ago somewhere in the last 11 pages. I already acknowledged some of those errors and proposed some corrections. Not sure I really want to go there again. But the 1 in 64 million seems a little far-fetched when the odds of drawing are greater than 1 in 8000 if you put in for even one tag (with very few exceptions, such as Henry Mountains deer). I think my dad was somewhere in the neighborhood of 1 in 250 for a single muzzleloader antelope tag he applied for. The probability of drawing that two years in a row is (1/250)^2 = 1 in 62,500, and that's if you apply for just that one tag each year. Apply for more than just that, and you'll up your odds from there. Still pretty far-fetched, but not into the millions.

FWIW, Heather Farrar won a Paunsaugunt rifle tag in 2016 and now another deer tag in 2018. I can't find the 2016 results online now, though, so I guess it's just my word unless someone has the results saved. I have since started saving PDFs of the winners in case I ever want to revisit them.


----------



## backcountry (May 19, 2016)

Definitely something fishy with expo tag results webpages. 2017 cache link no longer works despite success multiple times the day I mentioned it. I have it saved as a pdf but it must have been deleted off of web as searches aren't successful for it anymore.

What would be the possible benefit in deleting a cache unless there is something that is inconvenient for the public to see?


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

I'll be the first to say that this numbers game is not my cup of tea, and I don't fully understand it. But it does not fit logically in my brain that applying for a second tag ups your odds from the base odds any at all. 

That would only work if you were putting a second tag into the same pool. But with the expo you're putting it in a totally separate and independent pool, so the odds do not build upon each other at all to increase by putting in for other tags. If one tag has 5,000 applicants, and the second tag you put in for has 5,000 applicants, your odds cannot be better than 1:5,000 to draw a either tag, and since they are independent of each other, your odds do not increase. You still only have 1 in 5,000 chance of drawing the tag. At least that is how logic explains this to me. I'm open to be educated, just explain it simply so my brain doesn't hurt anymore than it already does when thinking about this.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

It seams like every year there is a conspiracy theory about 2 more people drawing tags for the 20th year in a row at the show.

Could it be that they buy more tickets that all the others, or perhaps they are just lucky. 

It would be nice if the books were actually opened to the public. I quit going to RMEF banquets after 3 members of one family won all the major drawings at it. There were all kinds of stories going on about this one but then the person that was in charge told everyone that his relatives had a chance to draw the prizes just like everyone else. 

But it also could be like a lucky hunter that I knew. He drew all of Utah's OIL tags usually on his first or second time putting in for them. He drew the first moose tag up Hobble Creek the first year that it was offered. He drew a NR mountain goat tag in Colorado the first year that it was offered. I asked him once what kind of glue he put on those $100 bills that he attached to his applications.


----------



## backcountry (May 19, 2016)

I've got the 2016 winners list/webpage saved as pdf now. 

Heather Farrar won the Paunsaungunt PLE buck tag that year.


----------



## hazmat (Apr 23, 2009)

Critter said:


> It seams like every year there is a conspiracy theory about 2 more people drawing tags for the 20th year in a row at the show.
> 
> Could it be that they buy more tickets that all the others, or perhaps they are just lucky.
> 
> ...


I know people who put in on all elk tags available as well as deer so far none have them have drawn a single tag let alone two or three.


----------



## grizzly (Jun 3, 2012)

Vanilla said:


> I'll be the first to say that this numbers game is not my cup of tea, and I don't fully understand it. But it does not fit logically in my brain that applying for a second tag ups your odds from the base odds any at all.
> 
> If one tag has 5,000 applicants, and the second tag you put in for has 5,000 applicants, your odds cannot be better than 1:5,000 to draw a either tag, and since they are independent of each other, your odds do not increase. You still only have 1 in 5,000 chance of drawing the tag.


You are correct that if a tag, say Henry's Deer has 1:10,000 odds that applying for that tag, plus 99 other tags, doesn't increase your odds of drawing the Henry's tag. But if your goal is to just draw ANY tag... you hope that it is Henry's, but it might be La Sal Elk or San Juan Bear, or Desert Bighorn, or Turkey... the odds of drawing ANY tag increases by adding more chances.

Think of it with something easier to comprehend. Imagine you win $100 if you flip a QUARTER and it comes up heads. But if you flip tails, you get nothing. Obviously you have a 50/50 chance of winning.

But what if we give you more chances to win. Now you get that QUARTER and five additional DIMES for a total of six coins to flip. The odds of the QUARTER coming up heads remains 50/50, but to win this game all you need is any of the coins to come up heads. If any DIME or QUARTER comes up heads... then you win. Statistics tell us the odds of having all six coins come up tails will only happen 1.56% of the time. We have increased your odds of winning $100 to 98.44%. We did not increase the odds of the quarter being heads, but that isn't the discussion here, we did increase the overall odds of being successful somewhere among your entries.

****The way to do the math is to take the odds of NOT drawing and multiplying it by the odds of NOT drawing the next tag and so forth. You then take that total and subtract it from 1 to get your odds of drawing.

Say you have 3 white balls and 1 red ball in a box. You have a 25% of getting a red ball on any given draw. But to find out the odds of getting red at least once in 5 draws you actually do the following...

.75x.75x.75x.75x.75 = .2373

You then do 1-.2373= to find you have a 76.27% chance of getting at least one red ball in 5 attempts.... though each draw individually remains 25%.


----------



## Clarq (Jul 21, 2011)

Vanilla said:


> I'll be the first to say that this numbers game is not my cup of tea, and I don't fully understand it. But it does not fit logically in my brain that applying for a second tag ups your odds from the base odds any at all.
> 
> That would only work if you were putting a second tag into the same pool. But with the expo you're putting it in a totally separate and independent pool, so the odds do not build upon each other at all to increase by putting in for other tags. If one tag has 5,000 applicants, and the second tag you put in for has 5,000 applicants, your odds cannot be better than 1:5,000 to draw a either tag, and since they are independent of each other, your odds do not increase. You still only have 1 in 5,000 chance of drawing the tag. At least that is how logic explains this to me. I'm open to be educated, just explain it simply so my brain doesn't hurt anymore than it already does when thinking about this.


Yep. The odds of any particular draw are what they are.

What I've been trying to figure out are the odds that someone's name shows up on the successful draw list somewhere. Applying for multiple tags won't increase a person's odds of drawing any one particular tag, but it will increase their odds of showing up on the successful draw list (since it gives them more opportunities to draw).


----------



## grizzly (Jun 3, 2012)

Clarq said:


> What I've been trying to figure out are the odds that someone's name shows up on the successful draw list somewhere.


Here is the example from my post earlier. These were my odds for 20 tags in 2017:

0.009893154 (1/10,108 expressed as a percentage)
0.039054872 (2/5121 expressed as a percentage)
0.039588282 (etc...)
0.058088876
0.027203482
0.138944025
0.241545894
0.116099071
0.058173357
0.109829764
0.066445183
0.018271515
0.036127168
0.291167907
0.406504065
0.016162922
0.016708438
0.015691197
0.044873233
0.02268088

You would then subtract each of those numbers from 1... so they would like this:

0.999901068 (this needs to be 1 minus the actual results from above, not those that I had already adjusted to a percentage)
0.999609451 (example: 2/5121 = .0003905487. You would do 1- .0003905487 to get .999609451)
0.999604117
0.999419111
0.999727965
0.99861056
0.997584541
0.998839009
0.999418266
0.998901702
0.999335548
0.999817285
0.999638728
0.997088321
0.995934959
0.999838371
0.999832916
0.999843088
0.999551268
0.999773191

You would then multiply each of the numbers above by the other numbers:

For example... (0.999901068 * 0.999609451 * 0.999604117 * etc...)

That computation above equals 0.982407356

You then subtract 1 - 0.982407356 (number from above) to get your odds of drawing at least one of the tags in your computation ... 0.017592644, which expressed as a percentage comes to 1.75926%.

****Anybody can apply that formula to the numbers from the 2018 draw to find the odds of drawing AT LEAST ONE tag if they had applied for all possible drawings.****


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

My brain hurts. I’ll leave the odds discussion to the smart people.


----------



## callofthewild (Sep 7, 2007)

backcountry said:


> I've got the 2016 winners list/webpage saved as pdf now.
> 
> Heather Farrar won the Paunsaungunt PLE buck tag that year.


things that make you go hummmmmm.


----------



## backcountry (May 19, 2016)

If the site would change the low pdf size threshold to match other file sizes than I could uplaod both for other users. Sadly the current size limit is less than a Mb. 

Someone is deleting webpages and caches from the expo site for some unknown reason. 2015 is still up. Some of us know how to circumvent those strategies though


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

backcountry said:


> If the site would change the low pdf size threshold to match other file sizes than I could uplaod both for other users. Sadly the current size limit is less than a Mb.
> 
> Someone is deleting webpages and caches from the expo site for some unknown reason. 2015 is still up. Some of us know how to circumvent those strategies though


I'm willing to host any of these files irregardless of size. I have gigs of free unused space atm.

-DallanC


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

backcountry said:


> Someone is deleting webpages and caches from the expo site for some unknown reason.


Well, what good would a conspiracy be if there wasn't deleting of past data so people couldn't see it?


----------



## backcountry (May 19, 2016)

Vanilla said:


> backcountry said:
> 
> 
> > Someone is deleting webpages and caches from the expo site for some unknown reason.
> ...


Indeed. It's odd that it happens after and during these threads. Especially deleting the Google cache, that takes a direct request from the website administrators.

Doesn't prove anything malicious but it doesn't help the image of the drawing. Especially when its selective, ie other years are still up.

I'm not convinced anything is wrong with the system myself but some sunlight on it can only help.


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

backcountry said:


> Indeed. It's odd that it happens after and during these threads. Especially deleting the Google cache, that takes a direct request from the website administrators.
> 
> Doesn't prove anything malicious but it doesn't help the image of the drawing. Especially when its selective, ie other years are still up.
> 
> I'm not convinced anything is wrong with the system myself but some sunlight on it can only help.


I believe this is what a lot of folks here believe. I don't believe there are actual accusations since there is no absolute evidence but, we do have to make sure we keep an eye on the ball or we lose it.

On the comments about why would they rig something? Just think about why anyone does anything illegal/unethical/immoral at all. It's natural human behavior. Most acts of that nature are not worth it yet they happen all the time.


----------



## bowhunt3r4l1f3 (Jan 12, 2011)

MadHunter said:


> I believe this is what a lot of folks here believe. I don't believe there are actual accusations since there is no absolute evidence but, we do have to make sure we keep an eye on the ball or we lose it.
> 
> On the comments about why would they rig something? Just think about why anyone does anything illegal/unethical/immoral at all. It's natural human behavior. Most acts of that nature are not worth it yet they happen all the time.


Yea who knows. Everything could be totally legit. It just looks BAD. Everything around SFW has historically been run this way though. So no surprise here. They don't care what regular sportsman think of them. I mean their found has basically called us all worthless.

Good quotes Grizz has in his signature.

"This is a classic case of a handful of greedy fly fishermen getting too greedy." -Don Peay, Founder of SFW, as told to KUTV

"It's time to revisit the widely accepted principle in the United States and Canada that game is a public resource." 
-Don Peay, Founder of SFW, as quoted in Anchorage Daily News


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

bowhunt3r4l1f3 said:


> "It's time to revisit the widely accepted principle in the United States and Canada that game is a public resource."
> -Don Peay, Founder of SFW, as quoted in Anchorage Daily News


So what model does he want to return to? To the ancient belief that game is the divine property of the crown?


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

MadHunter said:


> So what model does he want to return to? To the ancient belief that game is the divine property of the crown?


This is a good read for you to answer that...

https://www.cascwild.org/don-peay-the-man-who-would-be-king-baron/

-DallanC


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

DallanC said:


> This is a good read for you to answer that...
> 
> https://www.cascwild.org/don-peay-the-man-who-would-be-king-baron/
> -DallanC


Looks like that is a big red solid YES and then some more.

Would things be different if I went back in time and paid the $35.00 so he could play football? -Ov-


----------



## KineKilla (Jan 28, 2011)

Could a person/outfitter/guide use the mentoring program to allow a paying client to fill their expo tag for an LE hunt? 

Could a person film and/or televise their expo drawn hunt and sell advertising rights to the footage?

I'd guess that the answer is yes and that may offer some financial incentive to those interested in cheating or manipulating a random draw system...not saying however that has or will ever happen.


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

KineKilla said:


> Could a person/outfitter/guide use the mentoring program to allow a paying client to fill their expo tag for an LE hunt?
> I am not sure of this
> 
> Could a person film and/or televise their expo drawn hunt and sell advertising rights to the footage?
> ...


It is well known that lucky tag winners (Antelope Island, Henry Mtns, Sportsman Tag winners) have been offered guiding and outfitting by big name operations in exchange for the film rights to the hunts. The advantage to the hunter is the chance of a truly great trophy animal by using the outfitters network of scouts.


----------



## Hoopermat (Dec 17, 2010)

Someone needs to look into these drawings. 
Someone needs to have access and perform an audit every year. If SFW doesn't provide this then they are hiding something. 

The DNR doesn't want any corruption found. Because they would be a co defendant in the class action lawsuit that would follow once the corruption was found.

You realize every person that has put in for the drawing would be able to file a suit against SFW, DNR and the state. 

But like others I just would like to know the truth. Is it an honest drawing or not.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

Hoopermat said:


> The DNR doesn't want any corruption found. Because they would be a co defendant in the class action lawsuit that would follow once the corruption was found


They are corrupt, its undeniable. Remember when it was time to apply for the Convention contract? Only 1 group submitted their application on time, RMEF. The SFW didnt think anyone else would apply so they didnt even have their paperwork ready and should have been excluded. But, the DWR made excuses and allowed the application period to be extended until the SFW got their application in.

We all know how that turned out...

-DallanC


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

Is the expo contract a long term contract? Could RMEF try to bid again next year or in 3, 5? Would it be worth while or even possible to file some sort of grievance and have the AG examine the whole stream of events?


----------



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

It was a 5 yr contract with an option to extend for another 5 years. Basically, nobody else is going to get even a token "chance" at the contract until 2027.


----------

