INDUSTRY FORUM

Comments

  • querb

    Saw this on twitter:

    does this mean i dont have to play against chipotle addict and csu ram in $2 50/50s and 5 man cash games?

  • waltdeuce

    Im sorry! This is soft. So we bend the rules for the whiners. Put more money up. Go work a regular job and come back ready to play ball. What about the people who want to legit challenge these guys. Now we have situations where we have 20 max $3 dollar soccer gpps. Garbage .

  • urbanachiever

    I’m a lurker, but had to create an account to say this.

    What does this do to people who want to play 150 entries, and could do it in the $3 to $5 contests, but can’t do it when they inevitably have the $8 GPP be the next level over $5, like they have now for MLB? Last season for NFL, I could max enter the big $3 to $5 GPPs for $450 or $600, which was doable at my level. It’s not doable when it’s suddenly $1200. I could compete against the big guys in the $3 GPPs because I could play 150 lineups like they did. Now, my options are I have to play 20 lineups in GPPs that will have lower prize pools, or play the higher prize pool contests but be unable to compete because I can’t afford to max enter with my bank roll.

    DK has basically forced me into being a low stakes player now. I’m now contributing a fraction of what I was before to build up those prize pools ($80-$100 versus $450-$600). I’m sure I’m not the only one in that position.

  • jokerswild22

    Excellent move by DraftKings.

    Anyone who disagrees is just doing it for attention.

    This is a happy medium for all and if sharks are upset that they can’t bottom feed then oh-well.

    Kudos to any site that goes through with these player safeguards. You wouldn’t see Esfandiari or Negreanu grinding .05/.10 tables because it’s simply not worth their time.

    For those of you that want to “challenge” the sharks, then just play in the contests above $5.. how is that difficult?

    20 entry max’s are amazing too, by the way. Excited to see them for football.

  • FFguru71

    @escot4 said...

    1) No, I don’t agree that being the best means winning with a single entry every time. I believe being the best is more about winning the most you can while staying within the rules. Knowing that most of the top pros put in 150 lineups, being the best often means having the top ROI with 150 lineups. I realize that having 150 lineups gives me a leverage advantage over anybody with fewer lineups. However, I’ve won at least 2 tournaments that I can think of off the top of my head with a single entry that had over 20,000 entrants in them (one was 57,000), plus lots of smaller field tournaments with single entries, so it’s not like having tons of entries is the only reason for being successful.

    Here’s why single entries every time actually show less skill than multi: sample size. If I can only do 17 total lineups during an NFL season, I may or may not hit a big tournament once, but it’s highly unlikely to happen more than once with such little leverage compared to the rest of the field. Also, I’d be subject to far more variance because each week one injury or major bust would crush any chance I had. Building a “portfolio” of 150 lineups with the exact percentage exposure to each player that I want reflects more skill when it goes well, especially since other pros are doing the same. However, I would argue I’d still be one of the top players comparatively if everyone was single entry, as I’ve had a lot of success in those types of tournaments, it’s just that nobody would stand out because tournaments would be tiny as would prize pools.

    Obviously I wouldn’t have made as much if I could only play one entry every week, but I was never arguing that I could. That’s like telling somebody who makes $100k in the stock market, “yeah, but I bet you couldn’t do that if you could only make one trade per week.” Uhh, yeah, that’s obvious. I don’t understand the whole “one lineup is the only pure reflection of DFS skill” argument. If every contest was single entry, DFS sites wouldn’t be able to stay in business… they’d have already gone under.

    2) In what world does this question make any sense? If we couldn’t research anything, we wouldn’t know anything about the players in the first place outside of games we watched. I guess then it would be about whoever could watch the most games… then again that might be considered research, so I don’t know what you’re trying to prove there. The only “fancy computer program” I use is excel, if that could be considered fancy. But I made all my spreadsheets myself, my system isn’t really automated or anything, and I watch a ton of NFL and NBA. I would argue that my knowledge of both games is very good. I’ve been a huge fan of both since I was a kid, and I’m not just a pure math guy. So no, not agreed.

    I think you misunderstood me escot and I’m sorry if i wasn’t more clear..i didn’t mean only being allowed one entry..or only single entry tournaments, i meant choosing to only do one entry in the very large field tournaments..like the milly maker, and taking it down at least once and fairly consistently taking down large prizes in it. You really don’t think that wouldn’t be more impressive to do that with one entry regularly overcoming all the variance consistently, all the people that have the max entries every week, avoiding the busts regularly? That would be incredibly impressive if you asked me. You’d be doing that against some incredibly large odds stacked against you..and doing it consistently.

  • waltdeuce

    The problem im seeing is that there is no happy medium in sports like soccer. $3 dollar gpp is now 20 max. The next reasonable sized tournament is $33. Thats just too extreme of a jump. Basically they are creating an elite class. They should have a $3 dollar 20 max and also have a $3 dollar that has more entries.

    Since that ship has sailed why not make a tournament that can replace the gpp that basically has been scrapped. Having a $6 dollar gpp with 50-75 entries isnt too much to ask. I understand catering to the casual player but this is still competition.

  • escot4

    • x2

      $2M Prize Winner

    • 2016 DraftKings FFWC Champion

    @FFguru71 said...

    I think you misunderstood me escot and I’m sorry if i wasn’t more clear..i didn’t mean only being allowed one entry..or only single entry tournaments, i meant choosing to only do one entry in the very large field tournaments..like the milly maker, and taking it down at least once and fairly consistently taking down large prizes in it. You really don’t think that wouldn’t be more impressive to do that with one entry regularly overcoming all the variance consistently, all the people that have the max entries every week, avoiding the busts regularly? That would be incredibly impressive if you asked me. You’d be doing that against some incredibly large odds stacked against you..and doing it consistently.

    I get that you think that’s the best reflection, but this is also what I do for a living. I can’t reasonably expect to continue making good money off of one entry per week in NFL. Why would I put in 60+ hours per week and do all of my analysis to just do one tournament lineup that could easily be ruined by a 1st quarter injury? More lineups reduces the luck factor by increasing the sample size and more accurately representing my position on each player each week. I don’t want 100% exposure to eight players in an enormous tournament.

    Also, I love the Milly Maker, but nobody is going to consistently take down large prizes in it off of a single entry per week against over 200,000 people. Even if I was able to finish in the top 1% (out of say 200,000 entrants) three different times, I could easily end up profiting less than $5,000 for the full season. The goal is to do the best I can… not the best I can with one entry. If DFS was a single entry game only, your argument would make more sense. But currently it’s equivalent to saying something like “Westbrook leading the NBA in scoring would a lot more impressive if he could only take one shot per game even with everybody else taking the same amount of shots they always do. He’d be doing that with odds stacked incredibly against him.”

  • PigskinaBlanket

    • 415

      RG Overall Ranking

    • Ranked #82

      RG Tiered Ranking

    • x3

      2019 DraftKings FGWC Finalist

    • x2

      2016 DraftKings FGWC Finalist

    My only nit here would be wanting it to be a bit more sport specific. For example, I dont play NBA except when Im totally bored. Im basically free money in NBA….I think I have 6 RG points in NBA last season. why limit that action for all to take. But I like it in general….might have taken it all the way to $10, but they seem to like there new $8 price point for volume

  • waltdeuce

    The guys who like these new rules are the guys who want their kids to have participation trophies. This feels….UnAmerican. Im not close to being a shark. This feels like some people who are pocket watching, getting envious and throwing a tantrum. Im motivated by guys that make a living on on these sites. Just feels awkward, the manner this has taken place.

  • DSofM

    • 249

      RG Overall Ranking

    • Ranked #49

      RG Tiered Ranking

    • 2020 NASCAR Live Finalist

    • Blogger of the Month

    I think they need to have at least one big multi entry contest for low stakes players as well… As someone trying to climb the stakes it’s a bit difficult to jump from a bankroll that can enter a $4 20 max responsibly to a bankroll that can enter an $8 150 max responsibly. If I wanted to play something really really nitty like 2% of my roll each day for MLB GPPs then I’d need to go from $4000 BR to $60000 to be on a level playing field. There needs to be a middle ground established somewhere, either by increasing the entry limit on the $4 tourney or creating a new $1/$2 tournament that allows 100+ entries. I know there are a ton of people that would love to enter 100+ lineups but don’t carry a 60k bankroll to do it either.

  • jimmyrad

    @waltdeuce said...

    The guys who like these new rules are the guys who want their kids to have participation trophies. This feels….UnAmerican. Im not close to being a shark. This feels like some people who are pocket watching, getting envious and throwing a tantrum. Im motivated by guys that make a living on on these sites. Just feels awkward, the manner this has taken place.

    There’s gotta be a way to police the SCUM, you know, the top players max entering the new DIME games (yes, 10 cents), just the SCUM of SCUM.

    SCUM isn’t going to police itself, so someone else has to police that SCUM

  • DSofM

    • 249

      RG Overall Ranking

    • Ranked #49

      RG Tiered Ranking

    • 2020 NASCAR Live Finalist

    • Blogger of the Month

    @waltdeuce said...

    The guys who like these new rules are the guys who want their kids to have participation trophies. This feels….UnAmerican. Im not close to being a shark. This feels like some people who are pocket watching, getting envious and throwing a tantrum. Im motivated by guys that make a living on on these sites. Just feels awkward, the manner this has taken place.

    This is incredibly ignorant… Let me give you a comparison to the game that DFS is often most linked to: Poker…

    Imagine every pro could create a bot to sit every table from the highest of stakes to the penny stakes and play for them without doing any work beyond crafting the bot itself (like the optimizers)… They’d clean up the action so fast that nobody would be profitable except for a very few, nobody would ever climb stakes, and the sport would die as would the dream of doing it professionally. Now lets look at DFS. With just a few clicks I can have youdacao ram his optimal lineups up my tender quarter arcade loving asshole. I don’t really see that as a level playing field.

    I’m not ignorant to think that pro’s don’t do any work. I’m not a pro and I spend hours a day doing this myself as a hobby, so I’m not scoffing at their abilities. But a guy playing a 25k 6 max tournament shouldn’t be playing in a 25c tournament at the same time. This only happens in DFS because once you’ve created your lineups it’s very simple to enter them into any contest of any buyin level, so why wouldn’t the sharks come and ravage the dime/quarter dollar stakes if given the ability to. The issue here is that it creates a very large, disproportionate setup where a very small % of the players win a ton of the money (oh right that’s been happening for years) and its hard as fuck to grind up the stakes nowadays. Imagine if you were learning to play basketball and LeBron James just happened to be in every rec league and YMCA half court game you played in. You’d get fucked up real fast and never have the motivation to go further, and you wouldn’t even be risking any money. I think they need to protect the lower stakes players and doing this is a great step for the future health of DFS.

  • thedude404

    • 2015 FanDuel NBA Playboy Mansion Finalist

    @Cal said...

    This is what this means. Matt Kalish alluded to this change in the interview he did with Dan Back in June. Kudos to DK for taking action. I’d love to see Fanduel do something similar.

    Three years too late. They must have some real brainiacs running the show at these “companies”. See all you cats later………………………………………I will personally enjoy watching either fanduel or draftkings burn to the ground……….

  • fishcakeking

    FCK

    This thread is just hilarious. Time is a flat circle.

    [Multi entry is evil. Single entry is the only real way. ]

    [But pros need to get bang for their buck on their time investment. Prize pools can’t be this big without mme. ]

    And so it went on back and forth until the sun burnt out……

    Ultimately the market will dictate what is best, that is exactly what is happening with dk. The market is forcing them to cater to smaller volume players.

    FCK

  • madmanjayWV

    @Cal said...

    This is what this means. Matt Kalish alluded to this change in the interview he did with Dan Back in June. Kudos to DK for taking action. I’d love to see Fanduel do something similar.

    ~~ love to see ~~ ^^^^^

    Y can’t we all get along and have college fb on DK…..

  • thedude404

    • 2015 FanDuel NBA Playboy Mansion Finalist

    @fishcakeking said...

    This thread is just hilarious. Time is a flat circle.

    [Multi entry is evil. Single entry is the only real way. ]

    [But pros need to get bang for their buck on their time investment. Prize pools can’t be this big without mme. ]

    And so it went on back and forth until the sun burnt out……

    Ultimately the market will dictate what is best, that is exactly what is happening with dk. The market is forcing them to cater to smaller volume players.

    FCK

    LOL the market. they both single handedly are managing to kill the market. how they still get people dumping investment money into either of these two companies is beyond my realm of comprehension…..

  • superstars92

    @FFguru71 said...

    Understood, however, most of the top pros…have won several million dollars, at least. That was my point..for the top guys, at some point, after you have already won that much money, isn’t it purely about greed at that point?? Hell, even with $550,000 if you invest that properly, you could go a long ways on just the interest alone.

    Uhh no where did you get that information that most too pros have won millions of dollars (in profit not revenue). I think only few very have, and even if they have, why does that matter? I’m not a pro and when I see pros winning, it doesn’t bother me. Did you tell tell Steph Curry not to sign the largest contract in NBA history too? He already made 40+ million from his older contract. That’s plenty. Did you ask why he was so greedy to sign the largest one in NBA history? He shoulda signed for less so Ian Clark coulda gotten more. It makes no sense for you to ask that question if you aren’t asking it for all professions.

  • superstars92

    @escot4 said...

    That’s like telling somebody who makes $100k in the stock market, “yeah, but I bet you couldn’t do that if you could only make one trade per week.” Uhh, yeah, that’s obvious

    While I agree with most of your points, this isn’t true. So try this instead. For a 150 max tourney (or 20 max), rather than submitting exact one lineup once, submit one lineup 150 (or 20) times. To me, that is still single entry because it’s one lineup, but submitting the highest EV lineup max times is actually better than submitting 150 lineups 150 times.

    In finance, if you make one trade a week, if you always chose the best trade, you make more than if you diversify. For example, hedge funds who diversify on average make less than if you just invested in one thing, SPY, going back to whatever point in the past. Diversifying is a way to reduce variance, but it doesn’t maximize EV. EV is maximized when you actually don’t diversify. However, when you do diversity, you also increase your chances of winning a tournament because of the reduction in variance, but don’t confuse increasing chances of winning a tournament with maximizing EV because they aren’t the same. I know someone’s going to ask why they aren’t the same, but you are going to have to trust me on this because I don’t want to have to give out a super long mathematical explanation.

    Say in 2000, every trade you made was buying X amount of SPY, you would make so much more money than if instead you did X/5 amount of 5 different products (for X total) every week. Of course, if you did like X amount of say TSLA or AMZN, you make even more than SPY, but my point is diversification does not maximize EV. Yes, you can have like a few diversified portfolios beat a single entry portfolio if you make the right diversification (proves my point that diversification increases chances of winning a GPP), but overall an entire group of diversified portfolios CANNOT beat a single entry portfolio on average in the long run.

    Thus, single entry IS a true indicator of skill in the long run. This was Warren Buffett’s entire point of his hedge fund bet, and it applies directly to DFS. And it’s also why people that invest in hedge funds to maximize return just love burning money, but that’s for them to decide….

  • kroto

    @JoeFlacco05 said...

    I think they need to have at least one big multi entry contest for low stakes players as well… As someone trying to climb the stakes it’s a bit difficult to jump from a bankroll that can enter a $4 20 max responsibly to a bankroll that can enter an $8 150 max responsibly. If I wanted to play something really really nitty like 2% of my roll each day for MLB GPPs then I’d need to go from $4000 BR to $60000 to be on a level playing field. There needs to be a middle ground established somewhere, either by increasing the entry limit on the $4 tourney or creating a new $1/$2 tournament that allows 100+ entries. I know there are a ton of people that would love to enter 100+ lineups but don’t carry a 60k bankroll to do it either.

    this^^^

  • waltdeuce

    @JoeFlacco05 said...

    This is incredibly ignorant… Let me give you a comparison to the game that DFS is often most linked to: Poker…

    Imagine every pro could create a bot to sit every table from the highest of stakes to the penny stakes and play for them without doing any work beyond crafting the bot itself (like the optimizers)… They’d clean up the action so fast that nobody would be profitable except for a very few, nobody would ever climb stakes, and the sport would die as would the dream of doing it professionally. Now lets look at DFS. With just a few clicks I can have youdacao ram his optimal lineups up my tender quarter arcade loving asshole. I don’t really see that as a level playing field.

    I’m not ignorant to think that pro’s don’t do any work. I’m not a pro and I spend hours a day doing this myself as a hobby, so I’m not scoffing at their abilities. But a guy playing a 25k 6 max tournament shouldn’t be playing in a 25c tournament at the same time. This only happens in DFS because once you’ve created your lineups it’s very simple to enter them into any contest of any buyin level, so why wouldn’t the sharks come and ravage the dime/quarter dollar stakes if given the ability to. The issue here is that it creates a very large, disproportionate setup where a very small % of the players win a ton of the money (oh right that’s been happening for years) and its hard as fuck to grind up the stakes nowadays. Imagine if you were learning to play basketball and LeBron James just happened to be in every rec league and YMCA half court game you played in. You’d get fucked up real fast and never have the motivation to go further, and you wouldn’t even be risking any money. I think they need to protect the lower stakes players and doing this is a great step for the future health of DFS.

    DK went communist on us. Theres nothing ignorant about my previous statement. A better compromise can be made.

    Last night i was a little emotional and I had just had 4 wisdom teeth taken out. I was cranky

    The problem with what you’re saying is its anti American. In an open market if there is no rules to stop what they are doing…. then why not take advantage? I have no problem with someone taking advantage of the rules in place. That is simply business.

    Its not ignorant to suggest that DK can cater to the casual player without punishing players who wish to play in gpps with larger entries. Happy medium. How is that ignorant?

    Your Lebron analogy doesnt make sense to me because im a type A personality male who thrives off of competition. Playing someone like Lebron only helps to improve your game. Are you suggesting that good athletes should not be allowed to go in the ymca because its not fair!! Well thats not fair to the good athlete either. So now we punish the good athlete because hes a superior player.

    Its possible to grind your way to a decent level where you can compete with the Sharks. You said yourself you do this as a hobby. Some of us want to actually push the limits with this.

  • waltdeuce

    @jimmyrad said...

    There’s gotta be a way to police the SCUM, you know, the top players max entering the new DIME games (yes, 10 cents), just the SCUM of SCUM.

    SCUM isn’t going to police itself, so someone else has to police that SCUM

    I have no problem with stopping certain earners from playing in the lowest stake tournaments. The issue i have is sport specific. Soccer has no intermediate tournament now. There is basically 1 tournament with a decent payout and it cost $33. In my opinion this is too drastic a change. It essentially creates a class system.

    I have no problem with regulation in these smaller tournaments. There has to be a balance though. The issue isnt the max entry tournaments. Its the fact there are no tournaments to replace that intermediate level where you can win big money and compete with the best.

  • pickles

    @JoeFlacco05 said...

    I think they need to have at least one big multi entry contest for low stakes players as well… As someone trying to climb the stakes it’s a bit difficult to jump from a bankroll that can enter a $4 20 max responsibly to a bankroll that can enter an $8 150 max responsibly. If I wanted to play something really really nitty like 2% of my roll each day for MLB GPPs then I’d need to go from $4000 BR to $60000 to be on a level playing field. There needs to be a middle ground established somewhere, either by increasing the entry limit on the $4 tourney or creating a new $1/$2 tournament that allows 100+ entries. I know there are a ton of people that would love to enter 100+ lineups but don’t carry a 60k bankroll to do it either.

    Bingo

  • waltdeuce

    @urbanachiever said...

    I’m a lurker, but had to create an account to say this.

    What does this do to people who want to play 150 entries, and could do it in the $3 to $5 contests, but can’t do it when they inevitably have the $8 GPP be the next level over $5, like they have now for MLB? Last season for NFL, I could max enter the big $3 to $5 GPPs for $450 or $600, which was doable at my level. It’s not doable when it’s suddenly $1200. I could compete against the big guys in the $3 GPPs because I could play 150 lineups like they did. Now, my options are I have to play 20 lineups in GPPs that will have lower prize pools, or play the higher prize pool contests but be unable to compete because I can’t afford to max enter with my bank roll.

    DK has basically forced me into being a low stakes player now. I’m now contributing a fraction of what I was before to build up those prize pools ($80-$100 versus $450-$600). I’m sure I’m not the only one in that position.

    Good post! This is exactly how i feel. I built my bankroll up from scraps in order to compete in the gpps you mentioned.

  • db730

    RotoGrinders Media Director

    • 855

      RG Overall Ranking

    • 2016 DraftKings FFWC Finalist

    • 2016 DraftKings FBBWC Finalist

    @urbanachiever said...

    I’m a lurker, but had to create an account to say this.

    What does this do to people who want to play 150 entries, and could do it in the $3 to $5 contests, but can’t do it when they inevitably have the $8 GPP be the next level over $5, like they have now for MLB? Last season for NFL, I could max enter the big $3 to $5 GPPs for $450 or $600, which was doable at my level. It’s not doable when it’s suddenly $1200. I could compete against the big guys in the $3 GPPs because I could play 150 lineups like they did. Now, my options are I have to play 20 lineups in GPPs that will have lower prize pools, or play the higher prize pool contests but be unable to compete because I can’t afford to max enter with my bank roll.

    DK has basically forced me into being a low stakes player now. I’m now contributing a fraction of what I was before to build up those prize pools ($80-$100 versus $450-$600). I’m sure I’m not the only one in that position.

    I think this is a legit question and applies to a ton of users IMO. I’m in favor of the limiting the number of games high volume players can play and where they can play them, but drawing that line in the sand w/ respect to entry limits in low dollar games is silly. If they wanted to trend toward making 75% of all games under $5 turns 20 entry max….cool. But for a lot of people there is something fun about building 150 lineups in a $3 or quarter arcade and it not blowing up ones bankroll. Again….not ALL games need to be this, but I also think getting rid of them altogether is a mistake.

  • DSofM

    • 249

      RG Overall Ranking

    • Ranked #49

      RG Tiered Ranking

    • 2020 NASCAR Live Finalist

    • Blogger of the Month

    @waltdeuce said...

    DK went communist on us. Theres nothing ignorant about my previous statement. A better compromise can be made.

    Last night i was a little emotional and I had just had 4 wisdom teeth taken out. I was cranky

    The problem with what you’re saying is its anti American. In an open market if there is no rules to stop what they are doing…. then why not take advantage? I have no problem with someone taking advantage of the rules in place. That is simply business.

    Its not ignorant to suggest that DK can cater to the casual player without punishing players who wish to play in gpps with larger entries. Happy medium. How is that ignorant?

    Your Lebron analogy doesnt make sense to me because im a type A personality male who thrives off of competition. Playing someone like Lebron only helps to improve your game. Are you suggesting that good athletes should not be allowed to go in the ymca because its not fair!! Well thats not fair to the good athlete either. So now we punish the good athlete because hes a superior player.

    Its possible to grind your way to a decent level where you can compete with the Sharks. You said yourself you do this as a hobby. Some of us want to actually push the limits with this.

    Frankly it doesn’t really matter to me if it’s “anti american” because I’m not American so I really couldn’t possibly care less about how you feel this goes against your American values.

    “In an open market if there is no rules to stop what they are doing…. then why not take advantage? I have no problem with someone taking advantage of the rules in place. That is simply business. Its not ignorant to suggest that DK can cater to the casual player without punishing players who wish to play in gpps with larger entries.”

    This is basically what I said. I agree with all this. I have no problem with the pros that took advantage of how the contests were structured before. The issue I had was that the sites LET IT HAPPEN. They’re working towards fixing that and I want to support that.

    “Your Lebron analogy doesnt make sense to me because im a type A personality male who thrives off of competition. Playing someone like Lebron only helps to improve your game. Are you suggesting that good athletes should not be allowed to go in the ymca because its not fair!! Well thats not fair to the good athlete either. So now we punish the good athlete because hes a superior player. Its possible to grind your way to a decent level where you can compete with the Sharks. You said yourself you do this as a hobby. Some of us want to actually push the limits with this.”

    You need to look at what I said differently. Let’s say you saw basketball on TV and wanted to try it out. You walk onto the court and the 9 best players in the world are in the game with you. You never get the ball, they’re all smarter, they’re all faster and they have the game figured out already. It would take a long, long time for you to get up to their speed. The primary difference in why this could still be ok in basketball and why it’s not ok in DFS is the financial aspect in it. Imagine if all these YMCA games cost you money to play as well if it helps me make my point. You wouldn’t keep playing if you kept getting rolled by the best in the world, and you sure as hell wouldn’t see a profit for a very long time, if ever. I mean, if you dropped everything right now and tried to make the NBA, could you? I think your chances would be 1-1,000,000, if not worse. Same goes for becoming an elite DFS player, and it becomes even harder when they’re bumhunting the lowest stakes possible. That’s the point I’m making. I have a positive ROI over my time but only slightly and it’s hard to accurately evaluate how good I am. Did I run how periodically? Am I shark running bad? Am I a fish running good? I don’t know because I’m exposed to the entire player pool from the beginning. In poker, if you grind cash games, you start at 1c2c. Guess who you don’t see at 1c2c? The Pros. So you know if you’re beating the playerss at that level you can begin to move up, and up, and eventually get to the point where you’re playing high stakes with the pros. Don’t get me wrong I want to climb the DFS ladder too. I’ve done it with Poker but the setup to climb the ladder in the DFS world is considerably more difficult, especially since I arrived to the game quiet a lot later than most. Yeah it’s a “hobby” for me, but I probably spend more time than some pro’s do (because I’m not on their level yet and haven’t done this long enough) and I’d say I’m more of an exception than the rule when it comes to an amateur player putting effort into this game.

  • DSofM

    • 249

      RG Overall Ranking

    • Ranked #49

      RG Tiered Ranking

    • 2020 NASCAR Live Finalist

    • Blogger of the Month

    @db730 said...

    I think this is a legit question and applies to a ton of users IMO. I’m in favor of the limiting the number of games high volume players can play and where they can play them, but drawing that line in the sand w/ respect to entry limits in low dollar games is silly. If they wanted to trend toward making 75% of all games under $5 turns 20 entry max….cool. But for a lot of people there is something fun about building 150 lineups in a $3 or quarter arcade and it not blowing up ones bankroll. Again….not ALL games need to be this, but I also think getting rid of them altogether is a mistake.

    Please help us push for this. Low stakes players don’t hate 50-150 entry contests, they hate playing $1 contests with guys that are sitting $5000 contests as well. It just doesn’t make sense.

  • 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).