Official 2023 Ticket Lottery Results Thread

Vedd Hedd

If they picked people's names first, and went by priority, then we would have been seeing Austin and FW notifications much earlier.

jimjam1982

solace said:

Go Animal said:

Okay, just for the sake of study, here's how I fared, because I see NO pattern lol

Shows in order of preference:
1. Chicago N2, GA/Res & Res selected
2. Chicago N1, GA/Res & Res selected
3. Austin N2, GA/Res & Res selected
4. Austin N1, GA/Res & Res selected
5. Noblesville, GA/Res & Res selected
6. St. Paul N2, GA/Res & Res selected
7. St. Paul N1, GA/Res & Res selected

Shows I was notified about across 5 hours:

1. St. Paul N1, Res
2. St. Paul N2, Res
3. Chicago N2, Res
4. Chicago N1, Res
5. Austin N2, Res
6. Austin N1, Res

6 out of 7 (Noblesville shut out), No GA, least important came in first, with this weird leap frog move by St. Paul, and Chicago & Austin (albeit a bit late) coming in the order I listed them, after said leap-frogging. No rhyme or reason, folks. 

Just happy to have tix (that I will now try to upgrade lol)

This makes me feel so much worse about not getting the 2 hometown shows I put in for.

This is stupid. 

Its completely fucked and the 10c dudes decided to take the day off so they don't have to answer for ticket masters fucking mess. Clown show operation.

Go Animal

amethgr8 said:

cblock4life said:

Kevinman said:

MYM said:

so if someone gets Austin Night 1 and it was their fourth choice.... and it was my second choice, it stands to reason that i should be getting tickets, right?

Logically yes…..actually…..no idea.

If your name doesn’t get randomly pulled then it doesn’t matter what priority you listed or your seniority.  Your name never getting pulled means no tickets. 

It’s happening to me as well.  

this.

so animal got their 1st priority on the 3rd pull of names. right

Right. Shit's chaotic lol.

machinehum

ComeToTX

solace said:

Go Animal said:

Okay, just for the sake of study, here's how I fared, because I see NO pattern lol

Shows in order of preference:
1. Chicago N2, GA/Res & Res selected
2. Chicago N1, GA/Res & Res selected
3. Austin N2, GA/Res & Res selected
4. Austin N1, GA/Res & Res selected
5. Noblesville, GA/Res & Res selected
6. St. Paul N2, GA/Res & Res selected
7. St. Paul N1, GA/Res & Res selected

Shows I was notified about across 5 hours:

1. St. Paul N1, Res
2. St. Paul N2, Res
3. Chicago N2, Res
4. Chicago N1, Res
5. Austin N2, Res
6. Austin N1, Res

6 out of 7 (Noblesville shut out), No GA, least important came in first, with this weird leap frog move by St. Paul, and Chicago & Austin (albeit a bit late) coming in the order I listed them, after said leap-frogging. No rhyme or reason, folks. 

Just happy to have tix (that I will now try to upgrade lol)

This makes me feel so much worse about not getting the 2 hometown shows I put in for.

This is stupid. 

They’re not done yet. Let it play out. 

BloodMeridian80

machinehum said:

Again: nobody here knows how the process is actually happening. Some people have a very strong opinion on how it "should" be happening, and to that, I'll just paste this again: 

For the people who think the "only reasonable" way to do it is to pull from priority 1 for a city, then if there's any left, pull from priority 2, etc. Consider these two people's preference sets in order:

Person A: Austin, St. Paul, Noblesville

Person B: Chicago, Austin, St. Paul, Noblesville. 

If Chicago has high demand and Person B does not get it, and Austin, St. Paul, and Noblesville all have enough seats for pretty much everyone in priority 1 and not much else, it's entirely likely that Person A gets all three of their picks, while Person B gets zero because they put Chicago first, maybe because they live in Chicago and would prefer not to travel if possible. Who knows. Personally, I find that an extraordinarily unfair system. I'm not saying a system with some other outcome is necessarily better, but I'm saying this "obvious" "only reasonable" system is not at all that. 

Person a: CHI 1 and CHI 2
Person b: CHI 2 and CHI 1

B got both and A has neither. Does that make sense to you?

Go Animal

BloodMeridian80 said:

Go Animal said:

BloodMeridian80 said:

Go Animal said:

Okay, just for the sake of study, here's how I fared, because I see NO pattern lol

Shows in order of preference:
1. Chicago N2, GA/Res & Res selected
2. Chicago N1, GA/Res & Res selected
3. Austin N2, GA/Res & Res selected
4. Austin N1, GA/Res & Res selected
5. Noblesville, GA/Res & Res selected
6. St. Paul N2, GA/Res & Res selected
7. St. Paul N1, GA/Res & Res selected

Shows I was notified about across 5 hours:

1. St. Paul N1, Res
2. St. Paul N2, Res
3. Chicago N2, Res
4. Chicago N1, Res
5. Austin N2, Res
6. Austin N1, Res

6 out of 7 (Noblesville shut out), No GA, least important came in first, with this weird leap frog move by St. Paul, and Chicago & Austin (albeit a bit late) coming in the order I listed them, after said leap-frogging. No rhyme or reason, folks. 

Just happy to have tix (that I will now try to upgrade lol)

Edit: Just to confirm, you got CHI night one with 2nd priority

Yes. 2nd priority. It was my 4th email/CC charge. I had given up hope, threw up an ISO, and then *KABOOM*

Congrats, not trying to shit on anyone’s “luck”. I had CHI N1 as 1st and have heard nada.

May the Force be with you (I'll be trying for better tix) 

dlesko619

hairgrowth2001 said:

Please more Indy reserved.

I hear ya Brother!

Melis68

Is the process still going on?  My husband and I both only put in for Indy reserved and have not heard anything.  

JB23237

BloodMeridian80 said:

machinehum said:

Again: nobody here knows how the process is actually happening. Some people have a very strong opinion on how it "should" be happening, and to that, I'll just paste this again: 

For the people who think the "only reasonable" way to do it is to pull from priority 1 for a city, then if there's any left, pull from priority 2, etc. Consider these two people's preference sets in order:

Person A: Austin, St. Paul, Noblesville

Person B: Chicago, Austin, St. Paul, Noblesville. 

If Chicago has high demand and Person B does not get it, and Austin, St. Paul, and Noblesville all have enough seats for pretty much everyone in priority 1 and not much else, it's entirely likely that Person A gets all three of their picks, while Person B gets zero because they put Chicago first, maybe because they live in Chicago and would prefer not to travel if possible. Who knows. Personally, I find that an extraordinarily unfair system. I'm not saying a system with some other outcome is necessarily better, but I'm saying this "obvious" "only reasonable" system is not at all that. 

Person a: CHI 1 and CHI 2
Person b: CHI 2 and CHI 1

B got both and A has neither. Does that make sense to you?

I've seen this with 4 of my friends. It's bonkers

jdopj

You are going to get a refusal email, so unless you get that you are still in it.

mace1229

machinehum said:

PJNB said:

marra2312 said:

machinehum said:

tylerj said:

PJNB said:

tylerj said:

CopperTom said:

tylerj said:

All, it's not totally confusing as to why someone who listed  any show as 2nd priority would get a ticket and someone with 1st priority wouldn't. My understanding is they group those in 1st priority, run the randomizer/lottery and issue tickets to those who get picked. Once that's done they do that again for 2nd, 3rd, 4th priority etc until all the allotment is gone. 

I could be wrong. Someone let me know if they know otherwise. 

No.  First priority are drawn first.  If tickets remain, they move on to second priority entries.  A first priority person should never lose and a second priority person win. 

That's not how it's worked for the last few tours I don't believe. Been multiple past examples of 2nd, 3rd priority ppl getting tickets and 1st priority ppl getting nothing. it's caused a lot of butthurt for some folks. My first priority was Chicago N1. Haven't received an email yet. Yet some people at 2nd priority have reported getting reserved tickets. 

That is the reason we put priority down. It makes no sense to have priority for pics if it was random as you said. In no way should someone that picked a show as a 2nd get it over someone that put it as a first. That is a broken system

All I'm saying is there was a person here who said they got St Paul tickets for both nights at 5th and 6th priority and then there are people who put those as 1st and/or 2nd priority and haven't heard back yet. I guess they could still get tickets if they're sending out the emails by 10c number. 

People are thinking about "priority" wrong here. This has *nothing* to do with who has "priority" to get drawn, it is *only* and *strictly* your own personal prioritization of your preference of shows to attend. How to translate those personal rankings into something that looks fair across a matrix of multiple people ranking multiple instances is an entire field of study and there are a thousand ways to do it depending on what factors are considered more important. 

Then what is the point of them asking it? Not looking for a fight, just seems to needlessly complicate things if it doesn't have any impact on what order people get drawn.

Lol right it is so simlple

5000 pairs to go out for 10C

Priority 1 is drawn

3000 people have it as a first pick. All win

Priority 2 is drawn

2500 people have it as a second pick. 2000 win. 500 lose. 

Everyone after priority 2 loses 



This is not hard. 

With respect, you're very wrong because you're oversimplifying the problem space. Your example doesn't have 9 events with people ranking subsets of them. A forum post isn't the place to get into it, but for some enlightening lay-audience-oriented discussion take a look for example here: https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/372916/ranked-preference-matching-algorithm or google "ranked matching", "preference matching", "stable matching", "bipartite graphs", etc.

But that is exactly how it was originally explained. First show drawing- All priority 1 gets in the lotto before priority 2, and so on.
If there are more tickets than those with priority 1, then all who picked priority 1 should have tickets.
The 8 other shows have no impact on the show being drawn, the lottery doesn’t need to reflect 9 events with subsets.

MKSNYC

In for Austin both nights - 19 and 18 were first and second choices, reserved.  Seats in the 200’s but in the house :-)

405OK

MG79478 said:

Maybe it's just a coincidence, but for every show that rolled in today my seats got progressively worse.

Same

machinehum

 

solace

ComeToTX said:

They’re not done yet. Let it play out. 

We’ll see… St. Paul was the first shows drawn, haven’t seen people still getting them. Regardless it doesn’t explain getting 6th and 7th priority shows over someone’s 1st and 2nd. 

TB242170

Thanks 10C!  Chicago 1 and 2, flying in from Philly for the week!

machinehum

 

amethgr8

priority shows desire to see a show.  you can get drawn for all, none, or your 7th pick only.  but at  least you're getting to see a show you put in for.

mace1229

Indifference71 said:

PJNB said:

marra2312 said:

machinehum said:

tylerj said:

PJNB said:

tylerj said:

CopperTom said:

tylerj said:

All, it's not totally confusing as to why someone who listed  any show as 2nd priority would get a ticket and someone with 1st priority wouldn't. My understanding is they group those in 1st priority, run the randomizer/lottery and issue tickets to those who get picked. Once that's done they do that again for 2nd, 3rd, 4th priority etc until all the allotment is gone. 

I could be wrong. Someone let me know if they know otherwise. 

No.  First priority are drawn first.  If tickets remain, they move on to second priority entries.  A first priority person should never lose and a second priority person win. 

That's not how it's worked for the last few tours I don't believe. Been multiple past examples of 2nd, 3rd priority ppl getting tickets and 1st priority ppl getting nothing. it's caused a lot of butthurt for some folks. My first priority was Chicago N1. Haven't received an email yet. Yet some people at 2nd priority have reported getting reserved tickets. 

That is the reason we put priority down. It makes no sense to have priority for pics if it was random as you said. In no way should someone that picked a show as a 2nd get it over someone that put it as a first. That is a broken system

All I'm saying is there was a person here who said they got St Paul tickets for both nights at 5th and 6th priority and then there are people who put those as 1st and/or 2nd priority and haven't heard back yet. I guess they could still get tickets if they're sending out the emails by 10c number. 

People are thinking about "priority" wrong here. This has *nothing* to do with who has "priority" to get drawn, it is *only* and *strictly* your own personal prioritization of your preference of shows to attend. How to translate those personal rankings into something that looks fair across a matrix of multiple people ranking multiple instances is an entire field of study and there are a thousand ways to do it depending on what factors are considered more important. 

Then what is the point of them asking it? Not looking for a fight, just seems to needlessly complicate things if it doesn't have any impact on what order people get drawn.

Lol right it is so simlple

5000 pairs to go out for 10C

Priority 1 is drawn

3000 people have it as a first pick. All win

Priority 2 is drawn

2500 people have it as a second pick. 2000 win. 500 lose. 

Everyone after priority 2 loses 



This is not hard. 

This is what I've always thought.  Not sure how the hell the lottery and priority rankings work.  And now people are getting multiple pairs for same show in Austin??  What a mess.

People have won multiple pairs for the same show?

machinehum

 

Kevinman

Drawing each section of each show by priority makes most sense, especially with the announcements coming in waves.
1st St Paul GA, then Chicago GA, St Paul Res, Chicago Res, etc.

machinehum

 

Sugarloafer04

just got night 1 Austin

Spurs14

machinehum said:

NO IT ISN'T. I quoted the FAQ last time you said this! Again: "To level the playing field, ticket requests are fulfilled in a randomized selection process while still considering show priority." 

"While still considering show priority" is not REMOTELY similar to "Priority gets first consideration." Not remotely!

Maybe so.  It isn't worded very well.  What is the point of priority if it's random for anyone that puts in for a given show, priority 1 or 9 or in between?

Should say "ticket requests are fulfilled in a randomized selection process based on show priority" or something similar.  And say "lower priority will be filled first.  If seats remain, then the next priority will be filled, and so on until all seats are taken."

It's not that difficult.

Salt_life23

I have an account for myself, my wife has an account and separate Ticketmaster account, so do a lot of people.

I do have the same credit card listed for payment tho…

jimjam1982

machinehum said:

mace1229 said:

machinehum said:

PJNB said:

marra2312 said:

machinehum said:

tylerj said:

PJNB said:

tylerj said:

CopperTom said:

tylerj said:

All, it's not totally confusing as to why someone who listed  any show as 2nd priority would get a ticket and someone with 1st priority wouldn't. My understanding is they group those in 1st priority, run the randomizer/lottery and issue tickets to those who get picked. Once that's done they do that again for 2nd, 3rd, 4th priority etc until all the allotment is gone. 

I could be wrong. Someone let me know if they know otherwise. 

No.  First priority are drawn first.  If tickets remain, they move on to second priority entries.  A first priority person should never lose and a second priority person win. 

That's not how it's worked for the last few tours I don't believe. Been multiple past examples of 2nd, 3rd priority ppl getting tickets and 1st priority ppl getting nothing. it's caused a lot of butthurt for some folks. My first priority was Chicago N1. Haven't received an email yet. Yet some people at 2nd priority have reported getting reserved tickets. 

That is the reason we put priority down. It makes no sense to have priority for pics if it was random as you said. In no way should someone that picked a show as a 2nd get it over someone that put it as a first. That is a broken system

All I'm saying is there was a person here who said they got St Paul tickets for both nights at 5th and 6th priority and then there are people who put those as 1st and/or 2nd priority and haven't heard back yet. I guess they could still get tickets if they're sending out the emails by 10c number. 

People are thinking about "priority" wrong here. This has *nothing* to do with who has "priority" to get drawn, it is *only* and *strictly* your own personal prioritization of your preference of shows to attend. How to translate those personal rankings into something that looks fair across a matrix of multiple people ranking multiple instances is an entire field of study and there are a thousand ways to do it depending on what factors are considered more important. 

Then what is the point of them asking it? Not looking for a fight, just seems to needlessly complicate things if it doesn't have any impact on what order people get drawn.

Lol right it is so simlple

5000 pairs to go out for 10C

Priority 1 is drawn

3000 people have it as a first pick. All win

Priority 2 is drawn

2500 people have it as a second pick. 2000 win. 500 lose. 

Everyone after priority 2 loses 



This is not hard. 

With respect, you're very wrong because you're oversimplifying the problem space. Your example doesn't have 9 events with people ranking subsets of them. A forum post isn't the place to get into it, but for some enlightening lay-audience-oriented discussion take a look for example here: https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/372916/ranked-preference-matching-algorithm or google "ranked matching", "preference matching", "stable matching", "bipartite graphs", etc.

But that is exactly how it was originally explained. First show drawing- All priority 1 gets in the lotto before priority 2, and so on.
If there are more tickets than those with priority 1, then all who picked priority 1 should have tickets.
The 8 other shows have no impact on the show being drawn, the lottery doesn’t need to reflect 9 events with subsets.

Source for where it was explained that way, other than a post by a random on this forum or reddit? 

I apologize. I did not hang on to my email from ticketmaster in 2020.  Didn't think it would be needed as a legal document to settle the debate on the lottery was run in 2020 and 2022.  And there was no update or change, hell the FAQ is still showing 2022 shows.  They did confirm this when they screwed up back then.  Currently their support is off shore and can barely communicate so its been hard to get the same confirmation that it is in fact broken.

jsilsby

For folks discouraged.

Several friends I know caught quite a few reserved for everything other than Chicago or IN b/c …psychos… and clicked everything.  I suspect plenty of people will be flooding fan2fan with decent 100/200 level seats, so Id be really diligent come the sale over next 2 months. 

Kevinman

mace1229 said:

machinehum said:

PJNB said:

marra2312 said:

machinehum said:

tylerj said:

PJNB said:

tylerj said:

CopperTom said:

tylerj said:

All, it's not totally confusing as to why someone who listed  any show as 2nd priority would get a ticket and someone with 1st priority wouldn't. My understanding is they group those in 1st priority, run the randomizer/lottery and issue tickets to those who get picked. Once that's done they do that again for 2nd, 3rd, 4th priority etc until all the allotment is gone. 

I could be wrong. Someone let me know if they know otherwise. 

No.  First priority are drawn first.  If tickets remain, they move on to second priority entries.  A first priority person should never lose and a second priority person win. 

That's not how it's worked for the last few tours I don't believe. Been multiple past examples of 2nd, 3rd priority ppl getting tickets and 1st priority ppl getting nothing. it's caused a lot of butthurt for some folks. My first priority was Chicago N1. Haven't received an email yet. Yet some people at 2nd priority have reported getting reserved tickets. 

That is the reason we put priority down. It makes no sense to have priority for pics if it was random as you said. In no way should someone that picked a show as a 2nd get it over someone that put it as a first. That is a broken system

All I'm saying is there was a person here who said they got St Paul tickets for both nights at 5th and 6th priority and then there are people who put those as 1st and/or 2nd priority and haven't heard back yet. I guess they could still get tickets if they're sending out the emails by 10c number. 

People are thinking about "priority" wrong here. This has *nothing* to do with who has "priority" to get drawn, it is *only* and *strictly* your own personal prioritization of your preference of shows to attend. How to translate those personal rankings into something that looks fair across a matrix of multiple people ranking multiple instances is an entire field of study and there are a thousand ways to do it depending on what factors are considered more important. 

Then what is the point of them asking it? Not looking for a fight, just seems to needlessly complicate things if it doesn't have any impact on what order people get drawn.

Lol right it is so simlple

5000 pairs to go out for 10C

Priority 1 is drawn

3000 people have it as a first pick. All win

Priority 2 is drawn

2500 people have it as a second pick. 2000 win. 500 lose. 

Everyone after priority 2 loses 



This is not hard. 

With respect, you're very wrong because you're oversimplifying the problem space. Your example doesn't have 9 events with people ranking subsets of them. A forum post isn't the place to get into it, but for some enlightening lay-audience-oriented discussion take a look for example here: https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/372916/ranked-preference-matching-algorithm or google "ranked matching", "preference matching", "stable matching", "bipartite graphs", etc.

But that is exactly how it was originally explained. First show drawing- All priority 1 gets in the lotto before priority 2, and so on.
If there are more tickets than those with priority 1, then all who picked priority 1 should have tickets.
The 8 other shows have no impact on the show being drawn, the lottery doesn’t need to reflect 9 events with subsets.

This

evenflow82

Nothing for St. Paul yet. Not feeling hopeful. Bummer.