NFL FORUM

Comments

  • colinwdrew

    • 254

      RG Overall Ranking

    • 2020 DraftKings FHWC Champion

    • 2021 DraftKings FHWC Finalist

    So DK tweeted out millionaire maker ownership here http://playbook.draftkings.com/nfl/millionaire-maker-percent-owned-week-3/ which as of 230pm still includes ownership data for games that have not yet started. IMO this is a big leak and should never happen. It also seems like something that your average analyst should probably not have access too, and able to tell his buddies who is owned and who the best players have. Hey did you know that CSURAM has Randall Cobb going late? Given that they can access the macro results it seems probable they can access specific users during and/or before contests start.

    They definitely should no be sharing it publicly, if they’re going to do it just list the full rosters in the contest and call it a day.

    • Link
    • Last Updated 3 years ago
  • jimfred82

    • Blogger of the Month

    @mstutts2799 said...

    Is anyone else appreciating this? THIS RIGHT THERE is the best post on this thread.

    yep, liked that one myself. maybe people haven’t seen the commercial…. although the fact that DK has 157% of the commercials on any athletic event pretty much makes that an impossibility.

  • bmac5888

    • Blogger of the Month

    http://espn.go.com/chalk/story/_/id/13827269/fanduel-permanently-bans-employees-playing-dfs-money-amid-inquiry

  • hustlemania83

    Lol, on Jason Robins OTL interview he said “He(ethan) is a great kid, he did nothing wrong”
    Then he says one minute later “It would seem alarming employees are playing on other sites”..

  • rainbowtroutman

    @Ryazan said...

    you are so confusing. Are you a Trout fan, an Indians fan, or a raiders fan???

    Raiders and indians—don’t care about trout except the fish

  • IronMonkey415

    Good fish to eat.

  • Ryazan

    • x3

      2015 FanDuel WFFC Finalist

    • x2

      2015 FanDuel WFBC Finalist

    @rainbowtroutman said...

    Raiders and indians—don’t care about trout except the fish

    I’ll be honest, I’ve never tried an actual trout before, but that’s only cuz mike trout exists, and I feel uncomfortable about it.

  • Zialum

    @Ryazan said...

    can you give me an example? I just can’t think of one. In your case, the 75% owned guy would be someone like Cobb if every single Packer WR got injured besides him. And the 5% guy would who? What 8K WR that has a great matchup ends up 5% owned? The only reason studs get low owned is because they either have bad matchup, are a game-time decision with a legit injury, bad weather conditions, or a bad QB (despite the good WR matchup itself). Like if Klaussen was QB and Alshon Jeffery was finally back from injury and they were playing the soft pass D of lets say SF. Jeffery will be 5% owned, its possible. I still want the 75% Cobb because it is so so much more likely to me that he will go off, and I can just worry about the rest of my lineup going off. The percent owned just doesn’t matter to me.

    I don’t think you are factoring in the implied odds (I don’t know what else to call it) that comes from knowing Player B is much less owned than Player A. I would never pick Player B just because he is less owned, but it deserves to be factored in.

    I understand your argument of putting the best team out and that is your best chance of winning. I agree with this, but owning lesser owned players changes the prize payout for you. If all of your guys go off, it’s less likely other guys will go off, because there is only so many touchdowns to go around in a week. Less people own these guys, so less people clog up the leaderboard. This essentially changes the payout structure. It might be a push when it comes to bubbling, but as your score increases, your edge increases.

    Can I infer ownership %s through reason and research? A bit. But not as well as somebody staring at the data. Somebody that can plug it into a formula to maximize the implied odds and fantasy points.

    You still need to score as many points as possible, but by picking lesser owned players you are also high on, you can score less and win more. It’s like suited connectors in poker. And the fact that you’ve found a successful strategy that doesn’t factor this in doesn’t take away from how powerful it is.

  • rainbowtroutman

    @Ryazan said...

    I’ll be honest, I’ve never tried an actual trout before, but that’s only cuz mike trout exists, and I feel uncomfortable about it.

    now thats funny

  • pburghpens22

    I just wanna say that Ryazan makes the best points out of anyone in this thread

  • Ryazan

    • x3

      2015 FanDuel WFFC Finalist

    • x2

      2015 FanDuel WFBC Finalist

    @rainbowtroutman said...

    now thats funny

    the really funny thing is, im being serious. Something about the name affiliation has made me stay away from Trout itself even though i love seafood….i eat shrimp, tuna, salmon, haddock, cod, swordfish. But I can’t pull the trigger with putting a mike trout in my mouth

  • rainbowtroutman

    @Ryazan said...

    the really funny thing is, im being serious. Something about the name affiliation has made me stay away from Trout itself even though i love seafood….i eat shrimp, tuna, salmon, haddock, cod, swordfish. But I can’t pull the trigger with putting a mike trout in my mouth

    you made me laugh for 5 min—seriously tho its good eating

  • ComicFx

    This post don’t have a hair if it can’t hit 200 pages… I gave up this morning when I finally got resolution with the site announcements and coming actions but you die hards make me proud! #LockItDown

  • Frickman81

    #losersneverdie

  • IronMonkey415

    This topic will never die.
    Remember to Stay gold, Ponyboy…Stay gold

  • realdeals

    @rainbowtroutman said...

    And I used Reed in my cash games and thats why I suck—lol——except i’m a Raiders fan—but actually I did good im my cash games last week,no thanks to Reed or Cobb

    Hah I’m a Chargers fan. I actually got really lucky last week in cash. I knew J Mathews was really low % and I I still took him b/c I loved him last week. But that same thinking also worked for me by taking forte instead of L Murray. I knew the latter would be much more owned, but I liked forte more. Also lucky not having Cobb.

  • realdeals

    @Ryazan said...

    the really funny thing is, im being serious. Something about the name affiliation has made me stay away from Trout itself even though i love seafood….i eat shrimp, tuna, salmon, haddock, cod, swordfish. But I can’t pull the trigger with putting a mike trout in my mouth

    Hahah. You should put some Trout in your mouth. Rainbow trout is my favorite. M Trout is only 23 and hasn’t been in the league that long.

  • mellofellowsu

    @Zialum said...

    You still need to score as many points as possible, but by picking lesser owned players you are also high on, you can score less and win more. It’s like suited connectors in poker. And the fact that you’ve found a successful strategy that doesn’t factor this in doesn’t take away from how powerful it is.

    I think Bales said it best in his book, said something to the effect of it’s much easier to construct a roster that beats everyone else’s, rather than constructing the highest scoring roster possible.

  • PSSEndeavors7

    What a thread. So many discussion points that I can’t believe anybody suggested locking it. I just made it through all 163 pages and sure, there is some crap that you have to filter through. But on the whole, some great questions were brought up and discussed.

    I want to start by saying I have been thoroughly disappointed with the way DK has handled this situation. Their reaction and response (or lack thereof) has been way more upsetting than the initial tweet ever was. They have looked like a poorly run company every step of the way during this ordeal. Why has FanDuel beaten them to a statement twice now (not to mention more or less the same statement)? Why did it take 1.5 weeks to come up with that solution in the first place? I’ve seen some of you argue that they needed time to get the information straight…but if anything, the CEO proved that’s not the case. He got on OTL and had no clue how many employees within DK have been playing DFS on other sites. Don’t you think that would’ve been step one of an internal investigation? And don’t try to argue he didn’t have the numbers in front of him. Why do CEOs make the big money? Is their job inherently more difficult on a day to day basis? Generally, no…but they assume more risk than anybody else. So when a PR scandal is threatening the bottom line, a good CEO would be damned sure to have EVERY number imaginable and work relentlessly to make sure the situation is rectified. And what really blows my mind, how did they not foresee this as a problem in the first place? Even the most basic and broad risk management analysis would show customer trust is one of the single most important (high risk) elements of their business. Was risk analysis performed and ignored? Was it an oversight? We don’t know but either way it sheds a very poor light on management. I’m sure this CEO has done good things. They seem well-funded which at the very least shows some wealthy individuals believe in him. But this situation was handled poorly at best.

    To the main point, the fact that this data was accessible before 4pm lock is indefensible. I think everybody agrees on that point. And that is definitely the issue that every DFSer should unite under. Whether Haskell used that to his advantage or not is a complete unknown and seems like something the AG will get to the bottom of. Nobody can say definitively either way but it looks like we are on our way to finding out. I don’t think people are in the wrong for bringing up the results and raising questions about them. But the endless back and forth banter on whether those are sustainable does take away from the main problem —- data accessibility. So instead of debating his results, a lot more attention should be directed towards DK for allowing access before lock.

    I must say that I’ve been a bit disappointed in the lack of reaction from the most prominent voices in DFS. As people who make a living doing this, I would assume y’all would be the most concerned with its future well-being. The bottom line is DK dropped the ball and then waited 1.5 weeks before attempting to really fix the issue. ALL anger should be directed towards their management and lack of response. The attempts to hush people on here for voicing their concerns is just silly and the way some people went about it was downright rude and insulting. Namely, to assume every concerned person has lost money in DFS is asinine and comes off as arrogant. I think those posts are way more harmful than anything posted about Haskell’s results. From what I read, there was no head hunting aside from the very occasional idiotic post. It was merely people asking questions and discussing ramifications. Of course, I started reading a bit late so perhaps the head hunting posts were just deleted and I missed them. But in general, nobody in this forum is bringing down DFS. The media does not need a forum post to make a flaming pile of shit out of nothing. DK is solely responsible for what has transpired.

    Which brings me to my next point, why is there a fear of regulation and why aren’t more people calling for it? Sure, we don’t know DK’s financials but I think their advertising budget speaks for itself. This is going to be a very profitable business even if their income statement isn’t showing a profit yet. Regulation is not always a bad thing. And let’s be clear, when I say regulation, I do not mean the government swoops in and runs these sites. Bear with me as I explain:

    After what happened, I think everybody can agree some form of assurance service would do the entire industry some good. Even if you don’t personally think anything shady happened, a segment of the public does and assurance would help fight that. I feel like the general consensus on here is that an audit would be great for DK but regulation is somehow evil. The fundamental flaw with that mindset is that audits are nothing without an established criteria. How do you get established criteria? Regulation. And if these companies ever decide to go public like it’s been discussed, regulation is inevitable. They might as well start laying an infrastructure on their own terms. Sarbanes Oxley already provides a nice template. Some sort of oversight board needs to be created (just like how the PCAOB functions) and every DFS site pay a support fee based on size…again, just like the PCAOB does for public companies. That oversight board would develop, maintain, and enforce a set of general standards across DFS. Appointments to the oversight board would be staggered and executed by a third party. This exact sort of structure put people’s minds at ease regarding trust in public companies’ financial statements after Enron and Worldcom. It would accomplish the same task for DFS websites right now. And for people worried about that changing rakes, I think the companies would view it as a cost of business. You don’t see companies lowering dividends because they are paying higher audit fees and accounting support fees. I understand that example isn’t a perfect comparison, but at the end of the day, they still have to compete for the customer base and rakes are one of those factors a customer might consider when choosing sites. The FSTA just isn’t going to cut it. As people have already pointed out, the FSTA lacks independence which is a fundamental audit standard. Some sort of regulation would be good because as of right now, these companies can do whatever they want. There are no rules and they are only acting on this situation because the public found out about it (and is upset).

    It’s been startling to me to see how many people are criticizing those raising questions and saying things like “all this talk is destroying DFS.” If anything, this talk has improved DFS. FD and DK have stepped into action on something they initially looked like they wanted to sweep under the rug. This is positive change. This is progress. No forum post is destroying DFS. If you really want to better the game, stop scripts, lower entry limits, and reduce the ridiculous advertising campaigns that are turning people off nowadays. Players need to realize that without depositors, none of these prizes are possible. Appealing to the average joe is GOOD for DFS even if it makes life harder for top pros. I think it’s interesting that a lot of the people defending DK love calling casual players “fish”. I think the respect is misplaced. Draftkings isn’t paying you. They act like a broker by providing the medium on which you can play. The “fish” as you call them are the ones paying everybody. A little more respect for them is great for all of DFS.

    And on a broader note, the black friday comparisons strike me as a bit far-fetched. I didn’t have any money in the poker sites at the time so maybe I’m misinformed. But these are USA based companies that pay taxes and the pro leagues love them. Seriously, I’ve been so much more engaged watching NFL games this year and I’m only playing dollar games. As long as they don’t get classified as gambling, DFS will stick around in some form. DK and FD might be the biggest now but the industry won’t fail if they fail. The product is addictive and will retain a customer base. ESPN could easily crap out a DFS site in a month to fill any void by a DK or FD failure. I, for one, have been playing for four weeks… and don’t foresee myself ever stopping regardless of what the company’s have been doing just because I enjoy it so much (granted, I’m playing small stakes with disposable income)

    Anyway, I hope this post doesn’t get lost in the shuffle of this massive thread. I really hope RotoGrinders, given their connections, can urge DFS sites to make some more changes for the betterment of DFS as a whole to avoid situations like this. I’ve been frequenting this site for a year and learned everything I know from Grinders U. I finally made my first deposit just a month ago (I know, very calculated) and would hate to start seeing this industry go down the wrong path. I trust y’all and hope you can positively influence these guys. Cheers!

    And P.S. – Stevie, you strike me as a good dude. Relax a bit man. Your posts on this thread have struck me as short and snarky. I would hate people new to this site to get the wrong idea about RotoGrinders since it is my understanding you are lead mod!

  • smutpeddlers

    I’m glad everything is starting to settle… TIL TOMORROW MORNING WHEN OWNERSHIP PERCENTAGE WILL BE DEBATED FOR 12 MORE HOURS…… Honestly it’s nice to see everyone getting along. I don’t know how many people know how disfunctional families work but after the book shelf throwing and door hole kicking, there is a funny awesome tranquility that comes and some laughter. I think we are approaching this moment. It also happens when you’ve been through an emotional exchange for awhile. I think we are starting to see some sort of light……. At least for tonight

  • COMMISH

    @Ryazan said...

    2 WR at 8K each with both great matchups will have a close ownership . Player B is 3 owned specifically because there are factors working against him that make people not want to take him. So your example is an impossibility.

    I really don’t want to jump back into this fray, but I THINK I have an example that MIGHT clarify things a bit.

    Let’s start with a lottery type Pick-4 game. However, in this game instead of paying a fixed amount, for each win, a fixed prize pool of say $10,000 is divided amongst the winners who match the 4 numbers correctly. . Thus, if only one person matches the numbers correctly, he gets the entire $10,000. If only two people match all the numbers right, then they each get $5000. You get the idea. The numbers that will be drawn will be completely random.

    What the “% ownership numbers are important camp” is arguing is that if you knew the ownership numbers for each of the possible outcomes, you would avoid (or have a lower ownership rate) numbers for each number drawn where there is high public ownership. Basically, you don’t want to have to split your winnings with every Tom, Dick, and Harry on the planet. Of course, it would be great to have a copy of the actual ownership numbers because then you could plan your attack perfectly. However, in the absence of that info, you are forced to guess the ownership numbers. This may not be as hard as it seems. For example you know repeating numbers, like 0000, are going to be popular On the other hand, you can probably guess that screwball numbers, like 7492, are not going to be popular, and, thus, you would want to pick these numbers. The important point to remember is that the numbers are randomly drawn.

    Now, we have to move back to this example:
    ***************************************************
    WR A has a great match up, WR B also has great match up. Both cost 8k. You find out player A is 75% and player B is 3% owned. This is why it’s an edge to have inside info.
    *************************************************
    The problem here is that there is nothing random in those ownership numbers. You may not know the reason why the public is favoring one guy or the other, but there is a reason. In other words, ALL OTHER THINGS ARE NOT EQUAL, like they are in the lottery example. In this case, it takes some skill to determine why things aren’t equal.

  • smutpeddlers

    Almost an hour of tranquility and you hadddddddd to bring it back up again…. SMH lol

  • realdeals

    Hah I literally just checked this thread and was shocked it was on the same page #. Not biting Commish. Absolutely done done done with the % convo. Carry on.

  • IronMonkey415

    Have they shown a picture of uncle Vito?

    Should be our mascot.

  • realdeals

    @pburghpens22 said...

    I just wanna say that Ryazan makes the best points out of anyone in this thread

    Hahah.

  • realdeals

    I’m a niiiiiice person, but let’s put the $ to the peddle. I want to play Ryazan, commish, pburghpens22, etc and all who agree with their thinking in h2h on FD for NFL. Doesn’t matter the price $1 or $1000. Let’s play.
    I’m quite confident I can beat any one who analyzes like these dudes.

  • 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).