INDUSTRY FORUM

Comments

  • gnicholas0225

    Soft pricing and a lack of a flex spot means that basically every single night, the best value plays are 95% owned in cash games, and 20-50% of the field has the exact same lineup.

    Using tonight as an example, I came up with an identical lineup as roughly 40% of the field (Kemba, Teague, Beal, Wiggins, Brown, Brown, Tatum, Bertans, Dieng), including numerous pros, we all cashed, and yet I lost 90% of my entries because there was like a 40 way tie. I’m not in any way saying that my lineup took some genius to create, in fact, quite the opposite, it was the most straightforward play to make, so everyone made it.

    FanDuel seriously needs to do something, because there’s no point in playing cash games with them anymore. Everything usually comes down to 1, maybe 2 spots that you can use to differentiate yourself, and even then, there’s a good chance tons of others made the same picks. They need to, at the very least, add a Flex spot and see if that helps matters.

  • NoLimits0

    @thedude404 said...

    You cant, nor do I think you necessarily should, do anything about the optimizers (not like you could anyway). There is nothing against the rules from using them. In my opinion there will always be money to be made in tournaments though. Cash games were dead years ago so I’m not sure why people are still talking about them.

    I liked your take on PGA, which gets me thinking if I should even bother with any type of optimizer/stat research tool for PGA. I’m still on the fence about that as the initial outlay for something like Fantasy National is around $250 a year. When I look at it as $20 a month, it doesnt seem so bad though. Having never used any type of paid subscription, I probably will buy one for a year, just because when I consider the time savings for research alone, it easily pays for itself.

    As far as collusion not being a problem, I guess it all depends on how you define “problem”. Do people collude to create 600 different lineups? Absolutely…I know for a fact people do this. Is it widespread? I have no idea.

    A higher variance sport will always have the optimizer lineup not do as well. First it’s hard for most optimizers to come up with obvious plays to begin with due to the high variance of the projected outcomes. Then it’s hard for it to nail the correct ones due to the high variance of the results.

    I would use those websites you suggest but not for the optimal lineup. You would use them for your own research.

    NBA has the absolute lowest variance among all sports the very opposite of PGA and hence that’s why almost all pros are just blindly using an optimizer in cash games.

  • Pidinolo

    Why exactly does fd need to change to suit your needs ? Adapt or get left behind. Simple as that. Long term success in any game variant whether it be fantasy, sports betting, poker, etc. Takes constant fluidity and new theory being adapted to be profitable. If it was easy, everyone wouldnt be constantly whining every night and coming up with illogical excuses why they suck rather than find a solution or move on. Gpps are hard as shit to win let alone to come up with a successful plan to overcome variance. Good luck and either grow as an individual or STFU and stop blaming others for your lack of creativity.

  • NoLimits0

    @Pidinolo said...

    Why exactly does fd need to change to suit your needs ? Adapt or get left behind. Simple as that. Long term success in any game variant whether it be fantasy, sports betting, poker, etc. Takes constant fluidity and new theory being adapted to be profitable. If it was easy, everyone wouldnt be constantly whining every night and coming up with illogical excuses why they suck rather than find a solution or move on. Gpps are hard as shit to win let alone to come up with a successful plan to overcome variance. Good luck and either grow as an individual or STFU and stop blaming others for your lack of creativity.

    Well the new theory (in your post you are alluding to in terms of adjusting) I have literally posted on this board for the last 4 months is you just go and use an optimizer and submit that as your cash lineup. I don’t get what’s so hard.

    If anyone just listened to me they would have been up in cash games in NFL and NBA from the first day I posted. No one that would have listened to me would be down. I really don’t even know why there’s even a debate about this. There’s literally anecdotal personal evidence from so many users here of this being true. Also most pros do this same thing every night so clearly it’s a real thing that’s happening.

    The optimizer cash game rate is so much better and I hope people all just use it if you want to make money. Stop trying to think for yourself in cash games. It’s pointless in the long run. It takes the fun out of the game, but like I said most people are not like super rich and don’t have some good job on the side so they only care about maximizing profits and don’t play dfs for fun. All my coworkers who play season long with me don’t play daily fantasy sports not because they don’t know it but because they don’t care for the effort of a secondary income

    Now you can make the argument that if everyone does that cash is dead since everyone will have the same lineup. Actually that’s pretty much getting to that state too and eventually will there in 1 year but it’s not there yet.

  • bigez952

    @NoLimits0 said...

    Well the new theory I have literally posted on this board for the last 4 months is you just go and use an optimizer and submit that as your cash lineup. I don’t get what’s so hard.

    If anyone just listened to me they would have been up in cash games in NFL and NBA from the first day they posted. No one that would have listened to me would be down.

    The optimizer cash game rate is so much better and I hope people all just use it if you want to make money. Stop trying to think for yourself in cash games. It’s pointless in the long run.

    This is true as the Blitz has won double ups at like a 70%+ rate the last 2 seasons. I used to log my play daily using The BAT optimal and for sure I could lock in a 56-60% win rate so it was like printing money and I just had to decide how much to play each slate for how much money I wanted to win that season. In my final “losing” season I still had a win rate of 48.5% and it was a tiny loss that might have just been due to a bad variance year. I didn’t jump back in for 2019 mainly because I had 3 kids under the age of 2 so it was getting way to difficult to commit time to checking all the weather and running optimal lineups at lineup lock which was another reason which likely knocked down my win rate to below 50%.

    MLB is a tough sport to grind as it is 180+ days of commitment with around 200-220 slates to play since mid week had a lot of decent split slates so you can attack both. A 56-60% win rate will win you decent money in the long term but you have to be able to withstand the metal anguish of going on some losing streaks which can break people if they don’t view the season as 220 slate sample size vs. a day to day one. You need to have really strict bankroll management to make it work as well.

  • NoLimits0

    @bigez952 said...

    This is true as the Blitz has won double ups at like a 70%+ rate the last 2 seasons. I used to log my play daily using The BAT optimal and for sure I could lock in a 56-60% win rate so it was like printing money and I just had to decide how much to play each slate for how much money I wanted to win that season. In my final “losing” season I still had a win rate of 48.5% and it was a tiny loss that might have just been due to a bad variance year. I didn’t jump back in for 2019 mainly because I had 3 kids under the age of 2 so it was getting way to difficult to commit time to checking all the weather and running optimal lineups at lineup lock which was another reason which likely knocked down my win rate to below 50%.

    MLB is a tough sport to grind as it is 180+ days of commitment with around 200-220 slates to play since mid week had a lot of decent split slates so you can attack both. A 56-60% win rate will win you decent money in the long term but you have to be able to withstand the metal anguish of going on some losing streaks which can break people if they don’t view the season as 220 slate sample size vs. a day to day one. You need to have really strict bankroll management to make it work as well.

    Yes MLB will be interesting next year. I’ll let you know my results. I only did this for NBA and NFL recently because MLB had ended. MLB also has more variance than NBA even though the number of slates will be similar. For NBA it has been great so far. For the record if anyone doesn’t already know I pretty much use a combined optimal lineup for both NBA and NFL and I’m man enough to admit it that I’m not good but have been having good results due to third party websites (which is the case for a lot of people but many won’t admit it). My GPP results haven’t been good so I’m trying to see how to change the optimal projections to benefit me. That’s really the next step for me is to solve GPPs.

    I understand one concern of small time players is they don’t want to pay for the optimal lineups across multiple sites because they don’t even play at those stakes. While this is true, that is just the way the industry has become. One way to solve this is what I mentioned in the other thread which is heavy price discrimination. I recommend RG charge a user like bkreider or moklovin 2-5k/month for access to optimal services. They pretty much cannot play dfs without it so they have to be willing to pay up to a certain amount and I think 2k/month is reasonable. Otherwise without these optimizers their bottom line would be greatly affected. This is the same idea behind charging so much more for first class seats. People will still be willing to pay if the demand is there. This way RG still makes a lot they don’t have to charge as much to new users. This type of price discrimination can also be done through government regulation but I doubt it gets to that stage.

    Price discrimination sounds like a “controversial” concept but it really isn’t. It’s one of the most researched things in economics and I believe Optimizer sites should use it for their advantage and at the same time it’ll greatly help the ecosystem of DFS. I have a computer science background but I took a few economics classes back in the day in college and that was one of the more interesting topics

  • NoLimits0

    Here’s the article on price discrimination.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_discrimination

    Dfs optimizer sites should attempt to do something like this as it will benefit the entire ecosystem and also probably help their bottom line. It will give “equal” access to optimizers. It will solve a lot of the issues addressed with optimizers and equal access here.

  • jjwd

    @NoLimits0 said...

    I recommend RG charge a user like bkreider or moklovin 2-5k/month for access to optimal services. They pretty much cannot play dfs without it so they have to be willing to pay up to a certain amount and I think 2k/month is reasonable. Otherwise without these optimizers their bottom line would be greatly affected. This is the same idea behind charging so much more for first class seats.

    This is not at all like paying for 1st class seats, and you have no idea what these high stakes players can or cannot do unless you know them personally.

  • jjwd

    @NoLimits0 said...

    If anyone just listened to me they would have been up in cash games in NFL and NBA from the first day I posted. No one that would have listened to me would be down.

    Many of us have been using an optimizer for 5 years at this point, and many of us understand the evolution of tools, projections and strategy nuances which come along with this. I’m glad you’re on this path of discovery with us now, but I’m not sure your condescending attitude is warranted.

  • jjwd

    @NoLimits0 said...

    For people that want to learn from a more of a strict optimizer type of guy, I recommend this user “bkreider”. He often uses an obvious optimizer generated cash lineup and his gpp exposures are going to be super close to the field gpp exposures across all players (since field ownership is usually a function of projections). So that’s someone you can learn from if you want an all optimizer type of guy.

    He’s ranked 21st but has a 50 tpoy rank which usually means very bad gpp player (most likely negative on the year in gpps), which helps my point above

    This is rampant speculation. Does he even play NBA tournaments? Bkreider is absolutely crushing NHL everywhere this year. Expand your thinking.

  • jjwd

    @NoLimits0 said...

    If anything I like you admit you use optimizers to be profitable in the past. 99% of the people using them don’t admit that and want to claim they are some expert player.

    Any proof of this pessimistic and divisive assertion?

  • NoLimits0

    @jjwd said...

    Many of us have been using an optimizer for 5 years at this point, and many of us understand the evolution of tools, projections and strategy nuances which come along with this. I’m glad you’re on this path of discovery with us now, but I’m not sure your condescending attitude is warranted.

    What condescending attitude are you talking about? I’m trying to help people. If you’ve ever read my posts I’m literally giving people free advice if they want to make more money. I know people like you don’t want that to happen so you’ll never admit it but that’s fine with me.

    Also if you are taking a shot at me that I only discovered this now that’s because I used to play just for fun. I didn’t care that much about making money. I mean most of you guys this is what you do for a living so I’m glad you found out about this earlier you better have or you would have quit now. I really was doing this as a favor to help the small time players. For me even if I made an additional 100k playing this vs before (which I won’t unless I put in like 50k a night into cash games) since I switched to optimizers, it would have no effect on my standard of living so that’s why I didn’t really care before. I mostly started caring because I first found it odd everyone had the same lineup and I investigated and just detailed my results to be helpful.

  • NoLimits0

    @jjwd said...

    Any proof of this pessimistic and divisive assertion?

    That’s true…most people who use an optimizer would never admit using one to make money in cash games. Why would they admit it? They want to give away their edge? Just think about it…

    I’m actually shocked both Bigez and Valauable Trader admitted it on this thread. Total props to them but 99% of people wouldn’t…there’s no reason to.

    And it’s clear from my analysis a few specific individuals use optimizers/third party sites a lot more than others.

  • NoLimits0

    @jjwd said...

    This is rampant speculation. Does he even play NBA tournaments? Bkreider is absolutely crushing NHL everywhere this year. Expand your thinking.

    Lol ok…nope he never plays NBA tournaments. You are right he NEVER max enters into every NBA tournament at every stake level every night. Never does that. I have no idea what I’m talking about. I mean there’s like data out there but who cares about data. We will just go with what you said he doesn’t play NBA at all.

    Him and moklovin don’t submit some optimizer generated lineup into cash games and showdowns either.

    It’s all a huge conspiracy. I think I saw Jimmy Hoffa the other day. Was that in a movie or real life though?

  • NoLimits0

    @jjwd said...

    This is not at all like paying for 1st class seats, and you have no idea what these high stakes players can or cannot do unless you know them personally.

    Yes it is. It would be super interesting if optimizer sites jacked the price of their optimal subscription to like 2k/month. I bet you a lot of pros would still pay for it. They just have to be careful on how and who they target. It’s exactly the same as first class seats.

  • jjwd

    @NoLimits0 said...

    Lol ok…nope he never plays NBA tournaments. You are right he NEVER max enters into every NBA tournament at every stake level every night. Never does that. I have no idea what I’m talking about.

    Him and moklovin don’t submit some optimizer generated lineup into cash games either.

    It’s all a huge conspiracy. I think I saw Jimmy Hoffa the other day.

    You seem like a very disingenuous guy. I suppose there’s no point in arguing with you if you’re going to misrepresent what I said (that’s called a straw man).
    But I am challenging you here because other people in this forum need to understand how divisive and negative you usually are. You’re certainly not accurately representing the landscape of DFS. If you cared about that, you would provide us with specific data points, rather than broad irresponsible claims about people whom you don’t know.

  • NoLimits0

    JJWD I know you don’t like me ruining you pros edge by publicity saying all of this but I’ll keep doing it. It will help the smaller time players understand and that’s all I care about.

  • jjwd

    @NoLimits0 said...

    Yes it is. It would be super interesting if optimizer sites jacked the price of their optimal subscription to like 2k/month. I bet you a lot of pros would still pay for it. They just have to be careful on how and who they target. It’s exactly the same as first class seats.

    Airlines are not charging rich people 10x more than regular people for the same seat. That’s what you’re proposing. Asinine

  • jjwd

    @NoLimits0 said...

    JJWD I know you don’t like me ruining you pros edge by publicity saying all of this but I’ll keep doing it. It will help the smaller time players understand and that’s all I care about.

    not a pro here dude

  • NoLimits0

    @jjwd said...

    You seem like a very disingenuous guy. I suppose there’s no point in arguing with you if you’re going to misrepresent what I said (that’s called a straw man).
    But I am challenging you here because other people in this forum need to understand how divisive and negative you usually are. You’re certainly not accurately representing the landscape of DFS. If you cared about that, you would provide us with specific data points, rather than broad irresponsible claims about people whom you don’t know.

    Divisive or negative?

    Lol towards what? Pros bankrolls? Sure I guess that’s true. I would say most people like the information I say and they can choose to listen to some or parts or all of it for their benefit. It’s not like you even have to listen to anything I say either.

    Just the other day in some other thread I directly managed to get some guy to start using the blitz optimal lineup. I hope he cashed the last few weeks. I have no idea what’s so divisive about that.

    It sure is divisive to the pros edge I suppose but I don’t care about that.

  • NoLimits0

    @jjwd said...

    You seem like a very disingenuous guy. I suppose there’s no point in arguing with you if you’re going to misrepresent what I said (that’s called a straw man).
    But I am challenging you here because other people in this forum need to understand how divisive and negative you usually are. You’re certainly not accurately representing the landscape of DFS. If you cared about that, you would provide us with specific data points, rather than broad irresponsible claims about people whom you don’t know.

    Straw man? Did you read what you wrote. Your retorical question basically implied he doesn’t play NBA tournaments at all…

    Literally I brought him up because his distribution of plays is very similar to field ownership which is more indicative of how an optimizer works. His 21st to 50th disparity is just me saying he probably has a ton of cashes across a ton of contests but not as many big ones relative to others with his volume, which my point of saying if you go with strict optimizers in GPPs you will min cash a lot but it’s harder to win. Obviously if you max enter every night at every stake you’ll win some from time to time but it’s not going to be at the same rate as others like awesomo and youdacao who don’t strictly go with the optimizer. Clearly meant to help people understand…

  • NoLimits0

    @jjwd said...

    Airlines are not charging rich people 10x more than regular people for the same seat. That’s what you’re proposing. Asinine

    Are you an Econ major? Because that’s not how price discrimination works. I’m not even sure you know what price discrimination is actually given you made that comment.

    It has nothing to do with rich or poor. Anyone can buy a first class seat. It has to do with how much you want it. Obviously the richer you are the more likely you want it but that’s a by product not a direct function.

    In the same sense, clearly some pros want the optimizers more so they are willing to pay more. It’s just a matter of how much they are willing to pay. I can see 2k/month being reasonable given they probably make more than 24k/year on cash games. So an “optimizer” pro would pay way more than a “non pure 3rd party optimizer” pro like Awesemo so Awesemo might not be willing to pay that same amount as Moklovin or bkreider.

  • blenderhd

    • 634

      RG Overall Ranking

    Optimizers are calculators. You can make one in Excel. What you’re talking about is a projection model.

  • NoLimits0

    @blenderhd said...

    Optimizers are calculators. You can make one in Excel. What you’re talking about is a projection model.

    Formally, you actually define it as a “3rd Party Optimal Projection Model” and then you run a “Linear Programming Optimization” to take the X lineups. I’m quite aware of this I just shorten it to optimizer because if you know machine learning, it’s the correct terminology to shorten what I said above to optimizer.

  • NoLimits0

    Optimizers are definitely not calculators though. Even in the mathematical programming sense (linear programming which is how the lineups are generated), it’s not but definitely not in the machine learning sense. But I imagine most people here know what people mean when they say optimizers.

    Calculators are closed solvers which means if you give it some commands it’ll always calculate an answer. But in mathematical programming like with the traveling salesman problem, optimizers are open ended.

    Here obviously I refer to optimizers as my defintion above as a generic term referring to everything in the quotes. I think it’s well understood.

  • jjwd

    Just to summarize NoLimits’ points:

    1. Optimizer sites should make high stakes guys pay way more than average players for the same product. (No suggestion on how to quantify these levels).
    2. Bkreider is probably a “very bad” GPP player, but he probably min cashes “a lot”.
    3. 99% of optimizer users won’t admit they use an optimizer, but there’s no way of knowing this because they won’t admit it.
    4. NoLimit could make thousands of dollars on DFS by simply using optimizers, but he doesn’t have time, even though optimizers are very fast and easy to master.

    yep, sounds legit!

  • X Unread Thread
  • X Thread with New Replies*
  • *Jumps to your first unread reply

Subforum Index

RotoGrinders.com is the home of the daily fantasy sports community. Our content, rankings, member blogs, promotions and forum discussion all cater to the players that like to create a new fantasy team every day of the week.

If you or someone you know has a gambling problem, crisis counseling and referral services can be accessed by calling 1-800-GAMBLER (1-800-426-2537) (IL). Gambling problem? Call 1-800-Gambler (NJ/WV/PA), 1-800-9-WITH-IT (IN), 1-800-522-4700 (CO) or 1-800-BETS OFF (IA). 21+. NJ/PA/WV/IN/IA/CO/IL only.