Thanks for sharing this Alex. It’s definitely nice to see almost 30 people over 1k in profit so far this year.

I think this daily fantasy can experience a tip into a more mainstream game with two important elements – the promotion of low buy in, large prize pool contests and well known players who are winning a lot of money. Fanduel is really pushing the large prize pool boundaries with the DFBC and the FFFC. This post is a good move towards highlighting the winning players.

Good info

-28 players have net profit of over $1,000 (all sports combined)

-59 players have net profit of over $500 (all sports combined)******is this including the 28 or addition to the 28*****

Interesting but i wonder what the ratio of losers to winners is overall, and not just this year. I have no idea, but would guess maybe 85/15 ?

Anyone else? Over or under 85%?

@youcanbetonthis said…

Good info

-28 players have net profit of over $1,000 (all sports combined)

-59 players have net profit of over $500 (all sports combined)******is this including the 28 or addition to the 28*****

Including.

Sort of. You can have someone who won $500+ at MLB, but lost at the other sports, so isn’t on the overall list. You could also have someone who won $250 at MLB and $250 at NBA so they’re on the overall list without being on the list for any one sport. So I guess the best way to describe it is that the two lists were calculated independently and overlap each other.

I would say that wouldn’t be too farfetched of a guess. just in the 2 months or so i played consistently from feb-april, i would say there were at least 20 different people who seemed to be regulars… for about a week. there are a LOT of those, because it is definitely a curve to be able to compete consistently.

1) Thanks for sharing this Alex. Have a feeling this could go down as a hall of fame thread.

2) To Mike’s question, I’d like to know if anyone knows what that ratio is in poker?

If anyone is curious, I ran those same numbers on DraftStreet (for 2011 as of May 16th):

All Sports:
-20 players have net profit of $1,000 or more
-41 players have net profit of $500 or more

MLB Only:
-16 players have net profit of $1,000 or more
-33 players have net profit of $500 or more

Profitable this year and long-term profitable are not the same thing. Variance will make many people short-term profitable who have no chance being long-term profitable. In online poker, 10,000 hands is the minimum number to even start thinking of long-term. I consider drafting a single position to be the equivalent of a poker hand, so a 9 player fantasy draft is like 9 hands. That’s how I came up with 1000+ leagues as long-term for Daily Fantasy Sports. They also need to be the exact same structure and buy-in for it to be long-term. Until someone has run a 1000+ Large Field leagues, don’t tell me they are long-term profitable because of a single big score (Jamie Gold WSOP for example). Also, those who tend to get up to 1000 leagues tend to be the better players who are more likely to be long-term profitable, so even if you looked just at that group, you would have a biased sample.

If you wanted to get to the actual percentage of long-term profitable players on a site, take the number of winning players with over 1000 leagues of history, and divide that by the total number of players who have played on the site. The number would be a bit low because not all profitable players would have hit 1000 leagues yet, and a bit high because some of the group would have made it to profitability through a few Large Field scores without running enough large fields to eliminate variance.