INDUSTRY FORUM

Comments

  • Cal

    RG CoFounder & Admin

    • 338

      RG Overall Ranking

    • $1M Prize Winner

    • x4

      2015 DraftKings FFWC Finalist

    With the ChipotleAddict/Papagates issues reaching a boiling point I think it’s critical to get more organized about how it is handled on RotoGrinders, and hopefully the broader DFS community.

    Note that this thread will be heavily moderated in order to stay on a narrow focus. If you’d like to discuss broader issues, post in Awoo’s thread here. Know that I believe Awoo’s thread is full of misinformation and false narratives, which is why I’m creating this clean, focused thread you’re reading now.

    Here are the four main points I want to make:

    1. After multiple calls with Martin Crowley (papagates) and Matt Kalish (Co-Founder of Draftkings), I am further convinced that the two brothers are not violating DraftKings terms. The two brothers built a model together. They work from the same source data. Some days they interpret and act on the data very similarly, other days very differently. While this produces the optics problem, it is not collusion, even if they are splitting funds. It only becomes collusion if they are working together to align their lineups to circumvent entry limits. Read Luke’s article here that dives into 14 slates of data on that. If you think that rules should be changed, you’re not alone. It’s a very complex issue, but it’s one we can more effectively discuss without the cheating/DK turning blind eye claims.

    2. Regardless of whether they are violating terms or not, the optics of this situation are bad. It drives players away and it produces the narrative that DraftKings turns a blind eye while high volume players cheat. That cheating narrative clouds the issue, making it impossible to have a productive, constructive conversation about how to improve the optics and ecosystem issues.

    3. Many people that believe CA/PG are being unfairly treated have asked me why we don’t lock or delete Awoo’s thread. My answer is that locking that thread now will hurt this issue, not help it. Too many smart people believe they are cheating. We need to have a focused, transparent discussion to change the narrative, not simply shut down opinions. I think Crain’s post in Awoo’s thread is wrong but I also don’t know if I’ve ever seen that many “upvotes” on a RotoGrinders thread.

    4. Nearly everyone involved in this could have handled it better to prevent the cheating narrative to get to this point. I could have diverted resources to analyzing the spreadsheets so that we could have a data driven conversation instead of one supported by circumstantial evidence. PG/CA could have been more transparent and involved in the conversation when it started during NFL season. DraftKings could have been a lot more communicative about what is/is not allowed in the Community Guidelines. Fanduel could get into this conversation. Crain could have realized that, as a major influencer, he should dig into the data and be certain about his claims before making such a harsh post.

    I want to address this so that we can move focus to a constructive conversation about how to deal with the optics and other legit concerns that players have with this situation. I want PG/CA to not be referred to as cheaters by the broader community. I want people to know that DraftKings Compliance team is very aware of this and not turning a blind eye. I want the broader DFS community to be on the same page about the DK Community Guidelines and what constitutes collusion. In order to get there, we need to address the question of “Are they cheating?” There are lots of smart people and influencers that believe they are cheating, so this is going to require looking at the data and having focused, constructive conversation.

    I hope this thread and Luke’s article on the front page get us there, but we can go beyond that if needed. Again, this thread will be heavily moderated. Stay on the subject of “Are PG/CA violating terms.” If you’re not clear what is/is not allowed by DraftKings Community Guidelines, you’re not alone. Feel free to ask for clarification. DraftKings cannot comment on any individual cases but they should be able to comment in this thread to clarify what is/is not allowed. PapaGates will also be posting here if you want to ask him about his process.

  • brianhanson72

    I don’t think they are cheating, I believe that if you were to call what they do cheating then you would have to say everyone on this site and similar ones are doing the same, even the guys who go on break at the same time while at work and build lineups while talking about the players they like. You can’t call it cheating just because they don’t share with you and everyone else.

  • MHDU2424

    • 454

      RG Overall Ranking

    • Ranked #79

      RG Tiered Ranking

    Just based off of what I’ve seen so far I would have to say that atleast on some slates they’ve probably atleast discussed a strategy in which one of them will outright avoid certain chalk plays

    It’s honestly hard to see a max entry guy 100% on his own 100% fade some of the plays that were already discussed in this thread (Kershaw one night, Severino, The Felton punt play example)

    Now it’s really hard to prove and I don’t even know if it’s considered cheating but if someone really looked into it I’m sure you could find a pattern if they were working together…if they weren’t so be it

  • biglucky

    • x2

      2016 DraftKings FBWC Finalist

    • 2016 DraftKings FGWC Finalist

    Have you all listened to Dan B.‘s podcast with Chipotle in 2015 after winning the Milly Maker? Why in the world if he was being interviewed would chipotle say “we won a million dollars” if it was only him? I know my brother plays DFS also and if he won the MM or I did we would not be saying “we” won a million dollars if the other has no part of it. Here’s the link to the podcast, its right around the 2:40 minute mark.

    https://rotogrinders.com/podcasts/daily-fantasy-fix-interview-w-chipotleaddict-880718

  • Stuffinglover

    @Cal said...

    Would love to see PG/CA chime in on a question like this.

    It makes sense to just click “optimize” and have the model spit out the optimal and use it in cash games, so I do see how that would happen. It’s a big problem for the optics either way.

    If you’re entering a 150 max entry wouldn’t you throw your “optimal” cash LU in there?

    That’s a no brainer right?

    So on the nights they coincidently have the same cash LU they should BOTH have that same LU in the 150 max.

    I don’t have dfs research skillz or I would look into how often that occurs with them but my guess is not much.

  • bhdevault

    • Lead Moderator

    • Blogger of the Month

    @Stuffinglover said...

    If you’re entering a 150 max entry wouldn’t you throw your “optimal” cash LU in there?

    That’s a no brainer right?

    So on the nights they coincidently have the same cash LU they should BOTH have that same LU in the 150 max.

    I don’t have dfs research skillz or I would look into how often that occurs with them but my guess is not much.

    I can’t speak for them, but I use my cash game lineup in every sport except MLB. In MLB it’s optimal to stack to win a GPP, but not cash.

  • WatsonBankz

    This whole idea/thread has been pretty heavy on my mind lately.. Hypothetically, If two players were swapping action every contest (which is allowed), it seems very obvious that it would be in their best interest to use exposures to gain an edge. Now, here comes the sticky part… Is this edge considered “cheating/colluding?” IMO, no, it’s more of a high level strategy. For lack of better example, similar to the concept of card counting… It’s simply a way of statistically turning the odds in your favor a little more(back to this in a sec)

    When you first deposited, did you even know what exposures were, let alone how it would be possible to use them to gain an edge? My guess is probably not, 78% at least(lolz). My point being, it’s a ton of work to create a model. Let alone one worth a da**. It takes a lot of learning and evolving (both mentally and financially) to come to that point.

    I told you I’d come back, while not “illegal” Casino’s reserve the right to service this type of customer. A decision they always side with kicking them out and banning them. This happens because it’s not in the Casino’s best interest to serve this customer. In our situation(like poker), facts stat most will be rake slaves. That said, it would be up to DK/FD to make decisions on behalf of what’s in the best interest of their customers and what’s in the best interest of DFS as a whole.

    I think we have to determine (since it’s now out of the bag now) if this act is in the best interest of the game?

    If you’re unfamiliar, see below (poker example from 2+2)

    “I also lean pretty liberal with rules enforcement, especially when making sure that the best hand at showdown gets the pot. Also, I’m a firm believer in the idea that the muck is not magic – mucked cards can be ruled live if it’s in the best interest of the game”

    I also side with the poster here. It’s not me, honestly just googled “spirit of the game”, try it yourself. I think the first movers of this act should still be allowed to play within the community, since after all, it’s just a high level strategy. That said, it’s also a realllll slippery slope and DK/FD need to address how they will handle it if anyone is convicted. Have fun though, I truly don’t know who’d be simple enough to expose themselves that much. Certainly not anyone who could use this to their advantage. . . .

  • VChair23

    • 817

      RG Overall Ranking

    Is it cheating if they create their own 150 lineups separately, compare the csv’s, & manually edit the identicals to slight variations?

  • ChipotleAddict

    • 2017 RotoGrinders TPOY Champion

    • 4

      RG Overall Ranking

    • Ranked #3

      RG Tiered Ranking

    • $1M Prize Winner

    @Cal said...

    Would love to see PG/CA chime in on a question like this.

    It makes sense to just click “optimize” and have the model spit out the optimal and use it in cash games, so I do see how that would happen. It’s a big problem for the optics either way.

    Correct me if i’m misinterpreting the question. I can’t speak for others but my cash and tournament model are very different. It depends on the sport but in baseball my cash lineup very rarely makes the cut as a tournament team. However my cash teams are chalkier than most, and tournament teams more contrarian than most so this could easily not be the case for others.

  • ChipotleAddict

    • 2017 RotoGrinders TPOY Champion

    • 4

      RG Overall Ranking

    • Ranked #3

      RG Tiered Ranking

    • $1M Prize Winner

    @Cal said...

    It is my understanding that if the two players are working off their model and building teams independently (not building lineups in a way that work together) then they would be allowed to do an equity share or split even if a max entering. For example, if you and one other person independently built 150 lineups each using Carty’s THE BAT top recommendations as a base and split winnings you would seemingly not be violating Community Guidelines. Dan Back says that he’s not sure that’s correct so we will ask for clarification from DK.

    This has been answered before but just to clarify we don’t swap or pool entry fees or anything like that. Early on in our careers we would occasionally buy pieces of each other, but that tapered off as our bankrolls grew and we cut it off entirely when the community guidelines were posted since it seemed that’s what they were trying to ban even if their wording was a mess.

  • ChipotleAddict

    • 2017 RotoGrinders TPOY Champion

    • 4

      RG Overall Ranking

    • Ranked #3

      RG Tiered Ranking

    • $1M Prize Winner

    @tomac said...

    To me the clear answer here is 3.

    Pretty hard to disprove the intentional cover up theory but this was not a one time thing. I know there have been plenty more but this one stood out in my mind since we tied for first with the same team. Can be tough to definitively say a 2v2 is -ev in a top heavy tournament (although i’m very confident it is). I don’t think there’s much debate in regards to playing the exact same team https://www.fanduel.com/games/17193/contests/17193-204814913/entries/1103501383/scoring?entry=1103396052

  • FastEddieFear

    Each time this issue is brought to my attention, I’m amazed at how closely the various intricacies line up with the MLB steroid scandal.

    Major League baseball deserved the lions share of the blame for the proliferation of cheating in the game, but the individuals were the ones largely demonized. The players were heavily incentivized to cheat. There was millions of dollars to be made with almost no chance of getting caught and minor penalties if you even were. Juicing was an incredibly +ev play. And in the short term interest of rising attendance and media attention, they largely turned a blind eye rather than investigate and slander their most popular players who were making them money.

    The DFS sites deserve the lions share of the blame for the proliferation of cheating in the game, but the individuals are the ones being demonized. The players are heavily incentivized to cheat. There are millions of dollars to be made with almost no chance of getting caught and minor penalties even if you are. Cheating is an incredibly +ev play. And in the interest of collecting as much rake as possible (and in fairness also being busy with mergers and lawyers and regulation and just the running of a huge business), they have largely turned a blind eye rather than investigate and slander their most popular players who are making them money.

    Think of every regulation/restriction/improvement the DFS sites have made in the name of fair play. Reduced entry limits, VPN prevention, disallowing other industry emplyees to play – all of these were forced upon the sites by external events and forces. Not once has there been a major internal push to ensure contests were as equitable as possible, it has only happened when lawyers and attorneys general and public outcry made it necessary.

    Blaming either set of players is at best naive. Professional ballplayers who have sacrificed everything in their lives to excel on the field, sitting in the locker room seeing other players do better and get paid more by juicing were supposed to abstain due to an adherence to a rules the authorities clearly had little interest in pursuing?

    Similarly, someone actually believes that CA/PG put in all the time to develop an amazing system with the singular goal of winning as much money as possible, working side by side the whole time, but decided not to avail themselves of another easily achievable competitive advantage?

    If you told me they weren’t cheating today, or recently, I think that’s entirely possible – I have no idea. But suggesting they never did so seems remarkably naive. I’d bet my house against an hour of Seige coaching they violated the TOS multiple times in the past, and I have no issue with them doing so; they were basically told to.

    Setting aside their charitable acts which I do think are relevant to attacks on their character, there are few if any people in this chat who wouldn’t violate the ToS of a site for a million bucks.

  • somethingfresh

    @FastEddieFear said...

    Blaming either set of players is at best naive.

    Eddie while I agree with some of your insight, right here you fail to recognize we’re blaming the “potential” cheaters AND the sites. Not just the “cheaters” without recognizing their incentive and ability to cheat. We are basically the guy who didn’t juice during the McGuire 98 season and we’re calling out Mark (and co.) and the league that enabled him. I think a majority here isn’t naïve. Maybe you can argue we’d do the same, but as far as I know ‘we’ haven’t, and as long as that is true the burden isn’t on us.

    And that’s what prickles me the most about this. The burden of proof. You can’t allow a “split-fund” duo to max-enter the same tourney. If CA wins a milly and PG fails, and next week CA has 500K to play with and PG has 500K to play with, wtf are we even doing here? We are the ones that are supposed to sift through their entries to catch them? That’s the site being incompetent/self-interested AS WELL AS those cheaters being scumbags. Both should be vilified, and we should make as much noise as possible. I for one pull out of any high stakes tourneys where I can identify potential scumbaggery/site negligence. That’s how I stick it to the site and the scumbags. And I’ll keep making as much noise as possible until I don’t have to worry about that.

    Eddie your last line you try to pass off as realism “we’d all violate ToS for a milly” is the kind of unintelligible nonsense that corruption is built on. You don’t f*ing know me.

    Anyone, like you, essentially shining a light on both sides without taking a stand is just blowing hot smoke.

  • FastEddieFear

    I am absolutely blowing smoke but I would also posit that the correct allocation of blame would also lead to the more accurate distribution of time and resources towards fixing the problem. I am taking a stand – and not entirely comfortably with my friends in the industry – that the sites are largely to blame in having lax regulations which are rarely if ever enforced.

    Goods manufacturers will often do everything they can to make as much money as possible, even damaging the environment, unless they are regulated. D.C. lobbyists will do everything they can to get the results their clients need unless they are regulated. Wall Street banks will bundle up shit and sell it as shoe polish unless regulated. And DFS players, many of whose sole goal is to make money, will seek and find edges to do just that unless regulated.

    This isn’t so say there aren’t degrees of violators, or that their actions are excusable, but they are predictable. If you want to fix these problems in the long term, you need systemic protections with consequences, not only attempting to manage violators one by one. The EPA, the FEC, the SEC, MLB as mentioned before, and in this case the DFS sites have the primary responsibility not to foster an environment where the most profitable course of action is to break the rules.

  • draped

    @ChipotleAddict said...

    we cut it off entirely when the community guidelines were posted since it seemed that’s what they were trying to ban even if their wording was a mess.

    so you are saying you two NEVER split winnings after the community guidelines came out?

  • WatsonBankz

    @somethingfresh said...

    I for one pull out of any high stakes tourneys where I can identify potential scumbaggery/site negligence. That’s how I stick it to the site and the scumbags. And I’ll keep making as much noise as possible until I don’t have to worry about that.

    You can’t be serious, right?… There’s money involved, you’ll always have to worry about it. . .

  • Mindofigor

    It should be no one’s business what someone does with the money they win. If I win a lot, I may give some to my sister, my mother, donate to charities, heck even blow it in one night on a donkey show. It’s my money, I should be able to do what I want with it.

    There are plenty of websites that offer projections and optimal lineups and a lot of times players end up with the same lineups… is that colluding? There are people on youtube and message boards and podcasts that offer the best plays and basically build most of the lineup for you. Is that colluding? Where do you draw the line? RG has an experts chat where the brightest minds offer their knowledge on plays… is everyone colluding to build the best lineup(s) possible? One of my buddies plays dfs too and we play h2h against each other often and it’s amazing how similar our lineups are day in and day out. We usually never talk about plays, just once in awhile. But our general thought process is similar. Are we colluding? We usually play 1-5 lineups a day because we both work full time jobs and don’t have the ability to babysit 150 lineups. If we played 150 entries a day and won a lot, I’m sure there would be a thread about us.

  • draped

    @Mindofigor said...

    It should be no one’s business what someone does with the money they win. If I win a lot, I may give some to my sister, my mother, donate to charities, heck even blow it in one night on a donkey show. It’s my money, I should be able to do what I want with it.

    There are plenty of websites that offer projections and optimal lineups and a lot of times players end up with the same lineups… is that colluding? There are people on youtube and message boards and podcasts that offer the best plays and basically build most of the lineup for you. Is that colluding? Where do you draw the line? RG has an experts chat where the brightest minds offer their knowledge on plays… is everyone colluding to build the best lineup(s) possible? One of my buddies plays dfs too and we play h2h against each other often and it’s amazing how similar our lineups are day in and day out. We usually never talk about plays, just once in awhile. But our general thought process is similar. Are we colluding? We usually play 1-5 lineups a day because we both work full time jobs and don’t have the ability to babysit 150 lineups. If we played 150 entries a day and won a lot, I’m sure there would be a thread about us.

    I think you misunderstand what kind of collusion people appear to be most afraid of. its not the sharing of information, everyone does that to some extent. it is the creation of lineups as if a group of people were one person. the example that siege in this thread used was in a single entry 20 man winner-take-all qualifier, if you were able to enter two or more coordinated entries instead of one, then it would be a sizable advantage. and in particular the issue is that the community guidelines are written in such a vague manner that its hard to tell if this is even against the rules (or could be proven), even if most of the players believe it should be.

    IMO its posts like this that bring this thread down because it just causes even more confusion over something that isn’t even the issue at hand.

  • Mindofigor

    @draped said...

    I think you misunderstand what kind of collusion people appear to be most afraid of. its not the sharing of information, everyone does that to some extent. it is the creation of lineups as if a group of people were one person. the example that siege in this thread used was in a single entry 20 man winner-take-all qualifier, if you were able to enter two or more coordinated entries instead of one, then it would be a sizable advantage. and in particular the issue is that the community guidelines are written in such a vague manner that its hard to tell if this is even against the rules (or could be proven), even if most of the players believe it should be.

    IMO its posts like this that bring this thread down because it just causes even more confusion over something that isn’t even the issue at hand.

    The reason why I said what I said is because there are a handful of people who kept asking them if they share their winnings with each other.

  • draped

    @Mindofigor said...

    The reason why I said what I said is because there are a handful of people who kept asking them if they share their winnings with each other.

    I was responding to your whole second paragraph about all the DFS content and people having similar lineups. and I think a lot of players including CA/PG would disagree with that fact that you should be able to do whatever you want with your money. CA even said in a post above that they have stopped swapping shares because they believe it is (or should be) against the community guidelines.

  • somethingfresh

    @FastEddieFear said...

    I am taking a stand

    Good stuff I just wanted that to be clearer. And I don’t want to see you normalizing the “potential” cheaters.

    Ps. I would totes violate ToS

  • YUUNGMOOLAHH

    • Blogger of the Month

    In the example given of the 20-man Q winner-take-all scenario, are we suppose to believe that the two people under attack in these threads are the only 2 (or more) players who have stakes in each other in such contests? I’d bet more than Eddie Fear’s Seige coaching on that not being the case!

    It just so happens that maybe these two in question figured out that it doesn’t matter if their entries are well-coordinated (the ‘bad’ optics concern) or not, as the softness in the rules of the sites and them being allowed to share an algorithm justifies their coordination. While others continue to subsidize other players with swapping shares and staking others and independently submitting their uncoordinated entries (the ‘good’ optics), the two under attack essentially took a different route and found a better edge by coordination and just threw it out there right in everyone’s face.

    I call that strategic, bold, and smart! The fact that people are selling their coaching services, lineups, and access to their models is an act of cooperation/coordination, but collusion? Likely not. Likewise, what these two under attack are doing cannot be considered collusion either. They just decided to not be concerned with optics like most of you all are and gained the edge over you in doing so. Great players in everything find a way to push the envelope right up to the edge until the industry (i.e., rule makers of the game) either change the rules or interpret them differently. Have you considered that what James Harden is doing to draw fouls is actually a foul on him since he is the one locking his arm on the defender and flailing away as if he is the one being grabbed? It is definitely a holding foul on him, check the film. In the end, the DFS industry reaps what it has sown.

  • WatsonBankz

    @VChair23 said...

    Is it cheating if they create their own 150 lineups separately, compare the csv’s, & manually edit the identicals to slight variations?

    The idea of a strategy like this really has more to do with covering a larger amount of potential outcomes than sheer volume. Now ask yourself, would acting in this manner be in the best interest of DFS?

    I certainly hope everyone was well aware of the risks involved with participating in on-line skill based games. Cheating, colluding, swapping, scamming; theses are all very common. You have to decide for yourself if potential EV outweighs said variables. I also want to remind everyone that they (CA/PG) were acquitted. So instead of focusing on them, let’s look at the act as a whole and decide how we want DK/FD to handle a situation like this if someone were convicted. Is this something that we’re required to police ourselves? What would be the burden of proof in a situation like this? What do you think is adequate punishment for this type of behavior?

    Let’s move forward now, not backwards!

  • tomac

    @FastEddieFear said...

    I am absolutely blowing smoke but I would also posit that the correct allocation of blame would also lead to the more accurate distribution of time and resources towards fixing the problem. I am taking a stand – and not entirely comfortably with my friends in the industry – that the sites are largely to blame in having lax regulations which are rarely if ever enforced.

    Goods manufacturers will often do everything they can to make as much money as possible, even damaging the environment, unless they are regulated. D.C. lobbyists will do everything they can to get the results their clients need unless they are regulated. Wall Street banks will bundle up shit and sell it as shoe polish unless regulated. And DFS players, many of whose sole goal is to make money, will seek and find edges to do just that unless regulated.

    This isn’t so say there aren’t degrees of violators, or that their actions are excusable, but they are predictable. If you want to fix these problems in the long term, you need systemic protections with consequences, not only attempting to manage violators one by one. The EPA, the FEC, the SEC, MLB as mentioned before, and in this case the DFS sites have the primary responsibility not to foster an environment where the most profitable course of action is to break the rules.

    And since the sites have repeatedly shown to be less than willing to fix these issues, what if moving forward required the extinction of the industry as we now know it, and rebirth under federal regulation?

  • draped

    @WatsonBankz said...

    So instead of focusing on them, let’s look at the act as a whole and decide how we want DK/FD to handle a situation like this if someone were convicted. Is this something that we’re required to police ourselves? What would be the burden of proof in a situation like this? What do you think is adequate punishment for this type of behavior?

    So there is one thing I think that CA/PG could do that would not only make their situation better but would improve DFS in general. And its a little puzzling that they are not doing it (or haven’t mentioned that they are doing it).

    Since they have said in the threads on RG that they have not swapped action since the guidelines have come out, and they think the wording of the guidelines is poor, and they do not discuss strategy. Why are they not proposing a solution for a better policy or how to handle this situation? Every response from them is entirely defensive and never anything to do with how the situation can be improve. They obviously are very smart and very well informed when it comes to DFS. Not to mention they feel like they have taken the measures to avoid any kind of cheating, so wouldn’t they want a stronger policy in place to stop others as well as stop the attacks on themselves? and if so I’m pretty sure DK would listen to them.

  • Shaketiller

    A cliff notes version of what I think has the most traction…

    2 brothers are very good at DFS.
    They share a model they built that is very accurate.
    In GPPs, there has been history of key fades by one and not the other. Sometimes 100% to 0% with each having 150 lineups.
    In GPPs, there has been a history of identical cores with minor tweaks using various bats from the same game.

    I think one thing that gets lost by some is that the only reason this is a problem is because they are very good. But that’s also the only reason it would be done by anyone. If coordinating lineups in any way, it is a way to cover more of the players/lineups in their projections. Being as accurate as they are, I imagine they have a tight projection pool that while 10 lineups won’t cover it all, 300 will get close. So basically the argument is it is having 2 accounts for one person.

    But after seeing the DK rules I don’t even know if it’s against the rules. And then after hearing/reading DK etc talk about it a bit, they’ve clearly taken the stance to do nothing. It’s just a gray area. And the number one reason why is because it’s not the Fantasy sites money. It’s the players. If this happened in a sportsbook, the player is collared or banned. Even if it was just that the player was too good. Same in a casino. But that’s because it would be the sportsbook’s money that was being won and not the other players.

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

Sites mentioned in this thread

Use our links to sign up and deposit on sites listed in this thread to get these bonuses:

Subforum Index

New RotoGrinders Sports Betting Section!

Are you a DFS player who wants to get into sports betting?

If you have access to New Jersey sports betting, then use our DraftKings Sportsbook promo code and our FanDuel Sportsbook promo code to get the best bonuses in the NJ industry.

Those who can take advantage of PA online sports betting should use our SugarHouse PA promo code to get the best sports betting bonus in Pennsylvania.

If you don't yet have access to an online sportsbook, check out Monkey Knife Fight, a prop betting platform available in 31 states. Use our Monkey Knife Fight promo code to get a fantastic bonus.

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. Our goal is to help all of our members make more money playing daily fantasy sports!

Bet with your head, not over it!
Gambling Problem? Call 1-800-Gambler