PGA FORUM

Comments

  • ninerzfan8

    So who’s gonna take a stab at this lottery?

    Prices out. 18 guys. New course not sure if they’ve played anything at all there before.

    7400 yds. 5 par 5s and 5 par 3s.

    Sounds like bomberville and leave as much money on the table as possible to try to get a unique lineup.

    At least the big tourney is only about 40K entries vs the tour champ that had over 100K picking from 30 guys

  • colinwdrew

    • 499

      RG Overall Ranking

    • 2020 DraftKings FHWC Champion

    • 2018 DraftKings FHWC Finalist

    If my math is right there are 10965 possible combinations of golfers and only 268 which use the full salary cap.

  • ninerzfan8

    I might be doing it wrong but you can use anyone from matsuyama down in any combo (so 13 guys).

    So wouldn’t total available combos of just those 13 be 13*12*11*10*9*8 which is 1.2 million or so combos plus any other valid combos using the top 5 guys?

    Not a math major so I could be way off

  • ajump08

    You’re right ninerzfan8. Well over 2 million possible lineup combos.

  • colinwdrew

    • 499

      RG Overall Ranking

    • 2020 DraftKings FHWC Champion

    • 2018 DraftKings FHWC Finalist

    @ninerzfan8 said...

    I might be doing it wrong but you can use anyone from matsuyama down in any combo (so 13 guys).

    So wouldn’t total available combos of just those 13 be 13*12*11*10*9*8 which is 1.2 million or so combos plus any other valid combos using the top 5 guys?

    Not a math major so I could be way off

    Pretty sure your math is wrong, do the same logic and tell me how many combos you can do with just 7 golfers? Now 8 golfers? Not sure if my optimizer is missing iterations which is totally possible but given your example 6 golfers would yield a lot more than the 1 possible example.

  • smallANDflaccid

    Agreed.

    I think the issue is that his math is the non-denominator shorthand version of permutations, but those would mean that the same lineup in a different order would be a different lineup – but they are the same.

    So instead it should be combinations, not permutations, since order doesn’t matter.
    So if only looking at 13, then 13! / (6! (13 – 6)!) = 1716.

    If looking at the all 18, then 18564 – but obviously not all of those would work within the confines of the salary limits.

  • al0e_neill

    I’m only coming up with 1716 combos if taking the bottom 13 guys.

    You need to control for a couple facts which drastically decrease the amount of combos. 1. It doesn’t matter what order the players are in (matsuyama being the 1st or 6th guy in your lineup makes no difference), and 2. You can’t have repeat players on the same team.

    Again, I’m not a math wiz and haven’t done stat related math in years but I think this is more in line.

  • ninerzfan8

    Yeah you are right my math only makes sense if it matters what order the guys are in, which it doesn’t.

    Shows what happens when you let Excel do all your math after college.

  • patrickjl

    Enjoyed the math. This tournament reminds me somewhat of the Sun City Million, held in South Africa (where I used to live) in December. Ten players, nothing on the line except the money, less stress, bit of a holiday atmosphere. Thing that always struck me about that tournament was how the small field was strung out. There was always one guy 20 shots behind the leader. Kind of like they don’t take it too seriously if they have a poor first day. I’m not predicting that will happen here, just sharing sharing some observations.

  • Hogwired

    There will be so many duplicate lineups… I don’t see how anything can be contrarian.

  • hokie2009

    @smallANDflaccid said...

    Agreed.

    I think the issue is that his math is the non-denominator shorthand version of permutations, but those would mean that the same lineup in a different order would be a different lineup – but they are the same.

    So instead it should be combinations, not permutations, since order doesn’t matter.
    So if only looking at 13, then 13! / (6! (13 – 6)!) = 1716.

    If looking at the all 18, then 18564 – but obviously not all of those would work within the confines of the salary limits.

    Man I can’t believe I missed this whole convo! LOL

    For the record this ^^^^ is the correct answer, and what @Colinwdrew said

    So right up my alley! haha. I wish I had some time to run some more stuff and really have some fun with this … for example, the # of spieth combinations under the salary cap would be interesting, etc.

    I ran them for the 30-golfer event awhile back. If you rostered Day I believe it was the #1 golfer that week, the number dwindled mightily …

    Personally … I would have liked to have seen some different contest structures for an event like this. But they killed the contests across the board so … yeah.

    Can’t wait to play, still, though!

  • coachwood

    Look at the big brain on Brad.

  • SteveIsTall

    Does this make sense?

    Calculate the combinations of players with salaries over average and subtract that from 18,564, which is total number of unique 6 man lineups from field of 18?

  • Starsprophet

    • 2015 NASCAR Live Finalist

    I will never understand why you all are so concerned with having the most “unique,” lineup. You know you don’t HAVE to play against 40,000 people right? There are even contests where you can play against 1 guy, just one! Imagine that! Wow.

  • SteveIsTall

    It makes for interesting conversation.

  • colinwdrew

    • 499

      RG Overall Ranking

    • 2020 DraftKings FHWC Champion

    • 2018 DraftKings FHWC Finalist

    @Starsprophet said...

    I will never understand why you all are so concerned with having the most “unique,” lineup. You know you don’t HAVE to play against 40,000 people right? There are even contests where you can play against 1 guy, just one! Imagine that! Wow.

    Since most people play GPPs, about 39,000 more actually.

    If two lineups with equal odds to win, being unique is the ONLY thing that matters. Chop chop.

  • hokie2009

    @Starsprophet said...

    I will never understand why you all are so concerned with having the most “unique,” lineup. You know you don’t HAVE to play against 40,000 people right? There are even contests where you can play against 1 guy, just one! Imagine that! Wow.

    “Look at the big brain on Brad” guy deserves to be retweeted … if I could!

    But, as far as this … personally … not playing the $3 … it’s just … some fun mental gymnastics. I don’t know maybe I WILL play the $3. It’s not that big of a deal.

    But yeah that’s why I suggested maybe some foresight from DK and maybe a different variety of contests … but … the golf product is obviously completely on the back-burner …. they developed it a LOT last year and just pushed it all back … we’ll see

  • smallANDflaccid

    @hokie2009 said...

    the # of spieth combinations under the salary cap would be interesting, etc.

    Looks like 1455 (by “under” I assume you mean less than or equal to 50k rather than strictly less than 50k in that sense)

    *weird – had to edit this to use text, doesn’t like math in here I guess – treats it either as a SQL injection threat, or HTML

  • smallANDflaccid

    And if you want the two top salary dudes in there, then 69 possible diff lineups (within the sal cap limits).

    So much easier to code this stuff for PGA than for NFL.

  • JSteele

    All the Lahiri

  • hokie2009

    Kirk is the stud in the low end. He should be fine. Fell off the radar due to his injury last year …

    Lahiri is by far the worst golfer in the field. He should be the lowest owned, too, though. So the question becomes is he really that much less likely to do well than everyone else? Your call …

    Personally I want to be ON RECORD as saying though that Lahiri does not “belong” in this field. It is, however, golf. So I’m already preparing the egg<-face routine … I have it saved from previous weeks so no problems.

    I think the spieth fade is proper. He’s amazing. I think his ownership% will be higher than his win% so. I’m fine without him. I feel like he’s clearly the best golfer in the world (that whole jason day thing … meh) … but I think one of the bombers nips him here in this non-event … I like Spieth more when he’s fired up and working towards a meaningful title.

    Which bomber though? Good luck!?

    I’m going Bubba over DJ just because thats my horse and I’m kind of already on a golf vacation and not playing any serious money … Bubba’s my guy gonna stick with him.

    Very crap-shoot-y …

    I’m also going ot go heavy Rose and ZJ. Ideally Rose will get squeezed ownership-wise with DJ sitting $200 above him and ZJ … I wouldn’t call it purely contrarian because he’s an obvious value to me that is going to go horribly under-owned because of two things I think most people will over-blow … his lack of distance (see: St. Andrews) and his relatively horrible (for his price) performance last time out.

    But yeah if I’m going to take a guy who’s not a bomber, and can’t afford Spieth, ZJ is my guy this week.

    Also stabbing a little bit but I’m shy on Reed even though he’s been pretty hot, and Walker as well, solely because I view them as putting-dependent golfers … and I have no stats for this course … but I’m going to take a stab and say the greens don’t look too bad and I just want the guys who are going to get on it and let good things happen …

    This is a definite luck-box tournament for only the true die-hard DK golf players!

    Last one for a month! I’m going to miss it …

  • SteveIsTall

    I like Lihiri over Walker and Horschel. Used him in just under half my LUs.

  • ninerzfan8

    Ended up just playing 4 lineups. Picked 9 of the 18 guys and shuffled them around between them. Left between 800 and 1900 on the table on all of them. Gotta play since no golf the next 6 weeks or so. Good luck all.

  • zshatz11

    @hokie2009 said...

    Kirk is the stud in the low end. He should be fine. Fell off the radar due to his injury last year …

    Lahiri is by far the worst golfer in the field. He should be the lowest owned, too, though. So the question becomes is he really that much less likely to do well than everyone else? Your call …

    Personally I want to be ON RECORD as saying though that Lahiri does not “belong” in this field. It is, however, golf. So I’m already preparing the egg<-face routine … I have it saved from previous weeks so no problems.

    I think the spieth fade is proper. He’s amazing. I think his ownership% will be higher than his win% so. I’m fine without him. I feel like he’s clearly the best golfer in the world (that whole jason day thing … meh) … but I think one of the bombers nips him here in this non-event … I like Spieth more when he’s fired up and working towards a meaningful title.

    Which bomber though? Good luck!?

    I’m going Bubba over DJ just because thats my horse and I’m kind of already on a golf vacation and not playing any serious money … Bubba’s my guy gonna stick with him.

    Very crap-shoot-y …

    I’m also going ot go heavy Rose and ZJ. Ideally Rose will get squeezed ownership-wise with DJ sitting $200 above him and ZJ … I wouldn’t call it purely contrarian because he’s an obvious value to me that is going to go horribly under-owned because of two things I think most people will over-blow … his lack of distance (see: St. Andrews) and his relatively horrible (for his price) performance last time out.

    But yeah if I’m going to take a guy who’s not a bomber, and can’t afford Spieth, ZJ is my guy this week.

    Also stabbing a little bit but I’m shy on Reed even though he’s been pretty hot, and Walker as well, solely because I view them as putting-dependent golfers … and I have no stats for this course … but I’m going to take a stab and say the greens don’t look too bad and I just want the guys who are going to get on it and let good things happen …

    This is a definite luck-box tournament for only the true die-hard DK golf players!

    Last one for a month! I’m going to miss it …

    I think you are disrespecting Lahiri by saying he is the worst golfer in the field. Not that picking the worst golfer in a field of 18 of the top 50 golfers in the word is easy, but I think he does not get the respect he deserves because of his recent performance on the American stage. Everyone forgets that he finished T5 at the PGA Championship in August. Walker, Horschel, Kirk and Haas have all done nothing since then and Lahiri continued to play well on the other tours.

    As for him being in the field, he got a sponsors exemption for being sponsored by Hero and he isn’t the lowest ranked golfer in the field.

    And don’t overestimate the public’s perception of Zach Johnson. He will be higher owned on name value alone. I did not think any one would play him at the Open Championship and he was the highest owned golfer in the field.

  • JSteele

    I’ve only got him in a couple lineups, but Lahiri seems to be the one who is going to be underowned. I’ve got a core built around Koepka, Rose, Bubba and I have quite a bit of Matt Kuchar as well. The guy is not a bomber which most people are looking for but he’s got really good scoring stats last year.

  • stlcardinals84

    Leading RG Analyst

    • 2018 DraftKings FBWC Finalist

    • 2018 DraftKings FBBWC Finalist

    @hokie2009 said...

    Lahiri is by far the worst golfer in the field. He should be the lowest owned, too, though. So the question becomes is he really that much less likely to do well than everyone else? Your call …

    Not saying that I am playing Lahiri, but the statement is most definitely false. Just because he doesn’t play on American soil every week doesn’t make him the worst golfer in the field, let alone the worst golfer “by far”

    Poor characterization.

  • 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).