INDUSTRY FORUM

Comments

  • depalma13

    “Draftkings players with $1 Million in lifetime entry fees will not be able to play in contests that have an entry fee less than $5 AND a total prize pool less than $25,000.”

    Draftkings was so proud of their High Volume Player Restrictions designed to protect casual players that they made sure the Quarter Jukebox didn’t qualify for those restrictions and casual players can still be chum for the sharks.

    Way to go Draftkings! Great policy! Really love that you emphasized the “AND”. If it wasn’t for the bold letters, casual players might actually think they are playing with other casual players. Good thing you took the time to emphasize that word, so you can make a prize pool of a $.25 tournament large enough to invalidate the protections and feel good about the decision.

  • KlairVoyant

    • 654

      RG Overall Ranking

    • Blogger of the Month

    Putting Badges on players gave incentive for players to actively go after players without badges. Not allowing high volume players to join $5 and under games has created incentive for players that are not restricted from there to spam those games. It also gives some incentive for new players to join smaller buy in games and therefore may play less overall because they know that DraftDuel and FanKings have created a “SafeSpace” for them at the low buy in levels. It would be interesting how much this truly impacts the ecosystem.

    All that being said, to the OP’s original point……..just don’t play in that contest then. You have a choice, like others have said there are only 1 or 2 contests under $5 that meet the criteria for them to be able to play. I’m way more worried about the high rake and what it is doing to the new user experience and how it’s impacting the ecosystem and the long term viability of the current DFS offerings.

    Just my 2 cents, happy grinding!

  • billholler

    @KlairVoyant said...

    ..just don’t play in that contest then.

    My biggest complaint is the same few people that have won millions on DK that are always in every single cash game. Try getting in any NBA cash game tonight that doesn’t have CA, youdacao or awesemo. I was in 18 double ups last night ranging from $10 to $100 and they were in all of them. Thankfully 2 of those 3 made a terrible cash LU last night.

  • JimKronlund

    @billholler said...

    My biggest complaint is the same few people that have won millions on DK that are always in every single cash game. Try getting in any NBA cash game tonight that doesn’t have CA, youdacao or awesemo. I was in 18 double ups last night ranging from $10 to $100 and they were in all of them. Thankfully 2 of those 3 made a terrible cash LU last night.

    Bill I am not try to be antagonizing, but I am sure there are many players that see your name in a contest and go. “oh shit, I don’t want to play against him and he is every where”. Which is a valid concern because you are a very strong player that has the stats to back it up. I have the same thoughts about playing against testosterone in NHL. He also plays every contest. And he is ridiculously sharp, every single night.
    What criteria do you set that will correctly target the players that are deemed too good? That opinion will be different from every player because of individualistic BR limitations and win percentage rates.
    Then what would the criteria be for picking contests that are off limits to that segregated group?
    I have no clue how to do this and think its a slippery slope that leads only to unfair results to one of the groups involved.
    Sorry I have no suggestions, only more questions.

  • billholler

    @JimKronlund said...

    Bill I am not try to be antagonizing, but I am sure there are many players that see your name in a contest and go. “oh shit, I don’t want to play against him and he is every where”.

    I consider myself an excellent cash game player in NBA, NFL and especially NASCAR. Problem is that I am a degenerate that can not ignore the big jackpot GPPs. The point of this thread that eliminates me is simply referring to the guys that have won millions on DK or FD that are still bottom feeding. If I had the bankroll of the guys in question, no way am I wasting my time entering my cash lineups in $10 double ups or my GPP lineups in the QA.

  • emnj69

    @billholler said...

    I am a degenerate that can not ignore the big jackpot GPPs.

    ha ha me too although this week I am thinking of taking down a big fish with a large buy in head to head

  • JimKronlund

    @billholler said...

    I consider myself an excellent cash game player in NBA, NFL and especially NASCAR. Problem is that I am a degenerate that can not ignore the big jackpot GPPs. The point of this thread that eliminates me is simply referring to the guys that have won millions on DK or FD that are still bottom feeding. If I had the bankroll of the guys in question, no way am I wasting my time entering my cash lineups in $10 double ups or my GPP lineups in the QA.

    My point is that you are to the lower BR and skill players, is the same dynamic as the big winners are to you.
    I have no idea where the line in the sand could be fairly drawn.

  • billholler

    @JimKronlund said...

    My point is that you are to the lower BR and skill players, is the same dynamic as the big winners are to you.
    I have no idea where the line in the sand could be fairly drawn.

    Me either but I’m right back in there tonight with the same guys. Tonight not going as well as last night.

  • depalma13

    @KlairVoyant said...

    All that being said, to the OP’s original point……..just don’t play in that contest then. You have a choice, like others have said there are only 1 or 2 contests under $5 that meet the criteria for them to be able to play.

    So the small dollar player has to choose to sit out of the 1 or 2 contests that have the biggest payoff for the buy-in they play to accommodate the sharks?

  • sochoice

    • 2017 DraftKings FBWC Finalist

    • 2017 FanDuel WFFC Champion

    @depalma13 said...

    So the small dollar player has to choose to sit out of the 1 or 2 contests that have the biggest payoff for the buy-in they play to accommodate the sharks?

    Actually, you have many choices.

    #1 You keep playing the QA and accept that there are high volume players that tonight (NBA) can do a 20 max entry (.0004 of the total entries in the contest) or in NFL Sunday can enter a 20 max entry (.0001 of total entries). I find it hard to believe that any small players are scared off by “pros” playing 20 entries versus their own 1 or 2 entries, but will accept that this happens.
    #2 You max entry the QA yourself. Would cost you $5 a slate for the contests I noted above. Then, you are on equal footing with all the max entry players and your success/failure comes down to your own skill in setting lineups.
    #3 You sit out the QA and play low dollar single entry tournaments. Once again, you are on equal footing with everyone else and your own skill will win or lose the day.

    There are other options, but three choices seem like enough. However, if what you really want is to play contests for huge prize pools and you also don’t want to face competition from the “pros”, that isn’t going to happen. That’s not the way the economics of the industry works. Less “pros” and/or mass entry players = lower prize pools across the industry.

  • sjs1890

    • 2013 DraftStreet DSBC Finalist

    @sochoice said...

    Actually, you have many choices.

    #1 You keep playing the QA and accept that there are high volume players that tonight (NBA) can do a 20 max entry (.0004 of the total entries in the contest) or in NFL Sunday can enter a 20 max entry (.0001 of total entries). I find it hard to believe that any small players are scared off by “pros” playing 20 entries versus their own 1 or 2 entries, but will accept that this happens.
    #2 You max entry the QA yourself. Would cost you $5 a slate for the contests I noted above. Then, you are on equal footing with all the max entry players and your success/failure comes down to your own skill in setting lineups.
    #3 You sit out the QA and play low dollar single entry tournaments. Once again, you are on equal footing with everyone else and your own skill will win or lose the day.

    There are other options, but three choices seem like enough. However, if what you really want is to play contests for huge prize pools and you also don’t want to face competition from the “pros”, that isn’t going to happen. That’s not the way the economics of the industry works. Less “pros” and/or mass entry players = lower prize pools across the industry.

    So you are saying the sites should just accommodate and bend over backwards for the high volume players? Its pretty laughable they play $1-$4 contests let alone a QA lol. In poker you would never see high stake players dipping into a 1-2 no limit game defending the sites allowing this is just dumb.

    You mentioned “if what you really want is to play contests for huge prize pools and you also don’t want to face competition from the “pros”, that isn’t going to happen.” Lol isnt that exactly what the high stakes players are doing dipping into these contests to face lesser competition, so its ok for them to have this mindset but not low volume players…….ok lol?

    Option #4 seems more legit, would be just to not play until the sites actually care for all their players and not just the high volume catered group

  • bugzzie75

    Sorry, time to offend some people. How about instead of Bitching, moaning, and complaining about the high rollers consistently winning, regardless of the entry fee, you instead study their formula of success! In the time it took for you to write your post, you could’ve gone back, looked at his lineup, studied his thought process.

    Again, sorry but this is where I’m going to piss people off……Maybe, just maybe you suck at making winning lineups because you’ve become a Creatures of habit, or you’re too hardheaded to divert from what you know, read, and pay for! Why should Chipotle Additct be penalized because his dedication, and research habits enabled him to discoverer the magic formula for consistently winning?

    He’s success should be a tool in daily lineup building. I see all this complaining, yet I would venture to say 90 percent of those complaining shell out $30 or more monthly for DFS fee info sites;(DFSARMY/FANVICE/ROTOGRINDER.) You’re shelling out $360 or more yearly and still lose money……..but it’s Chipotle Addict and those who win consistanlys fault.

  • jmo26

    @bugzzie75 said...

    Sorry, time to offend some people. How about instead of Bitching, moaning, and complaining about the high rollers consistently winning, regardless of the entry fee, you instead study their formula of success! In the time it took for you to write your post, you could’ve gone back, looked at his lineup, studied his thought process.

    Right, because it’s that easy to study someone’s “thought process.”

    The reality is some of the casual players will never be winning players, and I don’t think most really expect to be. The larger issue is with feeling taken advantage of by the big fish; it’s certainly better for the entire ecosystem if people like CA aren’t max-entering everything from the QA upward. (I just hope his brother isn’t also max entering them at these lower price points.)

    This condescending “shut up and make better lineups” nonsense isn’t productive. Nobody needs to be told that they need to make better lineups to win, and the fact that they’re here shows that they realize research is also key.

  • NoLimits0

    @sjs1890 said...

    So you are saying the sites should just accommodate and bend over backwards for the high volume players?

    Sites will always bend down for high volume players. I’ve learned it the hard way. Just like credit card companies will bend down to people with more wealth. Just like everyone will bend down to someone more famous so they hope they can get their piece of the pie. It’s called life. If you don’t want this go move to a communist country. There everyone is treated “equal,” in quotes of course. In those countries the more wealth you got (back in the 50s and 60s), that just means the more you had to give back to the government and the more you were mistreated. America doesn’t work that way. It’s always been a meritocracy so of course the more powerful and more wealthy you are, the more respected you are and the better you are treated.

    Do I always agree? No. DK probably shouldn’t be like allowing collusion between high rollers or giving them special favors, but I’ve learned to deal with it.

    You know how you change it? Become a good player yourself and sites will start bending down to you too.

  • bigez952

    @jmo26 said...

    The reality is some of the casual players will never be winning players, and I don’t think most really expect to be.

    I 100% agree and it is also worthwhile to point out that with the current rake as high as it is only possible for around 10% of players to ever become profitable long term. 90%+ of DFS players will always be in the break even or losing category and all the research in the world won’t change the fact that there will always be more losers than winners.

  • jmo26

    @NoLimits0 said...

    You know how you change it? Become a good player yourself and sites will start bending down to you too.

    Fair enough, but that can’t be achieved by everyone — I agree the sites will always accommodate to the high rollers to a degree, but they have started to accommodate to your “average Joes” as well (see: smaller main slate for NFL, no late swap, etc., which all gave an edge to the sharps).

    Obviously the other alternative is to take your business elsewhere. A pipe dream, perhaps, but I hope that once the risks regarding legality are behind us, some more competition comes into the space. The rake is getting ridiculous. Emac suggested something about this somewhere recently, but if some established company (i.e., with lots of cash at its disposal) entered the space right now, I think they could take a decent market share if they did things right.

    I mean, does anyone actually have positive feelings towards DK and FD at the moment? There hasn’t been a single situation in recent memory where I felt like they dealt with things the right way.

  • bigez952

    @NoLimits0 said...

    You know how you change it? Become a good player yourself and sites will start bending down to you too.

    Sites don’t care if your a good player or not. They care about how much you spend and are willing to put at risk. You could be a great profitable player and never have the means to enter every contest on the site and risk $50,000 to $100,000 per day where the top players with perks are. I do agree it 100% makes sense that these guys get special treatment as they provide by far the most income to the sites. You could be the worst player in the world but if your willing to drop $1,000,000 to Draftkings I bet they would treat you pretty well lol.

  • NoLimits0

    @bigez952 said...

    Sites don’t care if your a good player or not. They care about how much you spend and are willing to put at risk. You could be a great profitable player and never have the means to enter every contest on the site and risk $50,000 to $100,000 per day where the top players with perks are. I do agree it 100% makes sense that these guys get special treatment as they provide by far the most income to the sites. You could be the worst player in the world but if your willing to drop $1,000,000 to Draftkings I bet they would treat you pretty well lol.

    Yes but in that case don’t you want these high rollers playing in the QA if they are on average losing players? Wouldn’t that help the average player that they are playing and helping to contribute to the rake if a lot of them are losing players. I know CA isn’t in that category but there are others that are in the category you mentioned.

  • NoLimits0

    @jmo26 said...

    Fair enough, but that can’t be achieved by everyone — I agree the sites will always accommodate to the high rollers to a degree, but they have started to accommodate to your “average Joes” as well (see: smaller main slate for NFL, no late swap, etc., which all gave an edge to the sharps).

    I agree with you but DK is trying. Remember they already banned all high rollers (defined by some net winning criteria) from anything under 5 dollars and a 25k prize pool. So they are trying. Can they make it better? Yes they can just ban them from all under 5 dollar tournaments, regardless of prize pool.

    However I don’t want to make people sound like DK isn’t trying to help average Joes. They aren’t doing their very best, but it’s better than nothing. I am in total support of just banning them from all under 5 dollar games though. It might eventually be that in 1-2 years once DK figures out some numbers on these larger tourneys.

    I believe as a small time player, if you play the 1-5 dollar double ups and tourneys that are under 25k prize pools you are playing against your level of competition/bankroll and you can indeed build up a bankroll if you are good.

    To single out a single QA is kinda ridiculous because there are other ways you can build it up without having to play against pros.

    Also no late swap hurts pros. I can’t believe people are saying it helps them. Who’s more likely to make a better and more sophisticated and up to the last minute news late swap? Pros are, not average Joes. Pros are way more likely to be in front of a computer when late news comes out than an average Joe. So denying late swap hurts pros.

  • jmo26

    @NoLimits0 said...

    Also no late swap hurts pros. I can’t believe people are saying it helps them. Who’s more likely to make a better and more sophisticated and up to the last minute news late swap? Pros are not average Joes. So denying late swap hurts pros.

    I agree. That is what I said.

    Singling out a QA makes sense, since it is the lowest-priced GPP with a decent prize pool — it’s not to say that the issue solely exists within the QA contests (it doesn’t), but it does help to provide an example when discussing the issue.

  • ndogg78

    @bugzzie75 said...

    Sorry, time to offend some people. How about instead of Bitching, moaning, and complaining about the high rollers consistently winning, regardless of the entry fee, you instead study their formula of success! In the time it took for you to write your post, you could’ve gone back, looked at his lineup, studied his thought process.

    Again, sorry but this is where I’m going to piss people off……Maybe, just maybe you suck at making winning lineups because you’ve become a Creatures of habit, or you’re too hardheaded to divert from what you know, read, and pay for! Why should Chipotle Additct be penalized because his dedication, and research habits enabled him to discoverer the magic formula for consistently winning?

    He’s success should be a tool in daily lineup building. I see all this complaining, yet I would venture to say 90 percent of those complaining shell out $30 or more monthly for DFS fee info sites;(DFSARMY/FANVICE/ROTOGRINDER.) You’re shelling out $360 or more yearly and still lose money……..but it’s Chipotle Addict and those who win consistanlys fault.

    This may come as a shock to some but not everyone plays DFS as a career. I think casual players want to have a tournament they can play in feeling like they actually could win. The best analogy I can come up with is if Russell Westbrook kept showing up at the local neighborhood pickup game. Everyone that is just looking to play for fun would stop showing up.

  • NoLimits0

    @ndogg78 said...

    This may come as a shock to some but not everyone plays DFS as a career. I think casual players want to have a tournament they can play in feeling like they actually could win. The best analogy I can come up with is if Russell Westbrook kept showing up at the local neighborhood pickup game. Everyone that is just looking to play for fun would stop showing up.

    Not really I think more people would show up if that happened. Heck I would go every day and then hope he invites PG13 one of the days! I think this is a bad example no disrespect. The court would be completely filled up.

  • NoLimits0

    @jmo26 said...

    I agree. That is what I said.

    Singling out a QA makes sense, since it is the lowest-priced GPP with a decent prize pool — it’s not to say that the issue solely exists within the QA contests (it doesn’t), but it does help to provide an example when discussing the issue.

    Oh yea sorry I misread the tense on the “which” statement you made. Yea anyways I do think eventually they’ll ban it but I think they need to collect some data. The problem is if they ban it for pros, they’ll lose about 20 entries * number of pros with the limit, and since this is a big tourney, that could affect rake so they might need to run some numbers. The bigger ban would be if they banned them from the big 3 dollar tourney not the QA. That has a bigger prize pool.

  • superstars92

    @ndogg78 said...

    This may come as a shock to some but not everyone plays DFS as a career. I think casual players want to have a tournament they can play in feeling like they actually could win. The best analogy I can come up with is if Russell Westbrook kept showing up at the local neighborhood pickup game. Everyone that is just looking to play for fun would stop showing up.

    I’m not on the CA/PG bandwagon, and I agree with the posts about not allowing them to play in the QA, but this example is not a good example of why they shouldn’t play.

    You should play with him and get better. How many top HS/college recruits would love to work out in the summer with an NBA player? The skill level of a top HS player vs. LeBron/Westbrook is just the difference in skill level between an ordinary player and Chipotle, so it’s a valid comparison. Even if you don’t have dreams of going to the NBA, I would still love to play with an NBA player one day just because it would be cool and maybe I can learn something. And, no most people don’t play just for fun. Most people play for money, making my comparison valid; otherwise, why are there so many people complaining if it’s just for fun?

    I sometimes read this blog on here like “Fade the Chalk” by Andy, and he like literally intentionally plays H2Hs with pros so he can learn what they did and compare himself with them to get better.

    Again, I’m opposed to CA/PG playing the QA, but this example is like an example that CA/PG would use to actually SUPPORT their argument.

  • reztes757

    2013 DD BLB Finalist (x2)

    • 177

      RG Overall Ranking

    If someone really wants to make a compelling case why don’t you dig up data on the top 10-20 pros playing in the QA for the season and see what their bottom line is for the contest. It wouldn’t surprise me in the least if they were net negative combined if you remove CA’s first place.

    Also, the russel Westbrook comparison is just silly. A high school player would lose 1000 out of 1000 times vs him. An average joe would beat CA at a bare minimum 20% of time and probably more like 30-40% over a large sample.

  • fightingjohn

    Aww the CA / PG debacle over again!!! I think we can all agree that they do talk to each other on a daily basis in some form. Are they taking advantage of the system??? Heck yea they are and they are know it. They do just enough that stay in the “guidelines” of the site, so they can’t be really touched.

    Do I agree with all the pros playing in these contests designed for low bankroll players. No I don’t and I wish these sites would get on board with making those types of changes, instead of worrying about what games to include on a slate.

    The DFS boom will be its own downfall in next few years. Players have figured out, how to take advantage of the rules in place and if we think the DFS sites care about your average Joe, no way they do. They need these max entry sharks to justify their existence. Start taking away their play and watch the industry crumble. Greed has taken over and if you don’t have the bankroll to keep up, they train is leaving you.

    I would love to be on top of tourney one day, but I know that won’t happen. I play for fun and make a few bucks here and there.

    So once again we can attack, attack, attack….but in the end not win this battle

  • 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/MI), 1-800-9-WITH-IT (IN), 1-800-522-4700 (CO), 1-800-BETS OFF (IA), 1-888-532-3500 (VA) or call/text TN REDLINE 1-800-889-9789 (TN).