NBA FORUM

Comments

  • kdjac0434

    I wanted to keep track of the payouts for this contest, but I did not play the first few days. Does anyone have the payout amounts through 3/3/18?

    3/4/18—4.79
    3/5/18—19.97

  • sethfein

    Shouldn’t it be a simple fix to rules.

    In the event where enough entries cash were the payout is below the entry fee, FD will “raise the bar” to the lowest cashing score where even money is paid out.

    So if 275 was bar and 290 would knock out enough to get back to $3 payout, then so be it.

    Doesn’t make sense to punish someone with a 350 with a loss versus a 276 score.

  • 2Slik

    • Ranked #20

      RG Tiered Ranking

    352 and I lost money. I suppose the guys that scored over 390 are really scratching their heads. I just don’t see the purpose of the clause that if everyone wins they refund the entry fee, yet if one doesn’t it’s totally acceptable to take in the rake. What’s the logic in that one? If the sites think negative point scoring is bad how can they possibly think users “winning” negative money is gonna go over?

  • mambaland

    its like that one game they have where similar h2h with a large group but payouts are different top to bottom…that too was stupid

  • TheRyanFlaherty

    @sethfein said...

    Shouldn’t it be a simple fix to rules.

    In the event where enough entries cash were the payout is below the entry fee, FD will “raise the bar” to the lowest cashing score where even money is paid out.

    So if 275 was bar and 290 would knock out enough to get back to $3 payout, then so be it.

    Doesn’t make sense to punish someone with a 350 with a loss versus a 276 score.

    But that’s the entire gimmick…
    What you’re saying makes no sense. What you’re describing is every GPP, league, whatever on the site where the user that scores more points wins more money than the user that scores less.
    The entire point of this is supposed to be that you’re NOT competing against other users.

    It sounds like people just have a fundamental disagreement with the entire concept.
    I get why losing money while winning is lame. I’ve stayed away to this point because while the concept sounds good there seems to be a certain gamble involved…and really you’re having to judge the slate as a whole against the number, trying to determine if it will be too easy or too hard and where the sweet spot is where you can actually make money.

    And now as I’m typing i’ve realized the real solution – they can keep everything as isnto preserve the integrity of the format…they just have to raise the cash score. With the crazy scores in NBA no-a-days and especially as we head toward the point of the season where there is always extreme “value”, none of these contests should be under 300. Move the 275 to 300 nightly (not after the fact) and youvlikely have the appropriate risk/reward.

  • joeycis

    • Blogger of the Month

    @TheRyanFlaherty said...

    But that’s the entire gimmick…
    What you’re saying makes no sense. What you’re describing is every GPP, league, whatever on the site where the user that scores more points wins more money than the user that scores less.
    The entire point of this is supposed to be that you’re NOT competing against other users.

    It sounds like people just have a fundamental disagreement with the entire concept.
    I get why losing money while winning is lame. I’ve stayed away to this point because while the concept sounds good there seems to be a certain gamble involved…and really you’re having to judge the slate as a whole against the number, trying to determine if it will be too easy or too hard and where the sweet spot is where you can actually make money.

    And now as I’m typing i’ve realized the real solution – they can keep everything as isnto preserve the integrity of the format…they just have to raise the cash score. With the crazy scores in NBA no-a-days and especially as we head toward the point of the season where there is always extreme “value”, none of these contests should be under 300. Move the 275 to 300 nightly (not after the fact) and youvlikely have the appropriate risk/reward.

    This basically hits the nail on the head. When this concept first came out, the NBA forum for that day had a discussion about what a great idea it was, but nobody wanted to consider the possibility that too many people would cash. I have been picking and choosing when I enter based on the slate, but these 270 scores are just absurdly easy to attain. The cut line for this should never get below 300. If you are playing these nightly, you are rolling the dice that you are able to do better than the field (when the field does poorly). That said, if that is the case, why not just enter a GPP?

  • gvn2fly1421

    FWIW, FanDuel addressed the situation from the other night through email. I did not reach out to them, this was sent to all participants from the negative cash night.

    Hello,
    As you know, you entered into our $3 NBA Beat the Score contest last night. Due to a high scoring night, many people beat the score in that contest and the amount of money that you won was actually less than the entry fee you paid.

    We created Beat the Score with the intent of having an achievable score that allows users to walk away net winners. Last night, that wasn’t the case. The new contest type is only a few weeks old, and we will work to find the right scores to beat as we gather more data.

    While we’ll normally only credit everyone back their entry fee if all people in the contest beat the score or no one in the contest beats the score, we want to ensure you have a positive experience on FanDuel. With that said, we credited your account to make your entry fee(s) whole. And, you’ll also receive a $0.25 voucher later today for an NBA contest set to run tomorrow (3/16) at 7pm ET.

    Thanks for playing,
    Your FanDuel Team

  • joeycis

    • Blogger of the Month

    Good on Fanduel for that, but they definitely won’t continue doing this if people lose in the future.

  • 2Slik

    • Ranked #20

      RG Tiered Ranking

    Very simple. Raise the entry point and create the exception that in case of overload all contestants get the at least the full value of their ticket. The onus is on them that if a tournament level is too low they don’t get the rake fees (not the worst thing in the world when the money is banked back on their site). These tournaments are there as a supplement for a better user experience and winning negative money is the last thing you want to happen regardless of that loophole existing.

  • mambaland

    as usual no one mentions the rake is the issue on all games..who cares how good or stupid they are when the rake is too high

  • sethfein

    @TheRyanFlaherty said...

    But that’s the entire gimmick…
    What you’re saying makes no sense. What you’re describing is every GPP, league, whatever on the site where the user that scores more points wins more money than the user that scores less.
    The entire point of this is supposed to be that you’re NOT competing against other users.

    It sounds like people just have a fundamental disagreement with the entire concept.
    I get why losing money while winning is lame. I’ve stayed away to this point because while the concept sounds good there seems to be a certain gamble involved…and really you’re having to judge the slate as a whole against the number, trying to determine if it will be too easy or too hard and where the sweet spot is where you can actually make money.

    And now as I’m typing i’ve realized the real solution – they can keep everything as isnto preserve the integrity of the format…they just have to raise the cash score. With the crazy scores in NBA no-a-days and especially as we head toward the point of the season where there is always extreme “value”, none of these contests should be under 300. Move the 275 to 300 nightly (not after the fact) and youvlikely have the appropriate risk/reward.

    Why do you feel the need to speak with such a tone just because you disagree? Have a conversation like an adult.

    It makes sense because this is ONLY referring to situation where cash line results in a loss.

    I dont see how I am describing a GPP. I am assuming you meant what is difference from double up since GPP is top heavy payout while this is all even payouts so I will give you a pass there.

    Its still different from double up because in most cases, you are getting paid out based on split of pool hitting determined cash line. I dont know the data for how often this happens but I would imagine its not very common otherwise FD would raise the bar.

    There was also slates the last week or 2 with pretty low scores since studs busted. I really stll havent seen a compelling argument why its bad to just warn people in the event of majority winners, line may move up.

    If thats understood, people can then review slate and determine if the cash line should be good enough or aim a little higher.

  • FDRep

    • FanDuel Representative

    Hi everyone! This is Nik from FD Product.

    The first thing I’ll say is that with a new format, there’s always going to be kinks. We looked at that night as a four-game slate, a few of which had the potential to be either non-competitive or low scoring. As it happened, two of the games went into OT and all four were very high scoring, complete with all of the chalky value plays coming through for 6x-7x+. Sort of a perfect storm.

    As we continue to roll out the format, we’re trying to make sure that one some days we set a high, challenging bar with an attendant higher payout, and other days we set a lower one. Some days we’ll have both, in separate contests. We’re relying on back-end modeling, numberFire projections, and a host of other sources to help us design the game, but issues sometimes crop up. The important thing to know is that we certainly didn’t and don’t design it in a way where we expected like Wednesday to happen.

    As far as the decision to make everyone whole, that was a no-brainer. No one who wins should ever receive a negative payout – that’s just common sense. It took us about three nanoseconds to decide that. We also wanted to make sure everyone understood that we recognize that it’s a bad look, so we also wanted to get you into a free contest for rocking with us as we figure it out together.

    The answer to how we ensure it doesn’t happen again is a little trickier, because any solution is going to require us to go under the hood and tinker around. Our initial thought is to be programmatic about it; if no one hits the score or if so many hit it that the winners lose money, it’s an automatic refund. That functionality will be coming out soon.

    Hope that helps! Thanks for playing, I really do hope you’re enjoying it.

    - NB

  • 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).