The system is not unfair, all members have an equal chance to win tickets to every show, for all seating levels. Each show is an individual draw with an equal chance for all members. It is the results that could be perceived as unfair as members were highly successful and others got nothing. Some people win at blackjack, some people lose their shirts. And if you selected GA/P1 for your only option and got nothing you should not be surprised.
The system is not unfair, all members have an equal chance to win tickets to every show, for all seating levels. Each show is an individual draw with an equal chance for all members. It is the results that could be perceived as unfair as members were highly successful and others got nothing. Some people win at blackjack, some people lose their shirts. And if you selected GA/P1 for your only option and got nothing you should not be surprised.
How is a system where one person wins GA to the same 4 shows I put in for and I get nothing not unfair?
The system is not unfair, all members have an equal chance to win tickets to every show, for all seating levels. Each show is an individual draw with an equal chance for all members. It is the results that could be perceived as unfair as members were highly successful and others got nothing. Some people win at blackjack, some people lose their shirts. And if you selected GA/P1 for your only option and got nothing you should not be surprised.
How is a system where one person wins GA to the same 4 shows I put in for and I get nothing not unfair?
Again; this goes back to not understanding basic statistics. Also, there weren’t a majority of people winning 4 GA shows. Some did. Most did not. Some got shut out completely, most did not get shut out completely. It’s really that simple.
The system is not unfair, all members have an equal chance to win tickets to every show, for all seating levels. Each show is an individual draw with an equal chance for all members. It is the results that could be perceived as unfair as members were highly successful and others got nothing. Some people win at blackjack, some people lose their shirts. And if you selected GA/P1 for your only option and got nothing you should not be surprised.
How is a system where one person wins GA to the same 4 shows I put in for and I get nothing not unfair?
As I said, it is the results that may be unfair, but the method of randomly selecting from the entire pool for each show is not. You did not get picked from the pool of tickets with the highest demand and the lowest likelihood of success. Especially if it was one of the major cities. Your request did not get picked and someone else's did. That is all there is to it.
The system is not unfair, all members have an equal chance to win tickets to every show, for all seating levels. Each show is an individual draw with an equal chance for all members. It is the results that could be perceived as unfair as members were highly successful and others got nothing. Some people win at blackjack, some people lose their shirts. And if you selected GA/P1 for your only option and got nothing you should not be surprised.
How is a system where one person wins GA to the same 4 shows I put in for and I get nothing not unfair?
As I said, it is the results that may be unfair, but the method of randomly selecting from the entire pool for each show is not. You did not get picked from the pool of tickets with the highest demand and the lowest likelihood of success. Especially if it was one of the major cities. Your request did not get picked and someone else's did. That is all there is to it.
That's my point exactly, a system that allows this is BS.
It sucks when you lose and it's great when you win.
It would be great if it worked out that we all get about 50% of what we put in for, but it doesn't. I've been completely shut out a few times when putting in for only home shows or what I really wanted, so last leg I put in for 5 shows to make sure I got something and got all 5 . Then got to choose where I really wanted to travel and where it made the most sense, since it wasn't realistic to go to Chicago, St Paul, and Austin for me. Ended up doing back to back in Austin. This time around I got 2 out of 4, no MSG when in the past I probably only would have put in for MSG................
The system is not unfair, all members have an equal chance to win tickets to every show, for all seating levels. Each show is an individual draw with an equal chance for all members. It is the results that could be perceived as unfair as members were highly successful and others got nothing. Some people win at blackjack, some people lose their shirts. And if you selected GA/P1 for your only option and got nothing you should not be surprised.
How is a system where one person wins GA to the same 4 shows I put in for and I get nothing not unfair?
Again; this goes back to not understanding basic statistics. Also, there weren’t a majority of people winning 4 GA shows. Some did. Most did not. Some got shut out completely, most did not get shut out completely. It’s really that simple.
I understand basic statistics, trust me. Applied math major here. My point is they shouldn't have a system that allows these types of outcomes.
The system is not unfair, all members have an equal chance to win tickets to every show, for all seating levels. Each show is an individual draw with an equal chance for all members. It is the results that could be perceived as unfair as members were highly successful and others got nothing. Some people win at blackjack, some people lose their shirts. And if you selected GA/P1 for your only option and got nothing you should not be surprised.
How is a system where one person wins GA to the same 4 shows I put in for and I get nothing not unfair?
As I said, it is the results that may be unfair, but the method of randomly selecting from the entire pool for each show is not. You did not get picked from the pool of tickets with the highest demand and the lowest likelihood of success. Especially if it was one of the major cities. Your request did not get picked and someone else's did. That is all there is to it.
That's my point exactly, a system that allows this is BS.
I do agree and think that the most feasible solution is to limit the number of requests or wins for each member. Adding any other levels of complexity such as seniority or priority would likely be rejected by TM.
The system is not unfair, all members have an equal chance to win tickets to every show, for all seating levels. Each show is an individual draw with an equal chance for all members. It is the results that could be perceived as unfair as members were highly successful and others got nothing. Some people win at blackjack, some people lose their shirts. And if you selected GA/P1 for your only option and got nothing you should not be surprised.
How is a system where one person wins GA to the same 4 shows I put in for and I get nothing not unfair?
As I said, it is the results that may be unfair, but the method of randomly selecting from the entire pool for each show is not. You did not get picked from the pool of tickets with the highest demand and the lowest likelihood of success. Especially if it was one of the major cities. Your request did not get picked and someone else's did. That is all there is to it.
That's my point exactly, a system that allows this is BS.
I do agree and think that the most feasible solution is to limit the number of requests or wins for each member. Adding any other levels of complexity such as seniority or priority would likely be rejected by TM.
The system is not unfair, all members have an equal chance to win tickets to every show, for all seating levels. Each show is an individual draw with an equal chance for all members. It is the results that could be perceived as unfair as members were highly successful and others got nothing. Some people win at blackjack, some people lose their shirts. And if you selected GA/P1 for your only option and got nothing you should not be surprised.
How is a system where one person wins GA to the same 4 shows I put in for and I get nothing not unfair?
Again; this goes back to not understanding basic statistics. Also, there weren’t a majority of people winning 4 GA shows. Some did. Most did not. Some got shut out completely, most did not get shut out completely. It’s really that simple.
I understand basic statistics, trust me. Applied math major here. My point is they shouldn't have a system that allows these types of outcomes.
If you’re an applied math major, then you’re intelligent enough to see that what I am saying is factually accurate and you are complaining just to complain because it didn’t work out for you. I am sincerely sorry for your disappointment. I’ve been there as have many others over the years. There is never going to be a perfect system. People who didn’t get tickets they wanted will complain after every sale until the end of the bands touring days.
The system is not unfair, all members have an equal chance to win tickets to every show, for all seating levels. Each show is an individual draw with an equal chance for all members. It is the results that could be perceived as unfair as members were highly successful and others got nothing. Some people win at blackjack, some people lose their shirts. And if you selected GA/P1 for your only option and got nothing you should not be surprised.
How is a system where one person wins GA to the same 4 shows I put in for and I get nothing not unfair?
Again; this goes back to not understanding basic statistics. Also, there weren’t a majority of people winning 4 GA shows. Some did. Most did not. Some got shut out completely, most did not get shut out completely. It’s really that simple.
I understand basic statistics, trust me. Applied math major here. My point is they shouldn't have a system that allows these types of outcomes.
You are probably right. People don't need to go 10 out of 10 on fan club lottery to enjoy the tour, when many get noting. But thems the breaks. Whatever they would try to do to put a cap on the lotto system in order to guarantee something for everyone would create another spiral of complaints. Two show minimum or whatever they may decide on etc. If we were all guaranteed one pair of 10C tickets per leg or something, I'd sign up for that and then you battle it out for more if you want. I don't think they will every even consider coming up with the parameters for something like that. It would lead to even more phony 10C accounts by resellers. Hell, I'd have a total of 6 accounts for me, my wife, and the kids.
The system is not unfair, all members have an equal chance to win tickets to every show, for all seating levels. Each show is an individual draw with an equal chance for all members. It is the results that could be perceived as unfair as members were highly successful and others got nothing. Some people win at blackjack, some people lose their shirts. And if you selected GA/P1 for your only option and got nothing you should not be surprised.
How is a system where one person wins GA to the same 4 shows I put in for and I get nothing not unfair?
Again; this goes back to not understanding basic statistics. Also, there weren’t a majority of people winning 4 GA shows. Some did. Most did not. Some got shut out completely, most did not get shut out completely. It’s really that simple.
I understand basic statistics, trust me. Applied math major here. My point is they shouldn't have a system that allows these types of outcomes.
If you’re an applied math major, then you’re intelligent enough to see that what I am saying is factually accurate and you are complaining just to complain because it didn’t work out for you. I am sincerely sorry for your disappointment. I’ve been there as have many others over the years. There is never going to be a perfect system. People who didn’t get tickets they wanted will complain after every sale until the end of the bands touring days.
I didn't complain other years I got shut out, I understood the method and the probability of my choices. I agree what you are saying is factually accurate. I'm just saying a system that allows someone to get 9 of 10 shows while another goes 0-4 (with the person who went 9/10 getting all 4 shows the person who went 0/4 put in for) is a bad system
The system is not unfair, all members have an equal chance to win tickets to every show, for all seating levels. Each show is an individual draw with an equal chance for all members. It is the results that could be perceived as unfair as members were highly successful and others got nothing. Some people win at blackjack, some people lose their shirts. And if you selected GA/P1 for your only option and got nothing you should not be surprised.
How is a system where one person wins GA to the same 4 shows I put in for and I get nothing not unfair?
As I said, it is the results that may be unfair, but the method of randomly selecting from the entire pool for each show is not. You did not get picked from the pool of tickets with the highest demand and the lowest likelihood of success. Especially if it was one of the major cities. Your request did not get picked and someone else's did. That is all there is to it.
That's my point exactly, a system that allows this is BS.
I do agree and think that the most feasible solution is to limit the number of requests or wins for each member. Adding any other levels of complexity such as seniority or priority would likely be rejected by TM.
The system is not unfair, all members have an equal chance to win tickets to every show, for all seating levels. Each show is an individual draw with an equal chance for all members. It is the results that could be perceived as unfair as members were highly successful and others got nothing. Some people win at blackjack, some people lose their shirts. And if you selected GA/P1 for your only option and got nothing you should not be surprised.
How is a system where one person wins GA to the same 4 shows I put in for and I get nothing not unfair?
The system is not unfair, all members have an equal chance to win tickets to every show, for all seating levels. Each show is an individual draw with an equal chance for all members. It is the results that could be perceived as unfair as members were highly successful and others got nothing. Some people win at blackjack, some people lose their shirts. And if you selected GA/P1 for your only option and got nothing you should not be surprised.
How is a system where one person wins GA to the same 4 shows I put in for and I get nothing not unfair?
Life isn't fair...
Agreed. But PJ tried to make ticket distribution fair up til this tour
Getting skunked when people are getting tix to 6, 8 10 shows doesn't seem like a fair or random system at all.
I think this gets to the point. It IS a random system. Does that make it "fair"? I don't necessarily think so. Priority seemed like the best option, that way more people would likely at least get 1 show. Going 0/1 while others go 8/8 stings a bit, but we knew going in it was random and these things would happen.
The system is not unfair, all members have an equal chance to win tickets to every show, for all seating levels. Each show is an individual draw with an equal chance for all members. It is the results that could be perceived as unfair as members were highly successful and others got nothing. Some people win at blackjack, some people lose their shirts. And if you selected GA/P1 for your only option and got nothing you should not be surprised.
How is a system where one person wins GA to the same 4 shows I put in for and I get nothing not unfair?
Again; this goes back to not understanding basic statistics. Also, there weren’t a majority of people winning 4 GA shows. Some did. Most did not. Some got shut out completely, most did not get shut out completely. It’s really that simple.
I understand basic statistics, trust me. Applied math major here. My point is they shouldn't have a system that allows these types of outcomes.
If you’re an applied math major, then you’re intelligent enough to see that what I am saying is factually accurate and you are complaining just to complain because it didn’t work out for you. I am sincerely sorry for your disappointment. I’ve been there as have many others over the years. There is never going to be a perfect system. People who didn’t get tickets they wanted will complain after every sale until the end of the bands touring days.
I didn't complain other years I got shut out, I understood the method and the probability of my choices. I agree what you are saying is factually accurate. I'm just saying a system that allows someone to get 9 of 10 shows while another goes 0-4 (with the person who went 9/10 getting all 4 shows the person who went 0/4 put in for) is a bad system
I know there’s been discussion in a lot of the ticket threads about this, so I thought I would just start a thread. (Sorry if one already exists!) I think Ticketmaster may have messed up the draw again. If someone put in for GA in a city with two shows, it seems like they automatically got GA for both nights. I cannot find one single person who put in for “GA or Reserved” for both nights, but only got GA for one night. I also think when some people were selected for GA it was potentially applied to multiple cities. Having such a high number of people getting GA for 6, 7 8… and even 9 shows is unheard of.
There are also an inordinate amount of people who got shut out for both nights in one city. So, if they put in for “GA or Reserved” but didn’t get GA… I don’t think they were added back into the draw for reserved seats for either night. People who selected “Reserved” in addition to “GA and Reserved” (whether P1 or P2) were probably okay. But those who thought they would be okay with just selecting “GA and Reserved” were not included in the general seated draw, therefore not getting either night.
I don’t think this applies to MSG, as you couldn’t win both nights. I also don’t think it applies to Vancouver BC, which I think was done by Ticketmaster Canada (who may have done the draw correctly).
Thoughts?
It's not just GA. If someone put it for GA/P1 seats to both shows for a US city EXCLUDING NYC (i.e. Vegas, LA, Chicago, Philly and Boston or Seattle) they were ALMOST positively given the same results for each show in the same city. It is city specific. This did not occur for those entering 1 Wrigley show and 1 Philly show, etc... This did not appear to occur in Vancouver, Likely due to TM Canada handling it rather than US TM.
@mookieblalock - the pool already seems to be skewed due to people failing to read the information I was looking for. Or my inability to communicate it thoroughly. I was not iso feedback from those who entered a single show in Vegas and a show in Missoula. Strictly both shows of 1 city.
So, if selected for GA in LA 1, they also were nearly guaranteed GA night 2 If given P1 for Wrigley 1, they were also going to recieve P1 for Wrigley 2
Example: Person A put in request for GA/P1 for 6 shows LA 1 LA 2 Vegas 1 Vegas 2 Wrigley 1 Wrigley 2
What we are seeing as "random" results: LA 1 - GA LA 2 - GA Vegas 1 - P1 Reserved Vegas 2 - P1 Reserved Wrigley 1 - GA Wrigley 2 - GA
COULD this happen through statistical odds? Yeah, it could. Likely? No. Likely to be repeated many times? Not at all.
Actual random based on Likely quantity of GA tickets to requests: LA 1 - P1 Reserved LA 2 - GA Vegas 1 - P1 Reserved Vegas 2 - P1 Reserved Wrigley 1 - P1 Reserved Wrigley 2 - GA
"A smart monkey doesn't monkey around with another monkey's monkey" - Darwin's Theory
One thing to keep in mind. Both here and on Facebook, there are people complaining this morning who never actually entered the lottery. They registered for Verified Fan and thought that was the lottery, or they went to add a show on the last day and cancelled out all their previous picks. Not saying that describes any of you, but it does happen each year.
Agree. A lot of the frustration is being generated by people who didn't really understand the process or made a mistake by accident.
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
One thing to keep in mind. Both here and on Facebook, there are people complaining this morning who never actually entered the lottery. They registered for Verified Fan and thought that was the lottery, or they went to add a show on the last day and cancelled out all their previous picks. Not saying that describes any of you, but it does happen each year.
Agree. A lot of the frustration is being generated by people who didn't really understand the process or made a mistake by accident.
Honestly, I'm not butt hurt about being shut out. I've had some luck in the past only putting in for 1 or 2 shows. I did the same thing this time and it bit me because the demand for Wrigley must have been higher than I thought. I've also never been in a spot where I could put in for 4 or 5 shows and take that sort of hit on my cc.
This system seems better than the days of mashing F5 for hours or being stuck at work with no hope of being online at the right time.
Question is do I try for tix this Friday or wait and try my luck at F2F (which I've never done before).
1998: Noblesville, IN 08-17
2000: Noblesville, IN 08-18
2003: Noblesville, IN 06-22
2006: Cincinnati, OH 06-24
2010: Noblesville, IN 05-07
2016: Lexington, KY 04-26, Wrigley Field 2 08-22
2018: Wrigley Field 1 08-18, Wrigley Field 2 08-20
2022: St. Louis, MO 09-18
2024: Noblesville, IN 08-26, Wrigley Field 1 08-29, Wrigley Field 2 08-31
One thing to keep in mind. Both here and on Facebook, there are people complaining this morning who never actually entered the lottery. They registered for Verified Fan and thought that was the lottery, or they went to add a show on the last day and cancelled out all their previous picks. Not saying that describes any of you, but it does happen each year.
There were also a lot of people posting in the days leading up that they weren't going to put in for P2 seating. I respect their courage but sometimes it's just better to be in the building.
1996: Randall's Island 2 1998: East Rutherford | MSG 1 & 2 2000: Cincinnati | Columbus | Jones Beach 1, 2, & 3 | Boston 1 | Camden 1 & 2 2003: Philadelphia | Uniondale | MSG 1 & 2 | Holmdel 2005: Atlantic City 1 2006: Camden 1 | East Rutherford 1 & 2 2008: Camden 1 & 2 | MSG 1 & 2 | Newark (EV) 2009: Philadelphia 1, 2 & 4 2010: Newark | MSG 1 & 2 2011: Toronto 1 2013: Wrigley Field | Brooklyn 2 | Philadelphia 1 & 2 | Baltimore 2015: Central Park 2016: Philadelphia 1 & 2 | MSG 1 & 2 | Fenway Park 2 | MSG (TOTD) 2017: Brooklyn (RnR HOF) 2020: MSG | Asbury Park2021: Asbury Park 2022: MSG | Camden | Nashville 2024: MSG 1 & 2 (#50) | Philadelphia 1 & 2 | Baltimore
Getting skunked when people are getting tix to 6, 8 10 shows doesn't seem like a fair or random system at all.
I think this gets to the point. It IS a random system. Does that make it "fair"? I don't necessarily think so. Priority seemed like the best option, that way more people would likely at least get 1 show. Going 0/1 while others go 8/8 stings a bit, but we knew going in it was random and these things would happen.
'we knew going in' is kind of the problem here
I would think the purpose of the lottery system is to get tickets into the hands of fans for the shows they want to go to.
This system is just encouraging people to buy as many shows as possible. This current system seems counter-productive.
FWIW I got Vancouver n2 GA but shut out of N1. I don’t see a poll anywhere because I’m still using the broken mobile site but just wanted to throw out a data point.
FWIW I got Vancouver n2 GA but shut out of N1. I don’t see a poll anywhere because I’m still using the broken mobile site but just wanted to throw out a data point.
Canada was it's own lottery not included with the US shows
One thing to keep in mind. Both here and on Facebook, there are people complaining this morning who never actually entered the lottery. They registered for Verified Fan and thought that was the lottery, or they went to add a show on the last day and cancelled out all their previous picks. Not saying that describes any of you, but it does happen each year.
There were also a lot of people posting in the days leading up that they weren't going to put in for P2 seating. I respect their courage but sometimes it's just better to be in the building.
Honestly, I'm not butt hurt about being shut out. I've had some luck in the past only putting in for 1 or 2 shows. I did the same thing this time and it bit me because the demand for Wrigley must have been higher than I thought. I've also never been in a spot where I could put in for 4 or 5 shows and take that sort of hit on my cc.
This system seems better than the days of mashing F5 for hours or being stuck at work with no hope of being online at the right time.
Question is do I try for tix this Friday or wait and try my luck at F2F (which I've never done before).
Agreed on all counts… I underestimated the demand for Fenway, so only put in for myself, I didn’t put in for my wife as we didn’t want to be stuck w/ extra pairs. Oh well, them’s the breaks.
Despite its flaws, this system is infinitely better than f5 - do people really think this site could handle all that traffic nowadays?
The system is not unfair, all members have an equal chance to win tickets to every show, for all seating levels. Each show is an individual draw with an equal chance for all members. It is the results that could be perceived as unfair as members were highly successful and others got nothing. Some people win at blackjack, some people lose their shirts. And if you selected GA/P1 for your only option and got nothing you should not be surprised.
How is a system where one person wins GA to the same 4 shows I put in for and I get nothing not unfair?
Seems like every system has been like this though. The old "Log on at 10am to reserve your seats" method led to hours of clicking f12 just to be shutout. People in that method used to end up with GA to a bunch of shows too while others got nothing except added frustration as you sat at your computer for 2 hours hoping you got lucky.
At least with this system you have the same hypothetical chance but can set it and forget it.
The system is not unfair, all members have an equal chance to win tickets to every show, for all seating levels. Each show is an individual draw with an equal chance for all members. It is the results that could be perceived as unfair as members were highly successful and others got nothing. Some people win at blackjack, some people lose their shirts. And if you selected GA/P1 for your only option and got nothing you should not be surprised.
How is a system where one person wins GA to the same 4 shows I put in for and I get nothing not unfair?
Seems like every system has been like this though. The old "Log on at 10am to reserve your seats" method led to hours of clicking f12 just to be shutout. People in that method used to end up with GA to a bunch of shows too while others got nothing except added frustration as you sat at your computer for 2 hours hoping you got lucky.
At least with this system you have the same hypothetical chance but can set it and forget it.
2 hours? Those are rookie numbers, gotta pump those numbers up LOL. Anything that does not require 8 hours of F5ing is cool with me. I hate when I'm shut out of 10C seats, but then there is public sale and fan to fan. I get my F5 time in that way.
Comments
As I said, it is the results that may be unfair, but the method of randomly selecting from the entire pool for each show is not. You did not get picked from the pool of tickets with the highest demand and the lowest likelihood of success. Especially if it was one of the major cities. Your request did not get picked and someone else's did. That is all there is to it.
It would be great if it worked out that we all get about 50% of what we put in for, but it doesn't. I've been completely shut out a few times when putting in for only home shows or what I really wanted, so last leg I put in for 5 shows to make sure I got something and got all 5
I do agree and think that the most feasible solution is to limit the number of requests or wins for each member. Adding any other levels of complexity such as seniority or priority would likely be rejected by TM.
@$300 a ticket?
Priority seemed like the best option, that way more people would likely at least get 1 show.
Going 0/1 while others go 8/8 stings a bit, but we knew going in it was random and these things would happen.
@mookieblalock - the pool already seems to be skewed due to people failing to read the information I was looking for. Or my inability to communicate it thoroughly. I was not iso feedback from those who entered a single show in Vegas and a show in Missoula. Strictly both shows of 1 city.
So, if selected for GA in LA 1, they also were nearly guaranteed GA night 2
If given P1 for Wrigley 1, they were also going to recieve P1 for Wrigley 2
Example:
Person A put in request for GA/P1 for 6 shows
LA 1
LA 2
Vegas 1
Vegas 2
Wrigley 1
Wrigley 2
What we are seeing as "random" results:
LA 1 - GA
LA 2 - GA
Vegas 1 - P1 Reserved
Vegas 2 - P1 Reserved
Wrigley 1 - GA
Wrigley 2 - GA
COULD this happen through statistical odds? Yeah, it could. Likely? No. Likely to be repeated many times? Not at all.
Actual random based on Likely quantity of GA tickets to requests:
LA 1 - P1 Reserved
LA 2 - GA
Vegas 1 - P1 Reserved
Vegas 2 - P1 Reserved
Wrigley 1 - P1 Reserved
Wrigley 2 - GA
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
I've also never been in a spot where I could put in for 4 or 5 shows and take that sort of hit on my cc.
This system seems better than the days of mashing F5 for hours or being stuck at work with no hope of being online at the right time.
Question is do I try for tix this Friday or wait and try my luck at F2F (which I've never done before).
'we knew going in' is kind of the problem here
I would think the purpose of the lottery system is to get tickets into the hands of fans for the shows they want to go to.
This system is just encouraging people to buy as many shows as possible. This current system seems counter-productive.
For MSG, P2 was the way to go!
At least with this system you have the same hypothetical chance but can set it and forget it.