MAIN FORUM

Comments

  • sethfein

    *FINAL UPDATE: Many from RG have stepped up and acknowledged the issue and have shown willingness to take proper steps going forward to avoid the conflict of interest. The term “fade” seems to be the biggest miscommunication among this and it will likely be resolved as well. That was main goal of this thread and initially, I was definitely emotional due to Cal response on twitter that seemed to disregard genuine complaints. It really seems everything is on track now for positive change but the thread is getting out of hand with just focusing on the wrong concepts (whether touts should be trusted in first place and whether I want RG to fire everyone because I lost). The common theme seems to be a big split on whether it is good practice to trust the content for own lineup builds. I do believe RG wants to be able to help common players that don’t have luxury of time to build models and still want a viable lineup for the slate.

    Either way, the goal of seeing update to the content and acknowledgement from the RG contributors of the issue was attained. They won’t turn off the commenting but please understand that a lot of the conversation below evolved from initial discussions in an effort to gain facts and information.*

    UPDATE: Many elements of rant below has been answered or my viewpoint changed since hearing other side. I was torn whether to fully edit post but did not want to create confusion within this thread. Would be ironic to delete a stance after pressure when calling out someone for doing same. So original post is posted but please consider the following:

    1) STL did NOT intend to mislead and is guilty of doing something everyone in DFS does…make decisions close to lock with either gut or intel that changes viewpoint. He was put in tough place and I fully recognize that. I apologize to him if anyone took my post as a personal attack as it was striictly about content that I personally feel is dumb anyways (and still do). Asking for something like a stone cold fade at 1pm EST is as dumb as relying on Anthony Davis injury report during morning shootaround. Change the content to something actually relevant throughout day so touts dont have to defend their reasonable actions with bad optics.

    2) Many RG staff have reached out since this post either thru thread or PM and have taken steps to try to resolve the conflict of interest that many feel exist. It is a positive step forward and so any negativity about past occurences, including KD fade play, should be done with

    3) This is representing those who want to play DFS and simply dont have time to do full research for hours before a slate. I agree only way to win consistently is thru own research but clearly many people feel RG is geared towars those who want a competitive shot with these tout content pieces…they arent catered to guys who have own data process or spreadsheet.

    4) Some asked why not check all touts and why only winning entries. This is really a flawed logic since if guys are paying for content because they dont have time to do research…they definitely dont have time to download every tout lineup builds and compare to any advice given to prove a point that may get ignored. I am sure this has happened many times with different touts and none were with malicious intent at all.

    5) This is my most important point and felt it got lost in hoopla: TOUTS SIGN UP FOR THIS! Lets get this straight. This isnt a non for profit site with pros trying to help common man with DFS. I am sure people are paid for their input based on their qualifications and credibility. Nobody is putting a gun to anyones head and saying “tell me what you know!”. If they make so much playing DFS personally that giving a few players they personally like will shift the market against them, then being paid for tout advice seems like the wrong line of work.

    Saying “well they play so OBVIOUSLY they wont give away their actualy fades and shame on any idiot who takes tout advice” is simply horrible (as many posted below) and if it is true, RG needs a disclaimer on every content that the tout is refusing to disclose actual views and any skill they have for reaearch is not applicable to this post.

    But again, I simply dont believe RG shares this view. If so, and only if this is true, I think RG would be better off having staff that are using actual expertise and helping people with DFS at premium level. Not using reputation to get readers only to mislead them to protect personal research.

    AGAIN, I DONT PERSONALLY BELIEVE THIS BUT READ MANY POSTERS HERE AND THEY SHARE THIS VIEW. I AM SIMPLY ADDRESSING.

    ————————————

    Last night, STLCARDINALS84 created some controversy when he scored a big hit on DK with a lineup that included Kevin Durant. The reason why many were rightfully upset was because Durant was someone that not only he, but all other touts in same question, answered as “stud they are fading in GPP”.

    A similar issue came up when Seige said “If you fade Wiggins and KAT tonight, you are doing DFS wrong” (Wiggins ultimately busted and Seige then had to redefine the term “fade” to his followers). Seige posted a definition of “fade” as the following:

    FADE = Less than a 1/4 of field ownership
    DON’T FADE = Have greater than 0%

    Now, he has since deleted his tweets altogether which is 100% WRONG for any Tout and RG should probably look into standard protocol for going forward considering how much people rely on building lineups, with real money on the line, and then an “established” tout can just delete his recommendation which affects ability to monitor for future reference.

    But there’s more! When pressed why he deleted the tweet, Seige said this:

    PORTION RELATING TO SEIGE ISSUE WITH WIGGINS WAS DELETED DUE TO RESPONSE

    EDIT: Seige responded that this was a miscommunication so I deleted the portion related to alchohol

    So fast forward to last night with STLCARDINALS84 Kevin Durant play. So in the end, Curry gets hurt and KD smashes the slate and lo and behold, STLCARDINALS84 has KD in 3 of 20 lineups when he told the premium RG members he would fade him in a GPP. Cal came to his defense saying that he played him in 1 of 20 lineups (as a lineup stack of the game) and that it’s still a fade. This is actually a very fair argument…if it were accurate. I will give benefit of the doubt to Cal that he doesn’t know how to use his own site ResultsDB to discover exactly how many lineups have a player. He shared a screenshot of just SMALL FORWARDS and shows KD in 1. However, DK has flex so you have to go to ALL to see actual exposures. The real amount is 3 and this is why it’s significant. I checked all 20 lineups and found 5 GS-SAS stacks and here is my opinion on this.

    1) You can not say you are “fading” a stud in a game that you are taking 20% stacking exposure to. He clearly saw value in this game and KD was up there with 3 out 5 stacks (more than Steph). Additionally, I would add that most of his lineups were some form of a stack (Lots of OKC-PHX, some BKN-CHA) so it would make sense to have less KD if you are taking a stacking approach

    2) If Cal is going to step in to validate this issue, then he should take the time to get facts straight. This isn’t some small DFS lineups provider on Twitter..this is likely the largest community of DFS players and the ethics is already a grey area when it comes to touts who offer their evaluations while playing themselves. Very similar to Fanduel employees playing slates they can see the ownership % on to gain an advantage. I would imagine between the influence RG has on DFS players, along with ability to track which players they are giving high projections to (which lineup builders spits out lineups from), they can get a really good idea of low ownership plays.

    3) Please for the love of everything holy define FADE. Almost every casual player sees it as avoid completely either due to brutal matchup or bad pricing. The constant flip flopping, deleting tweets, and inconsistencies is terrible from optics standpoint. It really isn’t that difficult to just take a stand and say who you are completely fading.

    If you really want to know the answer for STLCARDINALS84, here are his own % of players that are “stars” and the 2nd % is the field:

    Russ – 40% | 34%
    Booker – 25% | 31%
    Kemba – 20% | 12%
    Aldridge – 20% | 17%
    Durant – 15% | 9%
    Curry – 15% | 9%
    Howard – 10% | 21%
    Paul George – 10% | 10%
    Kyrie Irving – 5% | 20% SEIGE DEFINITION OF FADE
    KAT – 0% | 28% ANY DEFINITON OF FADE
    Embiid – 0% | 5%
    Simmons – 0% | 15% ANY DEFINITON OF FADE

    The answer to “who are you fading in GPP?” is either Kyrie Irving if you hold a higher standard for “star” from the bottom 3 shown or any of the 3 that he ACTUALLY 100% FADED. This isn’t a very difficult concept. There were no notable late news that affected BOS-MIN game. He had 6 stars with less exposure and yet said he was fading KD.

    The kicker is that he actually was 6% over the field with his Kevin Durant play. This is simply not a fade by even Seige’s definition.

    There is no other way to address this from RG standpoint other than apologize and acknowledge the mistake by both STLCARDINALS84 and TheSeige.

    I made sure to keep this post strictly business and no personal attacks against anyone involved. If replying, please keep same level of ethics if possible because I don’t want to believe that touts have bad intentions on getting people to lean one way and then capitalize on low ownership.

    My goal is to shed light on this issue and hold RG accountable to make proper standards for going forward.

    SIDE POINT: Notorious, STLCardinals84 and Stevietpfl all agreed on a GPP fade of what ended up being the best player on the slate who happened to also be at really low ownership. So the other question may be whether this content even serves a purpose without context behind it.

    EDITED TO MAKE SURE NO IMPLICATION OF PERSONAL ATTACK AGAINST BOTH TOUTS. I don’t want to see heads roll and understand it’s a grey area of guys being paid to give professional opinion but also having to be discreet due to personal lineups. Goal is to find common ground between consumer and touts.

    Thanks,
    Seth

    • Link
    • Last Updated 2 years ago
  • sochoice

    • 2017 DraftKings FBWC Finalist

    • 2017 FanDuel WFFC Champion

    @theseige said...

    Also a serious question for people and a corralary to this discussion, we have 2 options when doing written content or shows or podcasts or whatever we can either be:

    1) super vague because it’s early in the day and we don’t know exactly all the news and do I might play him, I might fade him, I might lock him in

    Or

    2) give you our thoughts as we have them at the moment, I’m rostering Player X, I’m fading player Y etc with the understanding that things can change wildly based on news, discussions with other players or simply changing your mind

    As RG subs and readers where do you want me to be?

    Just wear a suit and tie every show and everything will be fine.

  • sethfein

    @theseige said...

    Also a serious question for people and a corralary to this discussion, we have 2 options when doing written content or shows or podcasts or whatever we can either be:

    1) super vague because it’s early in the day and we don’t know exactly all the news and do I might play him, I might fade him, I might lock him in

    Or

    2) give you our thoughts as we have them at the moment, I’m rostering Player X, I’m fading player Y etc with the understanding that things can change wildly based on news, discussions with other players or simply changing your mind

    As RG subs and readers where do you want me to be?

    Glad you asked!

    Early day content should be more “data driven” so it won’t change based on news. Whether based on recent game logs, pricing, game flow etc. As long as it’s documented, people can then determine later on that it clearly doesn’t apply once news drops.

    Clearly at the moment doesn’t really work. In fact, it puts you at a major disadvantage because you have to own it without ability to update/monitor what you said.

    I’ll give an example from last night:

    R. Hollis Jefferson – I really think at 5.3k he is really underpriced based on fact he was close to 7k pre-injury. He had a good game coming back from injury but came off bench last game with limited minutes. I expect him to be back in rotation and has major upside against a CHA team that has been struggling lately on D.

    Or say Fade

    Kevin Durant: Usage on GS is really tough to gauge and SA plays a slower pace. He really is a better play when GS has stars who are out but I can see upside in stacking if you think Spurs can keep this on close (or Steph Curry gets injured 1 minute in and now he’s a must play…just kidding :) )

    Anyway you get the idea.

  • theseige

    • 2015 DraftKings FFWC Finalist

    • x2

      2016 DraftKings FBBWC Finalist

    @sethfein the only person who at any time has suggested alcohol was a factor is you and it was completely untrue every time you mentioned it

    Also anyone whose ever listened to any of my content (either in Premium or in Tactics) can attest that those have been my definitions since day 1…

    also when considering something a fade we can only do it on projected ownership, can’t tell you how many times I’ve tried to take an underweight or fade position to only find out I’m overweight on the player

  • TnRiddles

    • Blogger of the Month

    @sethfein said...

    Glad you asked!

    Early day content should be more “data driven” so it won’t change based on news. Whether based on recent game logs, pricing, game flow etc. As long as it’s documented, people can then determine later on that it clearly doesn’t apply once news drops.

    Clearly at the moment doesn’t really work. In fact, it puts you at a major disadvantage because you have to own it without ability to update/monitor what you said.

    I’ll give an example from last night:

    R. Hollis Jefferson – I really think at 5.3k he is really underpriced based on fact he was close to 7k pre-injury. He had a good game coming back from injury but came off bench last game with limited minutes. I expect him to be back in rotation and has major upside against a CHA team that has been struggling lately on D.

    Or say Fade

    Kevin Durant: Usage on GS is really tough to gauge and SA plays a slower pace. He really is a better play when GS has stars who are out but I can see upside in stacking if you think Spurs can keep this on close (or Steph Curry gets injured 1 minute in and now he’s a must play…just kidding :) )

    Anyway you get the idea.

    you do realize they arent writing an entire article for every player that might have some interest on a slate right? This whole issue has been way overblown and is absurd

  • sethfein

    @MHDU2424 said...

    I like how in your podcast you address different scenarios….if player A who is questionable is out this opens up usage for etc etc

    I just wish more attention was paid to the overview of each slate and where you can jump the field…stacking ideas….etc etc (Tourneys and cash)…Meansey does it really well for cash in crunch time

    The majority of shows and articles are just giving us player picks which is helpful but it’s repetetive

    +1

    You don’t have to give away what you are ultimately doing…just maybe go over what you are considering and if you went that way, why you like it.

    Throwing out players you like or don’t like doesn’t really help because if it’s not narrowed down enough, it’s just too many options to really do anything with at consumer level.

  • TnRiddles

    • Blogger of the Month

    @sethfein said...

    +1

    You don’t have to give away what you are ultimately doing…just maybe go over what you are considering and if you went that way, why you like it.

    Throwing out players you like or don’t like doesn’t really help because if it’s not narrowed down enough, it’s just too many options to really do anything with at consumer level.

    How about you just use the takes that sound interesting or wrong to you and dig deeper. Too many users are relying on these guys to give them black/white picks and basically make their lineups for them

  • sethfein

    @theseige said...

    @sethfein the only person who at any time has suggested alcohol was a factor is you and it was completely untrue every time you mentioned it

    Also anyone whose ever listened to any of my content (either in Premium or in Tactics) can attest that those have been my definitions since day 1…

    also when considering something a fade we can only do it on projected ownership, can’t tell you how many times I’ve tried to take an underweight or fade position to only find out I’m overweight on the player

    1) I am sorry for any offense caused…I am literally reading your tweet now that says in response to someone who asked “Why delete the tweet (or any tweets)? You do it all the time

    Your response: “I delete tweets I do blacked out that I regret and I don’t want on a timeline…”

    You deleted the Wiggins/KAT tweet and said this as a response….what would be the proper way to conclude as to why you deleted it? I am going off your own direct response

  • rysportguy

    I will say there is a 99% chance StlCardinals84 purposely kept Towns off the fade list because he felt strongly about that fade and felt it would give him an edge (also the fact that 2 people already said KD likely made this an easy decision to also put KD). I don’t have a problem with this but it is important for premium subscribers to know that they are going to hold back their very best plays/fades in order to make sure they can keep a strong edge in their personal play. One of the downsides of getting advice from someone who is also playing.

  • sethfein

    @TnRiddles said...

    How about you just use the takes that sound interesting or wrong to you and dig deeper. Too many users are relying on these guys to give them black/white picks and basically make their lineups for them

    I am sorry I have been really patient all day in this thread but I have to say…you’re reading comprehension sucks.

    You went from seeing what pros are thinking to making lineups for me in one swift move. Get outta here with that nonsense.

    I brought the convo here instead of twitter to specifically move away from this type of crap but I guess it follows.

  • sethfein

    @theseige said...

    @sethfein the only person who at any time has suggested alcohol was a factor is you and it was completely untrue every time you mentioned it

    Also anyone whose ever listened to any of my content (either in Premium or in Tactics) can attest that those have been my definitions since day 1…

    also when considering something a fade we can only do it on projected ownership, can’t tell you how many times I’ve tried to take an underweight or fade position to only find out I’m overweight on the player

    And I agree on the Fade definition which is why I am strongly considering a universal adoption of a clear definition of fade on this site….that you have no interest in on this slate.

    If you want some grey area for low probability plays with some upside in a stack (or narrative) just say “slight exposure” play.

  • DFSToddler

    @theseige said...

    (Side Note: I had no idea people considered the account as a professional account instead of a personal account that tweets about DFS and in the future will have it reflect that)

    You can’t be serious? You have a link to rotogrinders.com on it, a banner image promoting your RG product, a profile pic of you with the RG logo and you wouldn’t think people would take this as your professional RG twitter account (which is also linked to your RG profile).

  • Kmasonbx

    @theseige said...

    Also a serious question for people and a corralary to this discussion, we have 2 options when doing written content or shows or podcasts or whatever we can either be:

    1) super vague because it’s early in the day and we don’t know exactly all the news and do I might play him, I might fade him, I might lock him in

    Or

    2) give you our thoughts as we have them at the moment, I’m rostering Player X, I’m fading player Y etc with the understanding that things can change wildly based on news, discussions with other players or simply changing your mind

    As RG subs and readers where do you want me to be?

    As someone who listens to the morning grind every day I understand that things can change dramatically from when you guys record to lineup lock, so my thoughts would be to go with #2 but provide caveats to avoid the whole “you told me to fade X player but from ResultsDB I can see you were 40% on him.” I think qualifying comments and not being matter of fact, especially when content is provide with a large gap between lineup lock.

  • theseige

    • 2015 DraftKings FFWC Finalist

    • x2

      2016 DraftKings FBBWC Finalist

    Ya you are misconstruing the tweet, I get why you think what it means but anyone in Tactics can tell you I don’t have that kinda time before lock

    By the time the tweet was deleted everyone knew I got Wiggins wrong, it wasn’t some cover up, I was over the discussion, prolly shoulda left it up but ohh well I’m not perfect

    It’s a non-issue now cause the account moving forward is gonna be professional and I’ll keep the fun posts in my private personal account

  • theseige

    • 2015 DraftKings FFWC Finalist

    • x2

      2016 DraftKings FBBWC Finalist

    @DFSToddler said...

    You can’t be serious? You have a link to rotogrinders.com on it, a banner image promoting your RG product, a profile pic of you with the RG logo and you wouldn’t think people would take this as your professional RG twitter account (which is also linked to your RG profile).

    Never crossed my mind that people took DFS Twitter that seriously, maybe that’s naive but that’s how I approached it

    This isn’t the first time this had been brought to my attention this week, but honestly had no idea til this week

    • Link
    • Last Updated 2 years ago
  • sethfein

    @theseige said...

    Ya you are misconstruing the tweet, I get why you think what it means but anyone in Tactics can tell you I don’t have that kinda time before lock

    By the time the tweet was deleted everyone knew I got Wiggins wrong, it wasn’t some cover up, I was over the discussion, prolly shoulda left it up but ohh well I’m not perfect

    It’s a non-issue now cause the account moving forward is gonna be professional and I’ll keep the fun posts in my private personal account

    Again, I only went off of your response to that person for why you deleted it. This is really the first I heard otherwise from you so thanks for understanding my position.

    I also appreciate you taking the professional approach to your twitter going forward instead of taking a stubborn approach. It truly was my goal with this post and glad to see some measures are being taken so I didn’t waste my day on this.

    The only real outstanding order of business here is for someone from RG to shutdown the very strong consensus here that touts are expected to give opinions not based on their professional opinion because they play DFS too.

    Can you please just put this to bed and confirm whether this needs to be disclosed or not?

  • louiescards

    DK KoTH winner

    I swear if you take away our ability to troll your hot takes because of this thread….

  • theseige

    • 2015 DraftKings FFWC Finalist

    • x2

      2016 DraftKings FBBWC Finalist

    I’ll only speak for myself, but I call it like I see it, you might think I’m insane for how I see it, but I’ll just gonna say where my head is at the moment I do the content.

    If I’m asked to do it differently, I gladly will. I’m here to help, and if people think I’m not then obviously gotta look at the approach to better help you all

  • btwice80

    @theseige said...

    Side Note: I had no idea people considered the account as a professional account instead of a personal account that tweets about DFS and in the future will have it reflect that

    You mean the twitter account with the logo of your employer next to the picture of you wearing the company shirt? The account that you routinely use to promote your paid services/product via that same employer, as well as shows and articles for which that same company pays you?

    You had no idea people consider that a professional account? How dimwitted do you have to be?

    Of course it’s a professional account, despite disclaimers. The opinions are your own, yada yada yada, but that doesn’t change the overall nature of the account. You’d have to do an entire overhaul of your twitter approach for it to not be rightfully considered a professional account.

    ETA: I see DFSToddler beat me to the punch.

    • Link
    • Last Updated 2 years ago
  • sethfein

    @theseige said...

    I’ll only speak for myself, but I call it like I see it, you might think I’m insane for how I see it, but I’ll just gonna say where my head is at the moment I do the content.

    If I’m asked to do it differently, I gladly will. I’m here to help, and if people think I’m not then obviously gotta look at the approach to better help you all

    I think that’s fair and as long as the mindset is that people may be relying on this to make financially material decisions, then it should be said.

    If something is some joke to troll someone on Twitter (like play all the KCP you can get at $7.7k on FD!) then maybe use a hashtag to track that or make it a little more obvious….again, suggestion to help you in long run as outside observer.

    But what many here have said, more specifically, is that they think these premium content articles on “who to fade, play, stack etc.” shouldn’t be relied upon because the touts play too and wouldn’t want to give away their edge.

    THAT needs to be coming from those at the top to either shoot down or acknowledge that, yes, it’s an inherent part of the industry. We are advising those we are up against. Disclaimer would then be appropriate in my opinion.

  • sethfein

    @btwice80 said...

    You mean the twitter account with the logo of your employer next to the picture of you wearing the company shirt? The account that you routinely use to promote your paid services/product via that same employer, as well as shows and articles for which that same company pays you?

    You had no idea people consider that a professional account? How dimwitted do you have to be?

    Of course it’s a professional account, despite disclaimers. The opinions are your own, yada yada yada, but that doesn’t change the overall nature of the account. You’d have to do an entire overhaul of your twitter approach for it to not be rightfully considered a professional account.

    He already addressed this…no need to beat a dead horse.

    He is going to be more professional with the account that has 19k followers going forward.

    I also can’t believe he didn’t know this before hand but who gives a crap? It’s done with and the result is a positive one. He owned up to it which was the goal of this thread (as did STLCardinals)

    • Link
    • Last Updated 2 years ago
  • btwice80

    @sethfein said...

    He already addressed this…no need to beat a dead horse.

    He is going to be more professional with the account that has 19k followers going forward.

    I also can’t believe he didn’t know this before hand but who gives a crap? It’s done with and the result is a positive one.

    Obviously that exchange happened while I was reading the thread and typing my response, nothing to do with a dead horse.

  • Mangone

    • 82

      RG Overall Ranking

    • Ranked #16

      RG Tiered Ranking

    @rysportguy said...

    I will say there is a 99% chance StlCardinals84 purposely kept Towns off the fade list because he felt strongly about that fade and felt it would give him an edge (also the fact that 2 people already said KD likely made this an easy decision to also put KD). I don’t have a problem with this but it is important for premium subscribers to know that they are going to hold back their very best plays/fades in order to make sure they can keep a strong edge in their personal play. One of the downsides of getting advice from someone who is also playing.

    Honestly if you think STLcards is sitting throughout his day saying, who should I talk people off of that will give me an edge?? You are out of your mind…DFS is a difficult game not everyone is profitable and when news breaks things affect a lineup. If he played KD as a one off multiple times I would understand some uproar. Josh Jackson news came 10 MINUTES BEFORE LOCK. So with that big news lineups change and sometimes its a scramble and sometimes you can get exposure to guys you don’t want in that scramble. Cards only had them in game stacks this is clearly going way too far. If Cards loved KD and told everyone to fade why didn’t he lock button him them for that massive edge you are talking about?? That’s just my opinion but I hope people understand how good of a guy Cards is and how he would never mislead anyone.

  • Gathman78

    This is the last thing I will say here. I applaud the OP for the majority of his post. In my opinion is was a thread that needed discussion. I also applaud STLCards and Siege for coming in here as well. The part that baffles me is whether you agree or not, RG and it’s employees put out a paid and a free service. Not everyone plays DFS like said pro or tout. That seems to get lost here. It also is comical when another RG employee makes light of a member concern or thinks it’s stupid or funny. You’re offering a paid service that isn’t cheap and when an issue arises, whether big or small, the level of arrogance directed back at the everyday player is quite astounding and not profitable business practice.

  • sethfein

    I am signing off now so thanks for all those who participated in this discussion (except for Riddle…i dont know wtf that was).

    It truly was intention to just get some change instituted and some form of acknowledgement from touts that there is a grey area that can be fixed.

    Thanks for taking the time to answer/acknowledge and hope some really helpful content ideas come from this.

    Happy to see that constructive criticism can still be discussed without resorting to offensive or personal attacks. Twitter has become an absolute cesspool.

    Lastly, Cal, ResultsDB doesn’t show overall exposure at position level…come on man! :)

  • dolphinkick182

    @btwice80 said...

    You mean the twitter account with the logo of your employer next to the picture of you wearing the company shirt? The account that you routinely use to promote your paid services/product via that same employer, as well as shows and articles for which that same company pays you?

    You had no idea people consider that a professional account? How dimwitted do you have to be?

    Of course it’s a professional account, despite disclaimers. The opinions are your own, yada yada yada, but that doesn’t change the overall nature of the account. You’d have to do an entire overhaul of your twitter approach for it to not be rightfully considered a professional account.

    Disclaimer: Donald Trumps tweets and Twitter account reflect his own opinions and should not in any way be construed as the ideas or words of the United States of American, the US Government, or the American people.

    Wonder if this would help?

  • X Unread Thread
  • X Thread with New Replies*
  • *Jumps to your first unread reply

Subforum Index

RotoGrinders.com is the home of the daily fantasy sports community. Our content, rankings, member blogs, promotions and forum discussion all cater to the players that like to create a new fantasy team every day of the week.

If you or someone you know has a gambling problem, crisis counseling and referral services can be accessed by calling 1-800-GAMBLER (1-800-426-2537) (IL). Gambling problem? Call 1-800-Gambler (NJ/WV/PA), 1-800-9-WITH-IT (IN), 1-800-522-4700 (CO) or 1-800-BETS OFF (IA). 21+. NJ/PA/WV/IN/IA/CO/IL only.