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.

  • jdtrey

    @tonytone1908 said...

    Yes, if a qualifier is giving away 5 tickets and you happen to win all 5 in that qualifier, you deserve to keep them all. Imagine if they withheld an entry you won on a 1k qualifier. I’d be pissed.

    Sorry, quoted wrong post.

    While I agree that’s how the rules are now, let’s be honest.. DK should already have something in place preventing someone from joining 2 Qs if they already have 3 tickets or 5 entries in a tournament that awards 5 spots if the limit is 4.

  • Mphst18

    Take at what adam says with a grain of salt as he is not a max entry player and he got hurt I disagree with his friend the siege so he likes to call me names on Twitter.

    https://mobile.twitter.com/ShipMyMoneyDFS/status/758742499607269379

  • Shipmymoney

    • 56

      RG Overall Ranking

    • Ranked #10

      RG Tiered Ranking

    • x3

      2016 DraftKings FBWC Finalist

    • 2016 FanDuel MLB Playboy Mansion Finalist

    @sjs1890 said...

    Thats also not believable, if it was true that a flatter structure would help the sharks then DK would have implemented that a long time ago. Nearly all their rules are catered to high volume players.

    That is some horrible logic. It is math. It would be more profitable for everyone if payout structures were flatter. Anecdotal evidence, but there is probably a reason i got texts from people when the $3 Moonshot was flattened telling me I should start max entering it because it is so much more profitable now.

  • theseige

    • 2015 DraftKings FFWC Finalist

    • x2

      2016 DraftKings FBBWC Finalist

    @jdtrey said...

    While I agree that’s how the rules are now, let’s be honest.. DK should already have something in place preventing someone from joining 2 Qs if they already have 3 tickets or 5 entries in a tournament that awards 5 spots if the limit is 4.

    This limit is 4 thing is a TOTAL MYTH… and you shouldn’t be punished for having 3 tickets instead of 2 in trying to get your 4th…

  • Shipmymoney

    • 56

      RG Overall Ranking

    • Ranked #10

      RG Tiered Ranking

    • x3

      2016 DraftKings FBWC Finalist

    • 2016 FanDuel MLB Playboy Mansion Finalist

    @Mphst18 said...

    Take at what adam says with a grain of salt as he is not a max entry player and he got hurt I disagree with his friend the siege so he likes to call me names on Twitter.

    https://mobile.twitter.com/ShipMyMoneyDFS/status/758742499607269379

    There is nothing not factual in that tweet

  • Mphst18

    @Shipmymoney said...

    I wasn’t arguing that they aren’t trying to get first lol. I was arguing your claim that the reason for top heavy payout structures is to cater to max entry guys. If the structure were flatter, it would be more profitable for them to play. Therefore, they would be in favor of a flatter structure. The reason for the top heavy structure is to attract the casual player.

    You left out the best part , to attract the casual player to be served up like dinner to the max entries guy to take their money.

    That is the model and either you just like to argue or are in the dark.

  • sjs1890

    • 2013 DraftStreet DSBC Finalist

    @Shipmymoney said...

    That is some horrible logic. It is math. It would be more profitable for everyone if payout structures were flatter. Anecdotal evidence, but there is probably a reason i got texts from people when the $3 Moonshot was flattened telling me I should start max entering it because it is so much more profitable now.

    No its not LOL, have you not looked at the milly makers payout???? In order to make any real money you have to come in the top 100 out of 87,500. That is a absolutely terrible structure for people playing with a small amount of entries.

  • Mphst18

    @Shipmymoney said...

    There is nothing not factual in that tweet

    A

  • mjordantmac

    • 2016 FanDuel NBA Playboy Mansion Finalist

    Someone needs to close this thread before it gets into the hands of legislators. The last thing this industry needs is another scandal. It’s like half of you guys want DK to shut down if you’re not winning.

  • Shipmymoney

    • 56

      RG Overall Ranking

    • Ranked #10

      RG Tiered Ranking

    • x3

      2016 DraftKings FBWC Finalist

    • 2016 FanDuel MLB Playboy Mansion Finalist

    @sjs1890 said...

    No its not LOL, have you not looked at the milly makers payout???? In order to make any real money you have to come in the top 100 out of 87,500. That is a absolutely terrible structure for people playing with a small amount of entries.

    It is a terrible structure for everyone! But by putting $1M to first they can market it to casual players to take a shot at life changing money.

  • Mphst18

    @mjordantmac said...

    Someone needs to close this thread before it gets into the hands of legislators. The last thing this industry needs is another scandal. It’s like half of you guys want DK to shut down if you’re not winning.

    I want dfs to continue but not at the expense of others who are unsuspecting and get pillaged while the sites try to tell them and thier lawmakers the games have integrity and they have TOS they police and enforce. It’s just lip service to legalize.

    While I am profitable my point would be the same even if I wasn’t but I understand some people can put the notion of making money in front of their morals

  • Shipmymoney

    • 56

      RG Overall Ranking

    • Ranked #10

      RG Tiered Ranking

    • x3

      2016 DraftKings FBWC Finalist

    • 2016 FanDuel MLB Playboy Mansion Finalist

    @Mphst18 said...

    You left out the best part , to attract the casual player to be served up like dinner to the max entries guy to take their money.

    That is the model and either you just like to argue or are in the dark.

    I don’t know how to respond to this because it’s so far off base from what we were talking about. Like are you saying sites shouldn’t try to attract casual players? Or you also think that a flatter structure would not benefit max entry guys?

  • sjs1890

    • 2013 DraftStreet DSBC Finalist

    @Shipmymoney said...

    It is a terrible structure for everyone! But by putting $1M to first they can market it to casual players to take a shot at life changing money.

    Exactly its a terrible structure for everyone but the only ones that can sustain this tourney is high volume players, which is why im advocating for completely getting rid of this format so it can be better for the ecosystem. Also I didnt see much if any marketing for this tourney, and I would be willing to bet a flatter structure would have actually had more interest than currently.

  • Shipmymoney

    • 56

      RG Overall Ranking

    • Ranked #10

      RG Tiered Ranking

    • x3

      2016 DraftKings FBWC Finalist

    • 2016 FanDuel MLB Playboy Mansion Finalist

    @sjs1890 said...

    Exactly its a terrible structure for everyone but the only ones that can sustain this tourney is high volume players, which is why im advocating for completely getting rid of this format so it can be better for the ecosystem. Also I didnt see much if any marketing for this tourney, and I would be willing to bet a flatter structure would have actually had more interest than currently.

    High volume players would not be profitable in this tourney over the long run either. It is a -EV tournament for everyone. It is just fun to play for a million dollars.

  • tonytone1908

    So while we’re arguing whether this is fair or not, how are these lineups actually doing? Anything within reach of first or do we have 300 donation entries? We’ve seem to have lost sight of the argument of this being beneficial without speaking about the results.

  • Mphst18

    @Shipmymoney said...

    I don’t know how to respond to this because it’s so far off base from what we were talking about. Like are you saying sites shouldn’t try to attract casual players? Or you also think that a flatter structure would not benefit max entry guys?

    The second part

  • Mphst18

    @tonytone1908 said...

    So while we’re arguing whether this is fair or not, how are these lineups actually doing? Anything within reach of first or do we have 300 donation entries? We’ve seem to have lost sight of the argument of this being beneficial without speaking about the results.

    They are terrible lineups but how they do isn’t the point to me. It’s that they are allowing it when even though it’s hard to police it was caught, they have been caught before ( dk gave them a slap on the wrist which as you can see has not discouraged them) and the site does nothing.

  • theseige

    • 2015 DraftKings FFWC Finalist

    • x2

      2016 DraftKings FBBWC Finalist

    Hey mphst18, you going to comment on the actual TOC that said nothing of a 4 cap or no?

    You have hijacked your own thread to the point we can’t actually talk about the original post which was actually a problem

  • sjs1890

    • 2013 DraftStreet DSBC Finalist

    @Shipmymoney said...

    High volume players would not be profitable in this tourney over the long run either. It is a -EV tournament for everyone. It is just fun to play for a million dollars.

    Haha you dont get the point, we do not need a million dollar tourney its unsustainable. Sharks dont max enter this tourney for the tought of being EV, they have cash games h2h etc for their profit. Its just not sustainable for the common people which is the majority filling this contest.

  • tonytone1908

    @Mphst18 said...

    The second part

    Max entry guys getting 4x on half their entries is way more profitable than only getting 2 or 2.5x. If it was flatter I would play way more lineups myself.

  • poppaspicks

    • 2015 FanDuel MLB Playboy Mansion Finalist

    @EC4THREE10 said...

    my point is there is no need for anyone 1 person to need to add 150 line ups. They claim this is a game of skill. If you have skill then you should be able to win a tournament with a handful of line ups.

    My point is DK customer base isn’t happy about what’s going on. Everyone is watching and hoping DK will self police it’s self. We already have had the employee winning 350k with insider ownerships percentage. It is insider because no one else had access to the same information.

    I could careless if someone wants to throw in a ton of line ups. When your colluding as you can tell it makes everyone upset.

    First, about the collusion…unless it’s one person, with two user names, I don’t see the problem. If it’s two different people, with two different user names, two different tax id numbers and most importantly, TWO DIFFERENT SETS OF LINEUPS, what’s the problem? That they work together? Thousands of people work together playing DFS. Thats part of what makes it fun, you know, the “community”. RG claims to have 100k users…by people in this thread’s definition of colluding, aren’t we all guilty? About the only issue I see would be the people that run the same lineup every single day. That’s about as an obvious case of collusion as you can find. The difference is that these players don’t have the same lineups. Sure they have the similar percentages but they have different lineups. It would be ridiculous to say that people can’t work together, never mind absolutely impossible to enforce. The bottom line, is that they’re not breaking the rules. This wouldn’t make it past an initial hearing if this was handled in a court of law. I’m all for the community scrutinizing the industry but witch hunts just do much more harm than good. I mean, Fan Duel still doesn’t offer a CSV file which to me, is the most ludicrous issue that no one ever talks about…funny thing is, that I don’t play much on FD for that very reason. It’s kinda crazy but even as a high volume player, I’m not forced to play on a site that doesn’t share my same views on transparency.

    A couple more points that I think some people might find eye opening or at least interesting…You could be the best DFS player in the world and literally go multiple LIFETIMES and not win a large, single entry tournament. The whole multi entry debate and how it relates to skill is quite amazing…If anything, multi entry tournaments make it much easier for the cream to rise to the top. I know people don’t want to hear this but the massive, single entry tournaments involve much more variance and “luck” than the multi entry contests.

    Now the argument could be made that someone entering just 1 or 2 lineups would be at a major disadvantage vs the player entering 150 lineups, but even that isn’t true. In fact, the person entering 1 lineup, if they have the EXACT SAME SKILL as the person entering the 150, will have a higher EV on that single lineup vs the total combined EV of the player entering 150 lineups. In other words, in the long term, they should be more profitable. This issue here for many, is that the long term, legitimately might be years. Anyways, it’s been pointed out numerous times here over the years but from each lineup after your first, you’re giving up EV. The reason people multi enter is because even though their EV from the 150 lineups is less than their “best” lineup, they can still turn a profit because their 150 lineup’s EV is much higher than the collective EV of the field.

    I’m going to try and limit the depth of this rabbit hole, mostly because this has been rehashed over and over, but heres the last thing I want to point out…

    The best possible way to play fantasy sports, or any task in life where finishing in the highest percentile is the objective, is to put forth your best effort. This allows you to have the highest expected value possible. In fantasy sports, that would mean playing one optimal lineup.

    The issue is that you could theoretically “run good” or “run bad” for a very, very long period of time. Thats just how numbers work and variance is one hell of a beast. If you think your skill level allows you a margin to where you can afford to sacrifice EV for a reduction in variance, then by all means, run multiple lineups. In fact, if you think that, then you’re doing yourself a major disservice by NOT max entering each contest. Start in the quarter arcade and work your way up. Believe it or not, the lower the stakes, the easier the contest. Crazy, right?

    If you still feel like you’re at a disadvantage in these tournaments, then don’t play them. It’s that simple. Don’t make up excuses, or blame DK or other players. Just don’t play them. At the end of the day, whether you enter one lineup, or 500, you’re mathematically at no more, or no less of an advantage than anyone else that you’re competing against. Thats a fact. Stop arguing about it. It’s all perception. Numbers don’t lie but your mind does.

    One more thing…it’s COULD NOT care less.

  • Heterodox

    @Shipmymoney said...

    High volume players would not be profitable in this tourney over the long run either. It is a -EV tournament for everyone. It is just fun to play for a million dollars.

    are you suggesting that the players in question played this for fun, and not for profit?

  • Shipmymoney

    • 56

      RG Overall Ranking

    • Ranked #10

      RG Tiered Ranking

    • x3

      2016 DraftKings FBWC Finalist

    • 2016 FanDuel MLB Playboy Mansion Finalist

    @Mphst18 said...

    The second part

    How does a top heavy payout structure cater to max entry guys? Obviously they are more likely to get first with one of their entries, but each entry is less EV+ than it would be if the payout were flatter. Extreme example, but if first were 100k, and every other spot in the top 20% were $100, do you think that it would be more beneficial to MME than a flat structure?

  • Shipmymoney

    • 56

      RG Overall Ranking

    • Ranked #10

      RG Tiered Ranking

    • x3

      2016 DraftKings FBWC Finalist

    • 2016 FanDuel MLB Playboy Mansion Finalist

    @sjs1890 said...

    Haha you dont get the point, we do not need a million dollar tourney its unsustainable. Sharks dont max enter this tourney for the tought of being EV, they have cash games h2h etc for their profit. Its just not sustainable for the common people which is the majority filling this contest.

    The point is you made a statement that tournaments would be flatter if sites didn’t cater to high volume players, but in reality flatter tournaments are better for high volume players so your statement doesn’t make sense.

  • Shipmymoney

    • 56

      RG Overall Ranking

    • Ranked #10

      RG Tiered Ranking

    • x3

      2016 DraftKings FBWC Finalist

    • 2016 FanDuel MLB Playboy Mansion Finalist

    @Heterodox said...

    are you suggesting that the players in question played this for fun, and not for profit?

    I’m suggesting that if every tournament were structured this way we would all go broke. People do not play it because they expect to profit over time from it. They play it because the reward of getting incredibly lucky and winning it outweighs the expected loss from playing it since there are other game types and structures that are profitable. The point was that the top heavy structure does not benefit anyone so it is not an example of sites catering to MME guys.

  • 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).