PGA FORUM

Comments

  • whodat2

    When: March 21-25 (Tournament starts on Wednesday)

    Where: Austin, TX

    Course: Austin Country Club | A par 71 playing at 7108 yards

    Last Year’s Winner: Dustin Johnson over John Rahm

    DK’s Matchplay Scoring:

    Per Hole Scoring

    • Holes Won: +3 Pts
    • Holes Halved: +0.75 Pts
    • Holes Lost: -0.75 Pts
    • Holes Not Played: +1.6 Pts
    • Matches Won: +5 Pts
    • Matches Halved: +2 Pts

    Streaks and Bonuses

    • Streak of 3 Consecutive Holes Won in Match (Max 1 Per Round): +5 Pts
    • No Holes Lost in Match Bonus: +7.5 Pts

    Coverage: Golf Channel | PGATourLive

    Google Doc

    RG Golf Forum League

    Happy Meal Standings

    Admin Note: The mod team is working to keep these daily threads more on topic – Golf strategy talk for this week’s contest. Post referring to last week’s contest will be moved to the correct thread. Any off topic posts or posts containing full lineups will be deleted..

  • tristanwolf

    @whodat2 said...

    Tony Fine Cow ladies and gents.

    nice gif. i am a big fan but he is not popping for me so much- length?

  • RangerC

    One other thing to think about:

    - It’s possible for a guy to not get out of his group with 70+ pts (Kevin Na would have had 73 in 2016; won 14 holes and 2 of 3 matches), which will beat most guys who go out in the round of 16 and can be competitive with guys who go out in the round of 8 (Koepka only had 77). Meanwhile, some guys who go 0-3 will score less than 30 points. so 3/4 with 2 huge scorers can beat 4/4 with 2 duds.

  • lfn1992

    @BIF said...

    I think what he is saying is that nobody is nailing the final 4 so by only putting your entries in 3 quadrants, you are effectively giving yourself the following 2/16 chance in 3 diff groups versus 2/16 in 2 groups and 1/16 in 2 groups.

    He is basically betting that nobody nails all 4 finalists and increasing his odds at getting 3/4 – I’ve done that on a few entries as well but have a lot more with the previously discussed more common strategy

  • nicholasmarsh

    @RangerC said...

    One other thing to think about:

    - It’s possible for a guy to not get out of his group with 70+ pts (Kevin Na would have had 73 in 2016; won 14 holes and 2 of 3 matches), which will beat most guys who go out in the round of 16 and can be competitive with guys who go out in the round of 8 (Koepka only had 77). Meanwhile, some guys who go 0-3 will score less than 30 points. so 3/4 with 2 huge scorers can beat 4/4 with 2 duds.

    Point taken; I have a few hours in the morning to tinker myself out of cash, but will be a bit less focused on 4/4. I appreciate all of the insight. I thought that seemed too obvious.

  • dbullsfan

    • Ranked #48

      RG Tiered Ranking

    something I just noticed was that 3 of the last 4 holes are either par 3 or par 5 meaning 9 of the first 14 are par 4. I think in addition to just looking at birdie or better, I’m going to look at par 4 birdie or better as a lot of the matches won’t make it to the final few holes (2 of the par 5 in the last 4) for those looking at par 5 scoring this week.

  • lfn1992

    @RangerC said...

    One other thing to think about:

    - It’s possible for a guy to not get out of his group with 70+ pts (Kevin Na would have had 73 in 2016; won 14 holes and 2 of 3 matches), which will beat most guys who go out in the round of 16 and can be competitive with guys who go out in the round of 8 (Koepka only had 77). Meanwhile, some guys who go 0-3 will score less than 30 points. so 3/4 with 2 huge scorers can beat 4/4 with 2 duds.

  • lfn1992

    Incidentally, it is pretty hard to take an alternate event seriously when Jim Furyk is priced at 10.8k

  • deepfat

    Maybe as a bit of humor (or maybe not), has anyone else looked at Henley getting out of an extremely winnable group? One or two of these tier 4 guys get out of the group stage and that one is ripe for the pickings.

  • deepfat

    @dbullsfan said...

    something I just noticed was that 3 of the last 4 holes are either par 3 or par 5 meaning 9 of the first 14 are par 4. I think in addition to just looking at birdie or better, I’m going to look at par 4 birdie or better as a lot of the matches won’t make it to the final few holes (2 of the par 5 in the last 4) for those looking at par 5 scoring this week.

    Damn I thought I was the only one who noticed this lol. Great freaking eye.

  • tristanwolf

    @deepfat said...

    Maybe as a bit of humor (or maybe not), has anyone else looked at Henley getting out of an extremely winnable group? One or two of these tier 4 guys get out of the group stage and that one is ripe for the pickings.

    with casey stanley and fitzp? i’d say rahm and hidecki groups much easier to win.

    edit – i just saw 4th getting through, yes very possible but i don’t think that’s the group.

  • deepfat

    @tristanwolf said...

    with casey stanley and fitzp? i’d say rahm and hidecki groups much easier to win.

    edit – i just saw 4th getting through, yes very possible but i don’t think that’s the group.

    Fitzpatrick looks lost. I like Stanley too. Casey has a lot of ho-hum rounds that can be exploited. My numbers have him as one of the top tier 4 guys when matched with the course. Not putting him in a lineup or anything but thought it was interesting that my modeling kinda likes him.

  • dbullsfan

    • Ranked #48

      RG Tiered Ranking

    Brendan Steele is popping so much for me and I don’t have much of him, makes me nervous.

  • nicholasmarsh

    @lfn1992 said...

    One last rebuttal… Improving your odds to get 3× 2/16 still doesn’t equate to taking ZJ/DJ, but, like I said before, anything can happen. Good luck everyone. It’ll be fun!!

  • dbullsfan

    • Ranked #48

      RG Tiered Ranking

    @nicholasmarsh said...

    One last rebuttal… Improving your odds to get 3× 2/16 still doesn’t equate to taking ZJ/DJ, but, like I said before, anything can happen. Good luck everyone. It’ll be fun!!

    so what does taking 0% DJ do to my odds

  • tristanwolf

    @deepfat said...

    Fitzpatrick looks lost. I like Stanley too. Casey has a lot of ho-hum rounds that can be exploited. My numbers have him as one of the top tier 4 guys when matched with the course. Not putting him in a lineup or anything but thought it was interesting that my modeling kinda likes him.

    i hear ya, i have no fitz but a bunch of casey and lil stanley, no henley, but this is such a crapshoot, who knows.

  • dbullsfan

    • Ranked #48

      RG Tiered Ranking

    @tristanwolf said...

    i hear ya, i have no fitz but a bunch of casey and lil stanley, no henley, but this is such a crapshoot, who knows.

    I can’t do no Henley in Texas. I’m gonna have a little in what can be a winnable group if Casey has an off day or 2.

  • deepfat

    @dbullsfan said...

    I can’t do no Henley in Texas. I’m gonna have a little in what can be a winnable group if Casey has an off day or 2.

    I have no one in this group in my lineup for a multitude of reasons #1 being Casey’s ownership.

  • Dewoc19

    @ElSlappo said...

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DYsn9PcVAAA3MH2.jpg:large

    Thank you, this is why I was so confused with everyone talking about quadrants, I couldn’t find what people were talking g about, this totally makes sense now!!!

  • whodat2

    Uh Oh…. here comes Dewoc!

  • Driven2ThEdge

    @BIF said...

    I think what he is saying is that nobody is nailing the final 4 so by only putting your entries in 3 quadrants, you are effectively giving yourself the following 2/16 chance in 3 diff groups versus 2/16 in 2 groups and 1/16 in 2 groups.

    He is basically betting that nobody nails all 4 finalists and increasing his odds at getting 3/4 – I’ve done that on a few entries as well but have a lot more with the previously discussed more common strategy

    Yeah, I understand the intuition but it is mathematically flawed. lfn1992, please pay attention to the math, instead of being snarky and taunting others to chase the perfect 4/4.

    First non-technical: To take down a huge GPP you have to get really lucky and go big or go home. If you hedge on everyone else maxing out at 3/4, so you cap yourself at 3/4, you still have to beat the rest of the 3/4, which may not be better odds than the additional odds needed to have just gotten the 4/4 (caveat: yes I know 4/4 isn’t guaranteed to beat 3/4). For that matter, why is 3/4 the magic number? Maybe 2/4 will be the max so we should stack 3 in 2 of the quadrants to get a 3/16 chance in 2 diff groups to get 2 in the finals. Or… maybe 1/4 is good enough (not likely) and we should have all 6 in 1 quadrant. However, all this strategy turns out to be for naught, as shown in the technical section.

    Technical: First, let’s assume that all 6 of our picks win their individual groups to begin. This is a fine assumption without loss of generality for anything we are about to do. Now, let us define our two competing plans:

    Plan 1: Divide the 6 picks into the 4 different quadrants, i.e., 2, 2, 1, 1 (for Quads A, B, C, D).
    Plan 2: Divide the 6 picks evenly into 3 quadrants, i.e., 2, 2, 2, 0.

    Now, the goal is to calculate the odds that we get 3/4 (or also 4/4 for Plan 1) in the Final Four.

    Let’s start with plan 2 since it is the easier one.

    P(Getting 3/4 | Plan 2) = ½*½*½ = 1/8. This one should be pretty easy to see since for the 3 quads we’re in, we have 2 of the 4, so the odds for one of our guys to advance is 1/2, per quad.

    Now for Plan 1, let’s first look at Getting 4/4, since its easier:
    P(Getting 4/4 | Plan 1) = ½*½*¼*¼ = 1/64. (due to the same logic)

    Now for Plan 1, we find the 3/4 odds, which is the harder calculation (pardon the abuse of notation but it should be apparent what I’m doing):
    P(Getting 3/4 | Plan 1) = P(A, B, C) + P(A, B, D) + P(A, C, D) + (B, C, D) = ½½¼¾ + ½½¼¾ + ½½¼¼ + ½½¼¼ = 3/64 + 3/64 + 1/64 + 1/64 = 8/64 = 1/8 !!!!!!!!!!!!

    If you’ve followed me so far, thanks. The crazy, amazing, stupendous conclusion is that the odds of getting 3/4 is the same for Plan 1 and Plan 2, but only Plan 1 gives you the chance of getting 4/4. (It’s entirely possible I made a mistake; if I did please correct me; I’m looking at you BIF and qatman.)

  • whodat2

    @Driven2ThEdge said...

    P(Getting 3/4 | Plan 1) = P(A, B, C) + P(A, B, D) + P(A, C, D) + (B, C, D) = ½½¼¾ + ½½¼¾ + ½½¼¼ + ½½¼¼ = 3/64 + 3/64 + 1/64 + 1/64 = 8/64 = 1/8 !!!!!!!!!!!!

    Sorry….. but I didn’t do the math homework in 6th grade either.

  • dangasin

    That was a more complicated excel solver than stoke play tournament. Had to account for quadrants and groups and 16 oh my

  • walkoff9

    @Driven2ThEdge said...

    Yeah, I understand the intuition but it is mathematically flawed. lfn1992, please pay attention to the math, instead of begin snarky and taunting others to chase the perfect 4/4.

    First non-technical: To take down a huge GPP you have to get really lucky and go big or go home. If you hedge on everyone else maxing out at 3/4, so you cap yourself at 3/4, you still have to beat the rest of the 3/4, which may not be better odds than the additional odds needed to have just gotten the 4/4 (caveat: yes I know 4/4 isn’t guaranteed to beat 3/4). For that matter, why is 3/4 the magic number? Maybe 2/4 will be the max so we should stack 3 in 2 of the quadrants to get a 3/16 chance in 2 diff groups to get 2 in the finals. Or… maybe 1/4 is good enough (not likely) and we should have all 6 in 1 quadrant. However, all this strategy turns out to be for naught, as shown in the technical section.

    Technical: First, let’s assume that all 6 of our picks win their individual groups to begin. This is a fine assumption without loss of generality for anything we are about to do. Now, let us define our two competing plans:

    Plan 1: Divide the 6 picks into the 4 different quadrants, i.e., 2, 2, 1, 1 (for Quads A, B, C, D).
    Plan 2: Divide the 6 picks evenly into 3 quadrants, i.e., 2, 2, 2, 0.

    Now, the goal is to calculate the odds that we get 3/4 (or also 4/4 for Plan 1) in the Final Four.

    Let’s start with plan 2 since it is the easier one.

    P(Getting 3/4 | Plan 2) = ½*½*½ = 1/8. This one should be pretty easy to see since for the 3 quads we’re in, we have 2 of the 4, so the odds for one of our guys to advance is 1/2, per quad.

    Now for Plan 1, let’s first look at Getting 4/4, since its easier:
    P(Getting 4/4 | Plan 1) = ½*½*¼*¼ = 1/64. (due to the same logic)

    Now for Plan 1, we find the 3/4 odds, which is the harder calculation (pardon the abuse of notation but it should be apparent what I’m doing):
    P(Getting 3/4 | Plan 1) = P(A, B, C) + P(A, B, D) + P(A, C, D) + (B, C, D) = ½½¼¾ + ½½¼¾ + ½½¼¼ + ½½¼¼ = 3/64 + 3/64 + 1/64 + 1/64 = 8/64 = 1/8 !!!!!!!!!!!!

    If you’ve followed me so far, thanks. The crazy, amazing, stupendous conclusion is that the odds of getting 3/4 is the same for Plan 1 and Plan 2, but only Plan 1 gives you the chance of getting 4/4. (It’s entirely possible I made a mistake; if I did please correct me; I’m looking at you BIF and qatman.)

  • tristanwolf

    lol i think what he’s saying is no one is getting 3 of the final 4. and 2 of the final 4 will probably be killing it.

  • Dewoc19

    @whodat2 said...

    Uh Oh…. here comes Dewoc!

    What out bitches, single bullet, locked and loaded for extreme tilt for 5 full days

  • 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.