MLB FORUM

Comments

  • pokerrob1970

    DraftDay BLB Finalist

    It was a very small slate and its only been one day, but did anyone notice the huge amount of ties? I was in a 100 man league and ended up tied for 8th with 7 people. All of us had different rosters. Guess we will see how it goes after a few days but with the new scoring i think this might be the norm.

  • tvsfrink

    @lpk8787 said...

    I’m shocked that FD hasn’t addressed this given the negative feedback.

    They don’t believe in negative anything now.

  • lpk8787

    • 2016 DraftKings FBBWC Finalist

    • 2015 FanDuel WFBC Finalist

    @tvsfrink said...

    They don’t believe in negative anything now.

    well played

  • mannmicj

    RG Moderator -Can you add some kind of “fractional scoring needed” in the title of this thread?

    We want FanDuel to pay attention to this thread. These ties simply can’t continue at this rate in a sport with the MOST variance. It should be difficult to tie in MLB DFS.

  • sethayates

    @tvsfrink said...

    They don’t believe in negative anything now.

    I’d also recommend sending in your inquiry in triplicate.

  • tipandpick

    • 2016 FanDuel WFFC Finalist

    • 2014 FAFC Champion

    If you really want to see FD do something, two things must happen:

    1) Let them know you’re unhappy with the current scoring system.

    2) Provide defined examples of what you would do to alleviate the problem.

    Anybody can complain (#1), but conjuring up a reasonable solution (#2) that is in line with their original goal of higher overall scoring is not as easy as it would seem. I think we all would agree that we despise people in our personal lives who do not but complain, yet never do anything to change what they’re complaining about, right? So if you find yourself hating this new system, let’s use this forum to collectively put together a *reasonable set of changes to offer FD as a resolution.

    *The term ‘reasonable’ would include several factors:

    1) Only minor changes. A massive scoring change just weeks after a subsequent change will dissuade the casual player from playing MLB.

    2) Inclusion of fractional scoring across different lines of demarcation. Including 0.5 fractional scoring will only decrease ties by about 50%…proposed changes should be, at minimum quarterly (0.25), if not more.

    3) Maintenance of Pitcher-to-Batter Scoring ratios. Historically, FD has weighted pitcher scoring to be ~ 30-40% of a team’s overall scoring. Changing that ratio dramatically would not be in line with their established MLB product.

    4) Continued higher scoring. FD has gone on record stating that higher scoring was the goal of their initial change; to propose a reversion to the previous system and/or lower scoring would be in direct conflict with the vision for their MLB product.

  • myb821

    @tipandpick IMHO the onyl change they need to make is to bring back outs at -.75 points or at an absolute minimum bring them back for strikeouts.

  • MrMadness001

    They didn’t need to change a thing. The scoring from last year was fine.

  • mannmicj

    Targeting stolen bases is the key in my opinion. They stand alone. It could be 4.25, 4.5, 4.75, you name it. It doesn’t have to be connected to the number 3. It only needs to cause more unique scores. The reason I keep going back to Stolen Bases is it’s would the quickest fix with little negative feedback, in my opinion. Everything else would stay the same.

  • sethayates

    @tipandpick said...

    If you really want to see FD do something, two things must happen:

    1) Let them know you’re unhappy with the current scoring system.

    2) Provide defined examples of what you would do to alleviate the problem.

    Anybody can complain (#1), but conjuring up a reasonable solution (#2) that is in line with their original goal of higher overall scoring is not as easy as it would seem. I think we all would agree that we despise people in our personal lives who do not but complain, yet never do anything to change what they’re complaining about, right? So if you find yourself hating this new system, let’s use this forum to collectively put together a *reasonable set of changes to offer FD as a resolution.

    *The term ‘reasonable’ would include several factors:

    1) Only minor changes. A massive scoring change just weeks after a subsequent change will dissuade the casual player from playing MLB.

    2) Inclusion of fractional scoring across different lines of demarcation. Including 0.5 fractional scoring will only decrease ties by about 50%…proposed changes should be, at minimum quarterly (0.25), if not more.

    3) Maintenance of Pitcher-to-Batter Scoring ratios. Historically, FD has weighted pitcher scoring to be ~ 30-40% of a team’s overall scoring. Changing that ratio dramatically would not be in line with their established MLB product.

    4) Continued higher scoring. FD has gone on record stating that higher scoring was the goal of their initial change; to propose a reversion to the previous system and/or lower scoring would be in direct conflict with the vision for their MLB product.

    I agree, but the really confusing part is FanDuel’s official response to this.

    “Thank you for contacting FanDuel Customer Support. We changed our scoring due to user feedback. An overwhelming majority felt that our MLB scores were too low and you couldn’t win without the top-scoring Starting Pitcher. We changed our format to help address the majority of our users’ concerns and believe this new format will be a big improvement. Although we removed negative points for Outs, your batters can still go 0-4 and earn 0 points. This means you can still win big with poor performances or scratches/ejections! Please let us know how you like the scoring throughout the season. If you have any proposed changes to our current format, then please, share your opinion.”

    Let’s break down the relevant information from the copy/paste that their support team is sending out:

    We changed our scoring due to user feedback. An overwhelming majority felt that our MLB scores were too low and you couldn’t win without the top-scoring Starting Pitcher.

    Ok, I don’t recall seeing a survey. Who is this “overwhelming majority” they speak of? I don’t even recall people complaining about scoring being too low. Even if that’s the case, simply tripling the scores doesn’t change anything. If you didn’t have Kershaw and he scored 26 last year (9IP, 13K, W) it was hard to win. Guess what, that 26 from last year is 78 this year.

    What would you need last year to “win without the top pitcher?” Let’s assume you got 7IP, 6K, W for 17 points that’s 51 this year .

    So last year Kershaw got 26 I got 17. I need 9 points to catch up. That’s a 3-run home run. Let’s try it with the new system. Kershaw got 78, my guy got 51. I’m down by 27. Let’s see what I need. Well what do you know? A 3-run home run will get me the 27 I need. Thank you for changing the scoring FanDuel. It’s way easier to get a 27 point 3-run HR than it is a 9 point 3-run HR.

  • tvsfrink

    @sethayates said...

    It’s way easier to get a 27 point 3-run HR than it is a 9 point 3-run HR.

    Of course it is. Just try getting a 9 point 3-run HR now. :p

  • 1greatbuyz

    • x3

      2014 FanDuel WFFC Finalist

    • 2014 FanDuel WFBC Finalist

    If they really just want higher scoring, go back to the old scoring and everybody starts at 100 for filling out a lineup correctly. I know this is not a solution and I am making light of the reason they did this. I don’t understand the mindset that a higher score keeps people playing. The old scoring was simple, effective, and damn near perfect. Now bring back the big Field Of Dreams Tournament as well!

  • Stubbs230

    Since new scoring is old scoring times 3 all they have to do is put back the -.75 for outs and it would be the same as last year except FD gets the higher scoring they desire

  • Stubbs230

    I have to believe FD feedback is at least 10-1 negative on the new scoring system… Hope they do something but the chance of that extremely slim…

  • tipandpick

    • 2016 FanDuel WFFC Finalist

    • 2014 FAFC Champion

    @Stubbs230 said...

    Since new scoring is old scoring times 3 all they have to do is put back the -.75 for outs and it would be the same as last year except FD gets the higher scoring they desire

    No doubt that this would help, but it only provides four 3 additional demarcators (0.25, 0.50, 0.75, respectively). Theoretically, that should cut down on the number of ties by 3 (or thereabouts). With 100+ people tying at certain spots, you would still see 30+ people in a tie…which doesn’t adequately address the problem, IMO.

    Previous scoring was great because of the fractional scoring for pitchers (0.33 points/out), which allowed for 9 points of demarcation between whole numbers.

  • Stubbs230

    @tipandpick said...

    No doubt that this would help, but it only provides four 3 additional demarcators (0.25, 0.50, 0.75, respectively). Theoretically, that should cut down on the number of ties by 3 (or thereabouts). With 100+ people tying at certain spots, you would still see 30+ people in a tie…which doesn’t adequately address the problem, IMO.

    Previous scoring was great because of the fractional scoring for pitchers (0.33 points/out), which allowed for 9 points of demarcation between whole numbers.

    But pitchers with 1/3 or 2/3 of inning would get you off the divisible by 3 just like the fractions did…

    Never mind I see your point -.75 still can get you equal to a pitcher but with -.25 for hitters and .33 for pitchers it would never match up

  • 1greatbuyz

    • x3

      2014 FanDuel WFFC Finalist

    • 2014 FanDuel WFBC Finalist

    @tipandpick said...

    Previous scoring was great because of the fractional scoring for pitchers (0.33 points/out), which allowed for 9 points of demarcation between whole numbers.

    Bingo, the .33 and. 25 decimators created many more different scores. I am sure a math major here could figure up the numbers.

  • Stubbs230

    @1greatbuyz said...

    Bingo, the .33 and. 25 decimators created many more different scores. I am sure a math major here could figure up the numbers.

    Yeah I get it now with hitters at .25 increments and pitchers at .33 they would never match up

  • ryan52

    @Stubbs230 said...

    I have to believe FD feedback is at least 10-1 negative on the new scoring system… Hope they do something but the chance of that extremely slim…

    if enough people complain, they may. but i really dont think they will do much until people just stop playing and request withdrawls

  • sethayates

    @1greatbuyz said...

    Bingo, the .33 and. 25 decimators created many more different scores. I am sure a math major here could figure up the numbers.

    If FanDuel offered a downloadable CSV we could easily pull the data from this year and last year and run the scoring both ways, but, well, you know…

  • sethayates

    @sethayates said...

    If FanDuel offered a downloadable CSV we could easily pull the data from this year and last year and run the scoring both ways, but, well, you know…

    In case FanDuel reads this^^^:

    1. Download contest CSV from back end including all lineups for a contest.
    2. Pull STATs Inc data file from same day
    3. To the right of the STATs Inc data, create 5 columns with possible scoring systems (or as many as you want).
    4. In each column, enter the formula for the scoring system (ex: If singles are listed in column A5 then formula says A5*3)
    5. Go back to first tab. Use vlookup function to add up the score of a player’s lineup using one scoring system
    6. In the next block, use vlookup to add scoring based on second system.
    7. Continue to do this until you’ve tried out multiple systems, preferably run each of the system over a series of days or weeks.
    8. Pick the best one.

    If you need help with this, I’m available.

  • meerkatmreow

    @tipandpick said...

    No doubt that this would help, but it only provides four 3 additional demarcators (0.25, 0.50, 0.75, respectively). Theoretically, that should cut down on the number of ties by 3 (or thereabouts)

    No, it would cut down on the ties such that it’s identical to last year. You’d have the same number of possible scores between a 3 point range as you did between a 1 point range last year. Comparing a 1 point range this year to a 1 point range last year is like comparing apples to doritos…useless

  • meerkatmreow

    @sethayates said...

    In case FanDuel reads this^^^:

    Excel isn’t a fantastic way to go about this. If you’ve got an idea of how you’d like the scores to look, I’d pull it in and tune the scoring to achieve some desired metric of relative pitching v batters, number of ties, desired distribution of scores. Then manual tweak the results for easier digestion (round numbers, desired magnitude scale, etc) then retest that to make sure it’s close enough to the desired

  • yogaflame

    This is the cautionary tale of what happens when you overreact to casuals recommending changes about stuff they don’t understand. Game design is tough, in that it’s much easier to break a game by tweaking a rule through unintended consequences than it is to substantially improve the game. Removal of negative points is the “breaking” change, but multiplying point values solely to make scores higher is also unsavory. There’s no good reason to use scoring that’s not the lowest common denominator points system (unless you’re creating a game for seven-year-olds like Yu-Gi-Oh!).

  • ocdobv

    @meerkatmreow said...

    Excel isn’t a fantastic way to go about this.

    Hopefully, they have talent that can do more than make pivot tables in Excel. Sometimes, I’m not sure though.

  • DannyTanner

    In a shocking development, one of their high-dollar qualifiers for the Playboy Mansion Final had a tie at the top yesterday … On the first night of qualifying.

    Wonder if they can cut those big checks in two or three. Should probably bring a table saw to the live event, just in case.

  • 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.