If the purpose is to give some advantage to "old timers," I don't see how
this accomplishes that objective very well.  It seems to me that the people
who deserve rewarding are the folks who've been attending for a lot more
than the last five years, the folks who attended before the days of the
sellouts.

If I weredesigning the process, one difference would be that I would exclude
the last three years, and go back farther than five years.  I'd exclude 2000
and 2001 because they were oversold.  Many of the people who got tickets
were themselves lottery winners and to give them an advantage in the next
lottery seems unfair to me (or to put it differently, to put the losers in
the first lotteries in a disadvantageous position in the next lottery seems
unfair).  1999 was an aberration because of location.  I'd guess many "old
timers" simply couldn't afford to go to California.  Now you can argue that
if they were really that devoted, they would have raised the funds, but that
smacks to me of "classism."

Personally, this benefits me.  I lost in the Providence lottery, but "bought
my way" into Albany via the 2000 Regionals/2001 Finals package deal.  I'm
happy I have the advantage, and I won't refuse the tickets if I win, but I
don't think that this is a fair process.

Nathan Eric Hampton wrote:

>>[. . . ] If you are one among 10,000 applying for 7,000 seats in this
limited, special lottery, your odds are no better than if you are one
> among 19,000 applying for 15,000 seats.  This sounds good if you are an
> oldtimer, but I am not yet convinced that it is good.<<
>
While the odds may be no better in the first lottery than the second, the
advantage to the "old timer" is that a single "lottery ticket" enters them
in both lotteries.  Also, one of the things that's not clear is whether or
not the "oldtimers" can also enter the general lottery.  If so, not only do
they get the advantage of a single lottery ticket entering them in both
lotteries, but they also have doubled odds in the second.

>>And if it is good for the oldtimer, then the newcomer will be shorted.<<

Yah, this is a zero sum game.  Any advantage to oldtimers is a disadvantage
to newbies.  I'm not sure what you're saying here.  Do you object to giving
an advantage to oldtimers?  I'm not arguing one way or the other, just want
to understand what your point is.  If you were designing the ticket
application process, what would you do differently?

Oh, and BTW on the point that started this thread, I live in eastern
Massachusetts and the tickets hadn't arrived as of yesterday.  Thanks, Sara,
for posting and making me feel a bit less anxious.

Clay