Options
One fix for the lottery...
Spiritual_Chaos
Posts: 29,018
One thing they should do but still keep the lottery and make more people happy.
They should make it so that you first only can get ONE show, and they go through all the members and first after "as many as possible" members get one show they should open up the lottery as now.
So that as many members as possible at least gets one show. Instead of some getting 5 and others 0. But still keep the same lottery and still in the end people can luck out and get alot of show.
What would be the problems with this system?
They should make it so that you first only can get ONE show, and they go through all the members and first after "as many as possible" members get one show they should open up the lottery as now.
So that as many members as possible at least gets one show. Instead of some getting 5 and others 0. But still keep the same lottery and still in the end people can luck out and get alot of show.
What would be the problems with this system?
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
2010: Newark 5/18 MSG 5/20-21 2011: PJ20 9/3-4 2012: Made In America 9/2
2013: Brooklyn 10/18-19 Philly 10/21-22 Hartford 10/25 2014: ACL10/12
2015: NYC 9/23 2016: Tampa 4/11 Philly 4/28-29 MSG 5/1-2 Fenway 8/5+8/7
2017: RRHoF 4/7 2018: Fenway 9/2+9/4 2021: Sea Hear Now 9/18
2022: MSG 9/11 2024: MSG 9/3-4 Philly 9/7+9/9 Fenway 9/15+9/17
LOOKING FOR A SINGLE TICKET TO MSG NIGHT 2
I suppose this is where the priority could play in. Ensure that every member gets 1 pair based on their priority list, then go on with the rest. My guess is that this doesn't fit in to how the actual lottery was being run though.
People going to multiple shows chose shows with low demand as their secondary preferences.
I honestly don't think the end result would be much different with one pair per person. That one pair is still like choosing your #1 pref.
I think it would be a bit smoother to have one lottery per show and randomly allocate the GA tickets to people who won (unless they opted out of GA).
At least then you don't have competition between people having their #2 as the same show as their #1, losing to people who were a bit more clever, and splitting their pref's up between shows.
DaveA:
Boston prio 1
Texas prio 2
Gotham City prio 3
Jack:
Boston prio 1
Texas prio 2
Metropolis prio 3
Matt:
Boston prio 1
Metropolis prio 2
Gotham City prio 3
As it is now. DaveA could battle and win over Jack on Boston. And also on Texas. That would be 2 shows for Dave, and zero for Jack.
With a new system. Dave A would win his prio 1 and be put aside. So he won't fight Jack on prio 2 and Jack would get his prio 2.
Matt doesn't get Boston either, but he is happy with getting Metropolis which is his prio2.
Everyone got a show! Now, maybe some people only put Boston and would have been shut out completely. But still. Now, as many as possible have gotten a pair of tix.
Then open up and maybe Jack is shut out of his prio 3 Metropolis because they are all gone, and Matt and Dave fight for Gotham City which Matt wins. Etc.
And as hard as it might seem ... there are always programmers/coders who could come up with an algorithm, but I suspect the 10C couldn't be bothered. The shit that coders write for my company (I am not one of them, I just use what they do) is way more advanced than anything that a lottery could entail. The reality is that in the world of coding it would be very easy to add weighting factors for absolutely anything, including seniority, location, # of tickets already won, etc.
The easiest way (without "complicated" code) would be to run it as they have done, but once someone hits their 1st winner, then they are done. Very simple.
You could even run a 2nd lottery that only allowed people who were shut out of the 1st lottery. And so forth. But this would be too much effort for the 10C ... one lottery is enough work for them.
The end result would be that more people have a chance to get atleast one show. Even if it is not their prio 1. But someone already having one show can't stop their chance of getting one.
Yes, first one run through where people getting a show is put to the side. Than run it through again after the first run through with the rest of the tickets.
1) Make 5 shows the max, have 5 rounds... 1 choice per round. (keeping the limit as 1 pair per show)
2) If the lottery is being done on a Monday, tell us that cut off is Monday BUT give us the results the following day - Then we are not killing our whole Monday F5-ing our ticket page.
Anybody disagree?
East Troy 9/3/11
East Troy 9/4/11
Amsterdam 6/26/12
Amsterdam 6/27/12
Wrigley Field 7/19-20/13
Worcester, MA 10/15/13
Worcester, MA 10/16/13
Hartford, CT 10/25/13
Seattle, WA 12/06/13
Denver, CO 10/22/14
Fenway 2016 #1
Fenway 2016 #2
Fenway 2018 #1
Fenway 2018 #2
1. Why? What differs from my idea above?
2. Haha. "Sure".
I don't think it would change very much at all.
Say the most popular shows were at the start of the tour.
1) Scenario 1: Person requested 5 shows. The chose show #1 as #1 priority and all subsequent shows lower down. They'd only get the remaining shows if demand was low enough that people who marked it as #1 didn't get it.
2) Scenario 2: Person requests 5 shows. Show #5 is selected as 1st pref, show #1 as 5th pref. They'd only get tickets to show #5 if pretty much no one else wanted them.
Limiting it to one pair makes very little difference, unless your expecting people to use their one pair on the low demand shows (that you don't want to travel too). It's a good bet people would use the pair on the show closest to home or high demand shows, making little or no difference from the preference system.
People only got multiple shows because they chose additional preferences where people didn't want to go to. They probably use the 1st pref right where you wanted to go.
I guess if you're willing to travel to the places they were you'd get those tickets, but you'd of gotten them anyways.
Yea, sure. I'm not talking about it being a huge difference.
But in the cases of personA having his prio1 tix and battling out for his prio2 with someone who did not get his prio1 it would be a difference. Or would it not?
Yah I suppose it would. It just seems that the big shows like NY, Buffalo, and Seattle mostly went in the first round, so the 2nd round was moot.
People are complaining that people got tickets to 4 or 5 shows, but it's mostly because shows like philly 2, Charlotte, Charlottesville, Portland, OKC, Vancouver, Spokane, Calgary were very low in demand. Not because they were battling out a hotly contested #2 pref for a high demand market.
Problems:
1. Less likely to get a show close to you home
2. Decision has to be made which show you start with
You have to decide now which one you start with also...
And yes, the big shows will be gone in the first round. But now, you would have a bigger chance with your prio2 if all the prio1's are gone from the competion.
Hitler
Boston 1
Hartford 2
Stalin
Boston 1
Hartford 2
Today, Hitler can win both Boston and Hartford and Stalin could be out from both. With the "new" system Hitler and all getting prio1 would be gone from battling for Hartford 2.
So I mean, it would be better for Stalin. Even though this instance doesn't happen very often (but I guess it did happen on a few instances).
1. The 1Oth show is in my city Dallas, which is my first priority, the guy from New York has been shut out of 9 shows and now has dallas as his #1 priority also.
2. 10 shows on tour, New York guy gets 10 chances, me 1
OK - so people who live in Brooklyn would have to list all of the shows they would be willing to go to since there aren't enough tickets for just the New York area fans. If all of those areas have too many requests, then what do they do?
And we'd have to allow EVERYONE who wants a ticket - no matter where they are in the world - to get at least one show on a tour (whatever that means)? What a mess that would be.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
And what do you mean allow everyone to get tickets? You doesn't have to allow anyone more than you allow them now? Or what?
It's still a chance you end up without a ticket. But it evens it out a tiny bit more.
1. Less likely to get a show close to you home
2. Decision has to be made which show you start with[/quote]
Why is it less likely?
You have to decide now which one you start with also...[/quote]
1. The 1Oth show is in my city Dallas, which is my first priority, the guy from New York has been shut out of 9 shows and now has dallas as his #1 priority also.
2. 10 shows on tour, New York guy gets 10 chances, me 1[/quote]
The only fix I see is that there shouldn't have been separate drawings for GA then Reserved, it should have been by show only.
First of all double up the number of 10C seats allocated to each venue. Of course the promoter may want to give or allocate some seats to sponsors and/or endorsers but that can be work out. In the end, tickets will be sold either to a 10C member or a certain credit card holder or whatever service a person is suscribed to provided by the so called endorser or sponsor.
Second, restrict the number of entries you can apply to, it doesn't matter the number, but the lower the number of entries, the better, in order keep happy as many people as possible.
Third, restrict the time and fashion an applicant can enter any drawing: if there is a limit of entries per drawing, there should be a limit of entries per leg as well. Also, restrict the number of entries per city: if a city gets two or more shows, you can enter the drawing for only one show. If you chose two or more shows in the same city, you waive your right to enter the drawing for at least another show in the same leg. The problem is that there might be cities which get at least two shows and there might be lots of members in that particular city.
Fourth, if there's a restriction in the numbers of shows per leg you can apply to, in order to make it easier for a member to get drawn for a show in his/her homestate or a neighbouring one, and in accordance with how the tour is planned, members can only enter the drawing for shows of a particular leg of the tour. For example, if the fist leg is on the west coast, only members of the west coast will be able to enter the drawing, and if there are tickets remaining from the first drawing, the rest can enter the second drawing. Same fashion when the band tours other continents.
The 10 club gets the max allocation of 20% of the venue at almost every venue
8/15/92, 9/28/96, 8/28/98, 8/29/98, 9/18/98, 8/3/00, 8/9/00, 8/10/00, 8/23/00, 8/25/00, 9/1/00, 9/2/00, 4/28/03, 6/18/03, 7/5/03, 7/6/03, 10/1/04, 10/3/05, 6/19/08, 10/27/09, 10/31/09, 5/21/10, 9/3/11, 9/4/11, 10/21/13
More to Come....
Are we sure its 20%? I've kind of gotten feeling it's been dwindling. 10c seemed to have circumvented TM's 10% rule for years, but seem to have a rougher go of it.
I agree with your sentiment though. The 10c can't get more tickets then they got. Lol. Of course less people would be pissed if they could get more, but they can't, hence the problem
8/15/92, 9/28/96, 8/28/98, 8/29/98, 9/18/98, 8/3/00, 8/9/00, 8/10/00, 8/23/00, 8/25/00, 9/1/00, 9/2/00, 4/28/03, 6/18/03, 7/5/03, 7/6/03, 10/1/04, 10/3/05, 6/19/08, 10/27/09, 10/31/09, 5/21/10, 9/3/11, 9/4/11, 10/21/13
More to Come....
Hmm. Still don't understand. or maybe you are talking about in what order 10C is drawing the shows...
But If you have Dallas as prio1 and NY-guy has it at prio-5, he wouldn't move up to having Dallas as prio-1 before you have had a shot.
All prio1 are run through first (in random order). Those who get a show are taken aside. Those who are left and still couldn't get their prio1 are run through again using their prio-2. Now, there might be a few left who hasn't have got their prio1 or prio2 so you run it through again. The when as many members as mathematically possible have 1 show each - you put everyone back in the lottery and run through again with the rest of tickets and prios.
Wouldn't that solve the problem you are mentioning?
The problem is the current system shouldn't have split GA and reserved. That screwed some peoples rankings and until people saw how that effected the outcome, no one knew how to put down the best strategy.
Here's the issue. I wanted to go to one show. I signed up for Seattle and lost (no worries). I could have really made any show a destination show. Send me to charlotte, philly, portland, hell I don't care as long as I don't have a traveling conflict. What this lottery can't allow us to say is, "Here are the 8 or so shows I could attend, but I only want to go to one." Any of these 8 would be fine. Under the current system, I can end up getting multiple tix that I don't want/can't afford. So now I am shut out for this tour.
95-Milwaukee, 98-East Troy, 00-East Troy, 03-Detroit Nights 1 and 2, 03-Toronto, 04-Grand Rapids, 05-Kitchener, 06-Cincinnati, 06-Auburn Hills, 10-New Orleans, 10-Kansas City, 11-PJ20 Nights 1 and 2, 13-Chicago, 14- Moline, 16-Chicago Nights 1 and 2, 18-Seattle Nights 1 and 2, Chicago Night 1, 21-Ohana Encore Night 1 and 2, 22-Imola, St. Louis.