INDUSTRY FORUM

Comments

  • DraftKings_CM

    • DraftKings Representative

    On behalf of DraftKings, we are proud to announce our newly created Community team. Our group was formed to listen, engage, and advocate for the player community at large while championing our industry leading commitment to a world class game experience. We are here to represent your feedback inside the walls of DraftKings, because your ideas can help us deliver an increasingly better experience for all players. You can read our introductory post here: https://rotogrinders.com/threads/draftkings-cm-is-now-on-rotogrinders-2496208

    Now it’s your chance – what would you like to know? Do you have a suggestion you would like to share? We will do our best to answer all honest and respectful questions you post in this thread, in turn we hope to help players like you have a better understanding of how the world’s largest fantasy sports ecosystem works. Please allow us some time before responding to your questions and comments, you deserve well thought out answers – and that takes time.

    - DraftKings Community Team

  • Zieg30

    @DraftKings_CM said...

    Yesterday we added the MLB $25K HOME PLATE [3 ENTRY MAX, 2X MIN CASH thanks to the feedback of the community, and, and we intend to keep running this contest format all week as an experiment to determine the vitality of a 2x mincash + flatter payout structure vs our standard structures.

    I appreciate your attempt to respond to feedback on this forum, but this is not a viable experiment that will actually determine the vitality of a 2x min cash + flatter payout structure.

    For example, I STRONGLY prefer a 2x min-cash and the flatter payout structure espoused in this forum thread, but I wouldn’t ordinarily enter a GPP of 25K when a 100K or 200K GPP is being offered, even when the latter has a worse structure. So I am not joining your experimental GPP though I strongly favour the structure! Now, I would put MORE ENTRIES into the 100K or 200K GPP if it had a flatter payout structure, but even with the worse one I’m likely to enter it to the exclusion of anything else.

    A true experiment of vitality would actually try using a flatter payout structure and 2x min cash in your MAIN $3-10/entry GPP of the night for a week, the one with 100-300k as the prize pool. I expect that it would thrive.

    In sum, adding a random small GPP IS NOT A VALID EXPERIMENT. Throw us a bone with some legit GPPs with a flatter payout structure. Thanks!

  • hendog

    • 510

      RG Overall Ranking

    • Ranked #69

      RG Tiered Ranking

    • 2017 DraftKings FFWC Finalist

    @Zieg30 said...

    For example, I STRONGLY prefer a 2x min-cash and the flatter payout structure espoused in this forum thread, but I wouldn’t ordinarily enter a GPP of 25K when a 100K or 200K GPP is being offered, even when the latter has a worse structure. So I am not joining your experimental GPP though I strongly favour the structure! Now, I would put MORE ENTRIES into the 100K or 200K GPP if it had a flatter payout structure, but even with the worse one I’m likely to enter it to the exclusion of anything else.

    Same here, OP.

    Specifically, the flatness of the payouts matters more for bigger GPPs. In a small enough GPP it may be reasonable for first place to get more than 10%. At least, it matters less to me because it’s actually reasonable that you could win one of these now and then. Bigger GPPs, though, there are more places to spread out that equity, and you need to sustain yourself for a lot longer on other placings before you finally take one down, if you ever do.

  • mike291md

    Flatten out all the GPP’s. There are some excellent payout structure examples detailed in this thread. Would love to see them applied to ALL GPP’s not a singular event. Also, please lower the rake. High rake chokes player profit and incentive to keep playing.

  • awilson45

    2X min cash filled super early, like 5:30ish. Would love to see one for more $ guaranteed, as Zieg said.

  • jhpog

    Today’s GPP is absolutely absurd on DK. 100k to first, 1k to 7th. 100x difference between 1st and 7th when theres 63,700 entries is 10x too much at least, and realistically that’d still be a bit too much

  • ThatStunna

    • 14

      RG Overall Ranking

    • Ranked #13

      RG Tiered Ranking

    • 2016 DraftKings FFWC Finalist

    • 2017 DraftKings FBWC Finalist

    @mambaland said...

    It is my opinion that the high roller players prefer the top heavy payouts and the big pay day…it helps that they can multi entry to increase those odds.

    I would also say draftkings sends out surveys to let people give opinions on stuff like payouts. Keep in mind many many more people are not on RG threads than are on them so they have a voice as well.

    I’d prefer structures with 5-10% to first in general for large tournaments.

  • ThatStunna

    • 14

      RG Overall Ranking

    • Ranked #13

      RG Tiered Ranking

    • 2016 DraftKings FFWC Finalist

    • 2017 DraftKings FBWC Finalist

    @DraftKings_CM said...

    Thank you all for submitting great questions and comments. We are honored to have so much interest from this community and are working diligently to respond to everyone. Based on your posts, we are seeing a few key themes that we will address:

    1. Prizing /payout structures, and how we are trying to balance the expectations of all players
    2. Commissions and the sustainability of the contest ecosystem
    3. Discussion of our limited entry game formats
      1. Requests to provide more options to choose from to appeal to a wide range of player needs
      2. Requests to enable 150 entries on a small bankroll (exceptions to our 20max restriction for contests under $5)
    4. Ideas for future platform enhancements
    5. How we make DraftGroup (aka slate) decisions

    We will address each of these topics in more depth in the coming days. Please allow us some time to post responses, you deserve well thought out answers. We’re on it!

    1. I generally prefer lower payouts to first in order to raise the min cash and/or number of players who cash. These considerations are far more important to me in big contests.

    2. It is important to see where the rake money is going; flash bonuses, for instance, were a tangible promotion to get people interested in other sports. I would like lower rake unless there’s a strong argument that the money is being used to attract new players, etc.

    I do think there are lots of opportunities to make more money with lower rake contests; Fanduel’s 100 person leagues pull in a good amount of revenue with lower rake, while Draftkings leagues tend to be few in number. I realize that Draftkings tried some of these, but most of them filled and I would rather have seen them continue, even if there were no new ones say three hours before lock.

    3. I think it’s good to have low stakes 150 max, even if it’s only once in a while.

    4. The ability to swap up, especially through the app, is really important. People will be quite upset the next time a stud pitcher gets scratched or an important hitter’s replacement is $100 more. I’ve started skipping slates on DK but playing them on FD just because I don’t want to possibly spend 45 extra minutes fixing lineups.

    Yes, the lineups page is not very good. Adding a default setting (i.e. only show 10-20 lineups) that could be tweaked on the page, so it didn’t lag relentlessly, might be a good quick fix.

  • Babelito84

    Have all of your GPPs that are 150/333/444 have a 2x minimum cash. You win 2 and lose 2 for example and you end up down almost a third contest. Ex; 150 gpp x 4 = $600, win twice at $250, make $500. You still lose $100. 2x scenario for in cash you push.

    Flatten prize pools. I recently finished 4 points behind the winner in a large GPP. 1st won 25k, i was in 6th and won $1500. That’s way too top heavy.

  • tamparoor

    No one will agree with me but I think every contest should be single entry. Don’t care if prizes are lower The max entry guys have found a way to take advantage of every contest

    Make it all single entries and it people get caught selling lineups instant ban

  • Stewburtx8

    • 2012 FanDuel WFBC Finalist

    @Zieg30 said...

    I appreciate your attempt to respond to feedback on this forum, but this is not a viable experiment that will actually determine the vitality of a 2x min cash + flatter payout structure.

    For example, I STRONGLY prefer a 2x min-cash and the flatter payout structure espoused in this forum thread, but I wouldn’t ordinarily enter a GPP of 25K when a 100K or 200K GPP is being offered, even when the latter has a worse structure. So I am not joining your experimental GPP though I strongly favour the structure! Now, I would put MORE ENTRIES into the 100K or 200K GPP if it had a flatter payout structure, but even with the worse one I’m likely to enter it to the exclusion of anything else.

    A true experiment of vitality would actually try using a flatter payout structure and 2x min cash in your MAIN $3-10/entry GPP of the night for a week, the one with 100-300k as the prize pool. I expect that it would thrive.

    In sum, adding a random small GPP IS NOT A VALID EXPERIMENT. Throw us a bone with some legit GPPs with a flatter payout structure. Thanks!

    This is the problem with what DraftKings does a lot of times to try to “prove” a point. They put out experimental GPP’s based on user feedback that just do not have a great chance from the beginning. Now the $20- 3 max GPP yesterday did fill early which is encouraging. But today for example, there is a $25 buy-in $500k guaranteed contest with $100k to first (150 max entries, top heavy structure, 1.5x min cash). There is also a $20 buy-in $30k contest with $3k to first (3 max entries, 2x min cash, flatter payout structure). The setup and structure of the 2nd contest is MUCH better. But it is 16-17x smaller in size with 33x+ less money up top. It is just hard to justify playing the 2nd one over the 1st with that big of a difference in prize pools. Maybe it’s the wrong mindset but if you happen to hit the nuts that night, you would be sick knowing you won $3k instead of $100k (or even $10k-40k for a top 5 finish).

    Now if there was just one contest that was $20 buy-in, maybe 20 entry max, $250k guaranteed with $25k to first and 2x min cash, I think that contest would thrive. I currently enter 1-2 entries per night but might enter 5-10 entries in that type of contest. But it needs to be somewhat on the same level or replacing the current contest offerings at the same price point. Are people really playing a contest to win strictly $100k but won’t play to win $25k? That is the only logic I see to continuing to have these top heavy structures almost across the board. The Milly Maker is one thing, but why has DraftKings prioritized the $100k or $50k number up top as such a big deal in their main GPP’s?

  • bigez952

    @DraftKings_CM said...

    We hear you loud and clear!

    Yesterday we added the MLB $25K HOME PLATE [3 ENTRY MAX, 2X MIN CASH thanks to the feedback of the community, and, and we intend to keep running this contest format all week as an experiment to determine the vitality of a 2x mincash + flatter payout structure vs our standard structures. Great job RotoGrinders, we loved the suggestion! And congrats to muttcutts who came in 1st place for $2,500!

    https://www.draftkings.com/lobby#/MLB/0/All

    I missed that this contest has ran the last two days but did withdraw from my normal $12 SE Base Hit GPP to get into this one today. The payout structures between the $12 and $20 are nearly identical for the top 10 which I am more than fine to give up knowing that both pay out top 22-23% but the min cash is $18 vs. $40. I know I will never win a GPP and am mainly a cash game player but in the past have seen success by entering my cash lineup into GPP’s. Since I have started tracking my play I averaging cashing in GPP’s around 35% of the time with my one cash lineup which used to be profitable with 2X min cashes and the occasional 3-7X cash in there. However with the current structures I am getting killed when most of my cashes are $12 winning $18 or $12 winning $20. As a player who will never win a GPP and only has 1 top 10 in my career a decent structure that rewards lineups that finish in the top 5-15% and not just the top 0.1% is important.

    That being said $20 is a higher price point then I would really like to play everyday so it would be nice if this type of structure was also offered in the $5-$10 range. Since moving more contests to a flatter payout structure is important to me continuing to play I am willing to go outside of my normal daily play to support this tournament filling early in the hopes it opens the doors for better offerings any several price points in the future.

  • sjs1890

    • 2013 DraftStreet DSBC Finalist

    @Stewburtx8 said...

    This is the problem with what DraftKings does a lot of times to try to “prove” a point. They put out experimental GPP’s based on user feedback that just do not have a great chance from the beginning. Now the $20- 3 max GPP yesterday did fill early which is encouraging. But today for example, there is a $25 buy-in $500k guaranteed contest with $100k to first (150 max entries, top heavy structure, 1.5x min cash). There is also a $20 buy-in $30k contest with $3k to first (3 max entries, 2x min cash, flatter payout structure). The setup and structure of the 2nd contest is MUCH better. But it is 16-17x smaller in size with 33x+ less money up top. It is just hard to justify playing the 2nd one over the 1st with that big of a difference in prize pools. Maybe it’s the wrong mindset but if you happen to hit the nuts that night, you would be sick knowing you won $3k instead of $100k (or even $10k-40k for a top 5 finish).

    Now if there was just one contest that was $20 buy-in, maybe 20 entry max, $250k guaranteed with $25k to first and 2x min cash, I think that contest would thrive. I currently enter 1-2 entries per night but might enter 5-10 entries in that type of contest. But it needs to be somewhat on the same level or replacing the current contest offerings at the same price point. Are people really playing a contest to win strictly $100k but won’t play to win $25k? That is the only logic I see to continuing to have these top heavy structures almost across the board. The Milly Maker is one thing, but why has DraftKings prioritized the $100k or $50k number up top as such a big deal in their main GPP’s?

    Yeah it would be nice if the people at DK would actually take this “experiment” more seriously. The people at DK cant really think this $20 3 max entry is really a test to its vitality? Really? This payout structure needs to be tried out on the main $3 or $4 gpp for this “experiment” to have any credibility.

  • KindGuy

    Well a high roller won the $100,000 last night so that’s one less person who will complain about the payout structure XD

  • awesemo

    • 1

      RG Overall Ranking

    • Ranked #1

      RG Tiered Ranking

    • x3

      2018 DraftKings FFWC Finalist

    • 2017 DraftKings FFWC Finalist

    I enjoy playing all of the formats like Arcade, Pick’Em and Showdown. This year the MLB Pick’em slates have been all hitters, whereas last year there were pitchers as well. I feel like my team is incomplete without having a pitcher. What is the rationale behind only having batters available to roster this season?

  • webbm1

    @awesemo said...

    I enjoy playing all of the formats like Arcade, Pick’Em and Showdown. This year the MLB Pick’em slates have been all hitters, whereas last year there were pitchers as well. I feel like my team is incomplete without having a pitcher. What is the rationale behind only having batters available to roster this season?

    Agree with Awesemo, PickEm with just hitters just feels like a lucky dip, lottery. Last year I think the first 2 Tiers were pitchers first tier studs and second tier gas cans.

  • zombiekopitar

    @sjs1890 said...

    Yeah it would be nice if the people at DK would actually take this “experiment” more seriously. The people at DK cant really think this $20 3 max entry is really a test to its vitality? Really? This payout structure needs to be tried out on the main $3 or $4 gpp for this “experiment” to have any credibility.

    Yeah it’s not even an experiment, it’s a needed readjustment. They just keep jacking up the top heavy payout structure and are assuming it’s what everyone wants. I really don’t think lowering these top prizes are going to drive down willingness to enter what so ever.

    I actually am pretty indifferent about x2 minimum cash though….if you’re going to tell me that for a $10 contest at equal rake I’d cash $16 at 25% or $20 at 20% I honestly think I’d take the former.
    The bigger problem for me is a more even redistribution of the top 15%.

    Considering I’m a single/low entry player it gets frustrating when I’ve had a pretty good month with a lot of <5% entries and haven’t built my bankroll like I have previously.
    Like in tonight’s $25 MLB gpp even if it was changed to a 75k top prize that extra 25k could get redistributed in a more logical way. It’s the same payout for finishing 9% and 22% and that is just ridiculous.

    edit-I lost a bunch of my post when submitted. Will add a couple more ideas later.

  • IlliniTwig

    Like everyone else, my #1 wish is a flatter payout structure. I also like the single entry GPP’s. Regarding more, and larger, SE GPPs mentioned above, that would be wonderful but I understand why you would not want to guarantee those. But how about offering a single entry with a minimal guarantee and no total entry limit. Total prizepool determined at lineup lock. If I remember correctly, that’s how online poker tourny’s did it.

  • mike291md

    @zombiekopitar said...

    I actually am pretty indifferent about x2 minimum cash though….if you’re going to tell me that for a $10 contest at equal rake I’d cash $16 at 25% or $20 at 20% I honestly think I’d take the former.
    The bigger problem for me is a more even redistribution of the top 15%.

    Why take the former? You tack on high rake with the former and you’re basically losing money by placing. You shouldn’t feel punished for placing just because it isn’t top 10. If rake was lowered substantially then maybe I’d be open to taking less but with rake this high and showing no signs of lowering, I would vote for the latter.

    By taking the former, with high rake, it leaves you like no room to have a bad day and be alright in terms of bankroll. You’re bad days are massive hits now because when you placed the other day, it wasn’t that much of a payout. It shouldn’t work this way, in my opinion. When you place you should get back at least double. One placing lineup should cover the value of two buy-ins. Otherwise, you’re going to sink fast bankroll wise unless you’re a beast and win at a ridiculous rate to offset your losses (which most people aren’t).

    It’s really simple for the websites and the equation is….if you want to keep people playing you need to reward them enough to maintain some sort of bankroll while also keeping the games as clean as possible. That doesn’t mean everyone is a winner, it means if you place you don’t feel like you just took some sort of loss because of rake and lack of payout. Restructure your rake and restructure your payouts and do something to clean up the lineup sharing/selling nonsense and you will win a lot of people back.

    Do what you’ve been doing and expect to keep losing revenue.

  • KindGuy

    The number 1 complaint in this thread is payout structure yet a 30+% to first GPP last night filled without any problems. Like 65,000 entries.

    Just like the no late swap complaints, it appears most DFS players are all bark and no bite. People will play no matter what.

  • zombiekopitar

    @mike291md said...

    Why take the former? You tack on high rake with the former and you’re basically losing money by placing. You shouldn’t feel punished for placing just because it isn’t top 10. If rake was lowered substantially then maybe I’d be open to taking less but with rake this high and showing no signs of lowering, I would vote for the latter.

    By taking the former, with high rake, it leaves you like no room to have a bad day and be alright in terms of bankroll. You’re bad days are massive hits now because when you placed the other day, it wasn’t that much of a payout. It shouldn’t work this way, in my opinion. When you place you should get back at least double. One placing lineup should cover the value of two buy-ins. Otherwise, you’re going to sink fast bankroll wise unless you’re a beast and win at a ridiculous rate to offset your losses (which most people aren’t).

    It’s really simple for the websites and the equation is….if you want to keep people playing you need to reward them enough to maintain some sort of bankroll while also keeping the games as clean as possible. That doesn’t mean everyone is a winner, it means if you place you don’t feel like you just took some sort of loss because of rake and lack of payout. Restructure your rake and restructure your payouts and do something to clean up the lineup sharing/selling nonsense and you will win a lot of people back.

    Do what you’ve been doing and expect to keep losing revenue.

    It depends how they structure the bottom end. Obviously the rake is a huge problem in itself but that’s not my point.

    Having an extra 5% of the field in the minimum cash is not nearly as detrimental long term as having half the prize pool only going to the very top or whatever it is. There needs to be cash redistributed to keep contests robust and I know there can be a happy medium where finishing in 20-25% range can minimum cash, 20-15% double their money, and then 15% and on has a fair increase until you reach the top.

    The problem is DK lowered the minimum cash threshold while raising the rake…so they’re associated together even though they are not fixed with each other. It’s when it’s all added together along with top heavy payout that is becomes such a problem.

  • tamparoor

    Make all mma contest single entry Ridiculous that a user can make 150 lineups with the fighter pool selection so small especially with all the recent cancelled fights.

  • coachspitz

    bigger SE contests at all price points with a solid top prize. They don’t even have to be single entry, can go up to like 10 max to make the contest bigger and I would still approach it like I do SE. agree on flatter payouts and 2x min.

  • hendog

    • 510

      RG Overall Ranking

    • Ranked #69

      RG Tiered Ranking

    • 2017 DraftKings FFWC Finalist

    @elementasrat said...

    The number 1 complaint in this thread is payout structure yet a 30+% to first GPP last night filled without any problems. Like 65,000 entries.

    Just like the no late swap complaints, it appears most DFS players are all bark and no bite. People will play no matter what.

    This is a silly argument because there is no way to know what the demand would be if payout structures had been different long-term, and players’ bankrolls had been shaped accordingly. There is no counterfactual here.

    I for one chose not to play it.

  • 615SCRATCHMAN

    I just wish yall would fix the player cards. This card makes it look like the score of 103-90 was won by GS when in fact it was SA that won. The score on the right should reflect the home team?
    DATE OPP RESULT MIN FGM-FGA FG% 3PM-3PA 3P% FTM-FTA FT% REB AST BLK STL PF TO PTS FPTS SALARY
    04/22 GS 103 – 90 37 7-15 .467 0-2 .000 0-1 .000 7 2 0 2 3 1 14 29.25 $5,900
    04/19 GS 97 – 110 31 4-11 .364 1-5 .200 2-4 .500 6 2 0 1 4 0 11 24.0 $5,100
    04/16 GS 101 - 116 37 6-12 .500 0-3 .000 0-0 - 5 3 1 3 3 2 12 29.75 $4,900 04/14 GS 92 – 113

  • Zieg30

    @elementasrat said...

    The number 1 complaint in this thread is payout structure yet a 30+% to first GPP last night filled without any problems. Like 65,000 entries.

    Just like the no late swap complaints, it appears most DFS players are all bark and no bite. People will play no matter what.

    I have no plans to ever join anything but the largest GPP of the night in the $3-10 range any given night in any sport I play, but I would add MORE entries into those with a flatter payout structure.

    DK has vocal near-unanimous feedback here on that point.

  • 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