PGA FORUM

Comments

  • Mphst18

    DAUT44 and MIR84 already once caught colluding and disqualified from the kings cup by DK but still allowed to play on the site are back at it again colluding to circumvent the max entries for the millionaire maker so they have 300 entries.

    Each entered the max 150 lineups (MIR used 20 players) (DAUT used 22 players).

    The core 20 players used are identical with Reed (12% of DAUT lineups) and Finau (3.3% of DAUT lineups) as the 2 players DAUT used the MIR didnt.

    Both have 47%+ usage in lineups of main core of Kuchar, McIlroy, Molinari, Johnson, and Garcia.

    The Fact they these two who are known to work together, have been caught colluding before, have the same 20 players with near identical ownership %s yet have no lineups that overlap shows clearly they are doing this to have 300 entries (not the 150 limit).

    I understand these two are VIP players and dk generates a lot of revenue from them but how long will they allow their consumers to be unprotected and the integrity of their contests to be doubted.

  • pepsies15

    Whoa, thanks for drawing the line! You’re the hero RG needs.

  • Unico10

    • 595

      RG Overall Ranking

    • Ranked #93

      RG Tiered Ranking

    Lot’s of confusion and re-direction or misdirection of the argument (intentional and/or not…)

    We have two cases in which users colluded and violated DK tos. First one netted $1.5 mil, this one looks to be losing

    The issues is not about their winning, not about entry limits, not about redefining rules, not about which contests to join

    The issue is:
    Will DK do something about it or not???

    Many (most?) like to play within well defined rules and would like such rules to be enforced

    To the ones worried about a corporation that may get in trouble with the law because is incapable to police collusion and corruption…. DK is not DFS.
    Yahoo could gain space

    One acceptable response could be throwing their TOS out the window and remove entry limits because “we are unable to enforce them”

    At least there would be intellectual honesty
    I am sure the AGs wouldn’t approve though

  • Mphst18

    Yes let’s look at the CFB live finals where it says you can qualify up to four times ( forget if you agree or disagree that one should get four entries to a live final as at least they spell out the rule). Low and behold look who gets 5 entries even though it says you can only qualify up to four times non other than a dk pro. I guess thats just good business?

    https://www.draftkings.com/lp/cfb-world-championship

  • theseige

    • 2015 DraftKings FFWC Finalist

    • x2

      2016 DraftKings FBBWC Finalist

    @Mphst18 said...

    Yes let’s look at the CFB live finals where it says you can qualify up to four times ( forget if you agree or disagree that one should get four entries to a live final as at least they spell out the rule). Low and behold look who gets 5 entries even though it says you can only qualify up to four times non other than a dk pro. I guess thats just good business?

    https://www.draftkings.com/lp/cfb-world-championship

    If you look at the rules, if you qualify for more than 4 on the final day you can keep the seats, so if you have 3 seats and then win 2 more on a single day you get to keep both

    What else you got?

  • Mphst18

    Look at the order the first 4 were all completed before the 5th and don’t quite see what your saying in the listed Rules for the contest but hey let’s just play by whatever rules you say and not the ones in an enforceable agreement.

    Yum might want to read the T&C link under maximum entries rather than just rattling off an unwritten rule.

  • Stallion33

    • x2

      2018 DraftKings FBWC Finalist

    • 2017 DraftKings FBWC Finalist

    @Mphst18 said...

    Look at the order the first 4 were all completed before the 5th and don’t quite see what your saying in the listed Rules for the contest but hey let’s just play by whatever rules you say and not the ones in an enforceable agreement.

    Yum might want to read the T&C link under maximum entries rather than just rattling off an unwritten rule.

    Looks like Ram won four on 11/21, while he had one prior to that date.

  • Mphst18

    @theseige said...

    If you look at the rules, if you qualify for more than 4 on the final day you can keep the seats, so if you have 3 seats and then win 2 more on a single day you get to keep both

    What else you got?

    Here are the rules u see front page :

    Qualify up to 4 times through November 28th

    More explicit T&C link:

    MAXIMUM NUMBER OF ENTRIES

    Once a player has accumulated 4 entries to the FCFWC Contest they are no longer allowed to win entries in FCFWC Contest qualifier contests. They may however win additional entries through any other non-qualifier promotion that includes entry to the FCFWC.

    If you would like to show me where what you wrote is listed I would be glad to read it.

  • tonytone1908

    @Mphst18 said...

    Here are the rules u see front page :

    Qualify up to 4 times through November 28th

    More explicit T&C link:

    MAXIMUM NUMBER OF ENTRIES

    Once a player has accumulated 4 entries to the FCFWC Contest they are no longer allowed to win entries in FCFWC Contest qualifier contests. They may however win additional entries through any other non-qualifier promotion that includes entry to the FCFWC.

    If you would like to show me where what you wrote is listed I would be glad to read it.

    As stated he won 4 on the last day. If he already had 3 and won 4 on the last day he’s entitled to 7. Hell, if he won 20 on that last day he’d be entitled to all of them. Or should he just give them back and now nobody gets the entries since the contest is closed?

    I know it might be confusing to some but in legalese it’s spelled out clearly. If you can read things into everything else you should be able to read into this.

  • idontluvdemhos

    really surprised that one of the guys behind peachymer is being shady in DFS as well…….

  • sjs1890

    • 2013 DraftStreet DSBC Finalist

    @Stewburtx8 said...

    I am a mid/low stakes player but over my 4+ years of playing DFS I have sold pieces of my action on these forums. I have a few friends who play and we sometimes have 10-25% of each other in bigger GPP’s. Usually only on a top 3, 5 or 10 finish, but we still always have that in place. We do not coordinate lineups (or use any optimizers) but I’m sure we share ideas of who we like at times. Do we do this all the time? Definitely not. But in a very top heavy contest like the Milly Maker, why would you not want to swap some shares of each other in case someone hits it big? To me, it’s what makes DFS great. You can sweat big GPP’s with friends. Now do we max enter? No, not even close. Usually a couple entries each. But is this wrong in some people’s eyes? Probably. To me that is going WAAAAY too far if you believe that.

    All of what you posted here has always been against the TOS, but of course when money is on the line people always try and skirt the rules and needs to be either enforced or completely just thrown away.

  • Mphst18

    @tonytone1908 said...

    As stated he won 4 on the last day. If he already had 3 and won 4 on the last day he’s entitled to 7. Hell, if he won 20 on that last day he’d be entitled to all of them. Or should he just give them back and now nobody gets the entries since the contest is closed?

    I know it might be confusing to some but in legalese it’s spelled out clearly. If you can read things into everything else you should be able to read into this.

    Still reading don’t see anything in the T&C for the contests about what you typed but if you want to link to it so we can all read that would be fantastic.

    or is this just something everyone is supposed to know and what’s the point of a T&C then or a page up front that says qualify up to 4 times not qualify up to 8 times?

  • Mphst18

    Legalese would be the T&C what you are saying is some type of plain talk interpretation of somethings you may have heard or observed but surely isn’t listed in the enforceable agreement.

  • tonytone1908

    @Mphst18 said...

    Yes if someone keeps breaking into my house and robbing me of 100 dollars every day I better hope no one calls the cops on them or I police it or they may stop robbing me every day.

    Dude if you’re allowing yourself to get robbed for 100 dollars every day then you got your own problems, in more ways then one.

    Buy an alarm system, some cameras. Get a dog. Ask a friend to house sit. Take a day off. Hide your money somewhere else. Stay home all day. You have solutions. One of those might be not playing DFS at all but if you feel like you’re constantly getting robbed then STOP PLAYING. I never win on scratchoffs so I just stopped buying them altogether. I realized the system is stacked against me. Many people know their chances of winning on scratchoffs or lotto are next to nothing and they continue to play anyway. They’re happy and totally fine with the ridiculous odds. Just as many playing DFS are totally fine with it. But a few people with their $10/night bankrolls look for any reason to try to rid DFS of the main contributors because they found a loophole and have the bankroll to take advantage of it.

    In all honesty this issue has absolutely zero to do with whether YOU do well or not. Although this is another issue that’s been debated over and over again.

  • sjs1890

    • 2013 DraftStreet DSBC Finalist

    DFS was created for the purpose of entertainment, this is not poker, this hobby was not created for the purpose of people being dependent on dfs. Having sharks pool together illegally affecting the ecosystem, and entertainment of thousands is when DK needs to step in and enforce the rules they have set in place.

  • Mphst18

    @idontluvdemhos said...

    read up on peachymer in online poker.. daut was part of that “syndicate” so you’d be a fool to think he wouldn’t try something similar in
    DFS.

    Agreed. I think most are now aware they play as a syndicate/collude/circumvent etc. the frustration comes that the sites have what appears to be three chioices:

    1. Come out and say our TOS don’t mean anything do what you want as long as it doesn’t hurt us monetarily (net loss on referrals, etc). I would jump the risk of negative press in here but they don’t seem to care about that. This would hurt any chance of legalization.

    2. come out and do something about it but that is going to cost them money as most of the egregious offenders are their top revenue producing players.

    3. Remain in his limbo world were everyone remains frustrated ( this is the outcome they most likely will do).

  • tonytone1908

    @Mphst18 said...

    Still reading don’t see anything in the T&C for the contests about what you typed but if you want to link to it so we can all read that would be fantastic.

    or is this just something everyone is supposed to know and what’s the point of a T&C then or a page up front that says qualify up to 4 times not qualify up to 8 times?

    Once a player has accumulated 4 entries to the FCFWC Contest they are no longer allowed to win entries in FCFWC Contest qualifier contests. They may however win additional entries through any other non-qualifier promotion that includes entry to the FCFWC.

    Where does it say they can’t have more than 4 entries? They just aren’t allowed to win more qualifiers after that Hell, he could have won 20 qualifiers that last day if they had that many which obviously they didn’t. It also states they CAN win more in other promotions so again, no 4 entry limit. It’s not that hard to understand. No where in there is a specific cap mentioned.

  • Stewburtx8

    • 2012 FanDuel WFBC Finalist

    @sjs1890 said...

    All of what you posted here has always been against the TOS, but of course when money is on the line people always try and skirt the rules and needs to be either enforced or completely just thrown away.

    I completely disagree that ANY of what I described is against the TOS. It certainly should not be against the TOS either. This type of stuff is not harming anyone else or trying to skirt any rules that would create a disadvantage for anyone else. While DFS has provided a small supplemental income for me, it is still primarily entertainment. Everything I described doing occasionally just makes DFS more fun.

    I do see the argument for why two people should not be able to join forces to submit 300 unique lineups in a contest that has a maximum entry limit of 150. In this case, their “syndicate” play is being used to exceed the max entry limits. It’s why I stated that Draftkings needs to clarify their TOS so that there is a clear line on what is allowed and what is not allowed.

  • Mphst18

    Now you are speaking my language. What is a non qualifier promotion, is a qualifier tournament a non qualifier promotion?

    I guess I interpret qualify UP TO 4 times meaning 4 is the most. I guess UP TO 4 means something else to you.

    I guess I interpret once they accumulate 4 entries they can NO LONGER win entries through qualifying contests as meaning you can win NO MORE than 4 entries in a qualifier. You seem to interpret that NO MORE than 4 in a qualifiers means well after you win 4 if you are entered in another qualifier event you can win that as well, so technically 5 or greater.

  • tonytone1908

    @sjs1890 said...

    DFS was created for the purpose of entertainment, this is not poker, this hobby was not created for the purpose of people being dependent on dfs. Having sharks pool together illegally affecting the ecosystem, and entertainment of thousands is when DK needs to step in and enforce the rules they have set in place.

    So how do you propose to stop it? How do you propose to prevent it from occuring further? And how exactly does this situation keep you from winning? Please explain.

    I’m sure some of these lineups were duplicated by others in the contest, maybe someone could tell us if this is the case or not, so it’s not like they’re only coming to these lineups because of algorithms or entry limits. You and I have the same exact chance of getting the optimal lineup as anyone else.

  • Mindofigor

    Single entry tournaments = GOAT

  • sjs1890

    • 2013 DraftStreet DSBC Finalist

    @tonytone1908 said...

    So how do you propose to stop it? How do you propose to prevent it from occuring further? And how exactly does this situation keep you from winning? Please explain.

    I’m sure some of these lineups were duplicated by others in the contest, maybe someone could tell us if this is the case or not, so it’s not like they’re only coming to these lineups because of algorithms or entry limits. You and I have the same exact chance of getting the optimal lineup as anyone else.

    Its not about winning or losing lol. It’s about following the rules DK agreed upon, not me or you or anyone else, DK made the rules. For example if theres a small group of people pooling together, that means they are also working on a strategy together where if they worked by themselves they most likely wouldn’t have ended up with the same research. Which that can cause an honest person playing for entertainment which is what DFS was designed for a lesser cash or maybe not even cash at all.

  • ataggart

    When there was no entry limits = people wanted entry limits

    When they put in entry limits = people wanted the limits to be lower

    Now that the limits are lower = people don’t want players to work together

    Where does it stop? Careful what you wish for, if it keeps going like this DFS will be entirely single entry only at some point.

  • Mphst18

    @tonytone1908 said...

    So how do you propose to stop it? How do you propose to prevent it from occuring further? And how exactly does this situation keep you from winning? Please explain.

    I’m sure some of these lineups were duplicated by others in the contest, maybe someone could tell us if this is the case or not, so it’s not like they’re only coming to these lineups because of algorithms or entry limits. You and I have the same exact chance of getting the optimal lineup as anyone else.

    Let’s say one of the 300 lineups they entered finished 1st and you finished 2nd it prevented you from winning 900k. Yes some others picked the same lineups as them that’s the whole point that these two systematically worked together to select 300 lineups with 20 identical players and similar ownership percentage without overlapping any of their lineups amongst themselves. Ranger c has explained this numerous times that unless there is statistically impossibility that Their most common lineup ( I think 50 others chose it) would only be entered by one not both of them unless they were using a lineup generator with the parameters they wanted and then splitting up who entered which lineups.

    To quote you: if you can read things into everything else you should be able to read into this.

  • tonytone1908

    @Mphst18 said...

    Now you are speaking my language. What is a non qualifier promotion, is a qualifier tournament a non qualifier promotion?

    I guess I interpret qualify UP TO 4 times meaning 4 is the most. I guess UP TO 4 means something else to you.

    I guess I interpret once they accumulate 4 entries they can NO LONGER win entries through qualifying contests as meaning you can win NO MORE than 4 entries in a qualifier. You seem to interpret that NO MORE than 4 in a qualifiers means well after you win 4 if you are entered in another qualifier event you can win that as well, so technically 5 or greater.

    See, the problem is, you’re looking for everything to be written out to you, in plain english, in black and white, and that is not the case here, nor will it ever be. Things like this are written in the way they are for a reason. I understand it, I get it, you may not.

    But back to the topic of entry limits and people colluding. It is impossible to police or determine what people are doing. It may seem obvious to you but it’s just impossible to prove or stop. You open up a whole bunch of cans of worms and it really has no effect on how well you do at all.

  • Mphst18

    @ataggart said...

    When there was no entry limits = people wanted entry limits

    When they put in entry limits = people wanted the limits to be lower

    Now that the limits are lower = people don’t want players to work together

    Where does it stop? Careful what you wish for, if it keeps going like this DFS will be entirely single entry only at some point.

    It should be single entry the only reason it isn’t is greed. Not enough money for a site to make to only run single entry. That also would help the skill argument and all these people that get named as the best sure wouldn’t be winning as much, they win cause the ability to multi enter along with ridiculously high payout structures.

  • 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.