Official 2023 Ticket Lottery Results Thread

machinehum said:

BloodMeridian80 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.  

That may be what happened, but that’s not the system described nor used in previous lotteries

Honest question, not trying to be argumentative: where have you seen the system described for the current lottery, and where have you seen descriptions (from people involved who actually know what they're talking about) about how it's worked in the past? 

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. 

Lindsay Buchanan said:

So it’s 8:02 pm EST on 4/25. No word yet. Should I assume I didn’t get either show I put in for? Really bummed- been a 10 club member for a long time .the request page still says “request received” so I’m holding out hope 

machinehum said:

Kevinman said:

machinehum said:

Kevinman 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.

This

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

Source that says it’s not this way?

lolwut? Y'all are making the assertion, not me. I'm not interested in trying to prove a negative. 

dlesko619 said:

setlist41 said:

Anyone here with Indy being your 1st and 2nd choice and nothing yet?

My wife and I only put in for Indy and nothing yet 

setlist41 said:

Anyone here with Indy being your 1st and 2nd choice and nothing yet?

JB23237 said:

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