Equitable sharing

I bought into a group of ten owners sharing a resort that splits 20 weeks a year. Their protocol is to put 10 names into a hat and select the first 10 weeks according to luck of the draw. They do the second 10 weeks the same way. Each year they review the rules and I suggested - as a newcomer (as I am here) that they simply inverse the order in the selection of the 2nd week so that the chance of being 10th both times was statistically eliminated. This suggestion was embraced by a few and rejected by others that stated it made no statistical diffference.

And after the draw it seemed those opposed to change were luckier than those who weren't...go figure.

Any thoughts?

wilphil said:

I bought into a group of ten owners sharing a resort that splits 20 weeks a year. Their protocol is to put 10 names into a hat and select the first 10 weeks according to luck of the draw. They do the second 10 weeks the same way. Each year they review the rules and I suggested - as a newcomer (as I am here) that they simply inverse the order in the selection of the 2nd week so that the chance of being 10th both times was statistically eliminated. This suggestion was embraced by a few and rejected by others that stated it made no statistical diffference.

And after the draw it seemed those opposed to change were luckier than those who weren't...go figure.

Any thoughts?

Click to expand...

First question, is this a timeshare with 20 weeks owned or a outright condo? If a condo, what about the other 32 weeks a year? If a timeshare resort, who actually OWNS all the weeks?

If I understand this correctly, the NAMES are pulled and that person gets to SELECT which week they want, correct? Under the current format, a name COULD be drawn 10th in both cases. By skipping the "draw" and reversing the order for the second 10 (we do that on our football draft) there is no way for for someone to be unlucky with two 10th place draws. This format evens out the value of picks for everyone involved.

My guess is those who don't want to change has either had the good fortune of being 1st in both draws on many occasions or they can somehow manipulate the outcome of the "random" draws.