INDUSTRY FORUM

Comments

  • superstars92

    Kunu88/aboveandbeyond/MakeItRain84/Daut44/aejones (5 users) all have EXACT same lineup (same order) in my 1k double up (with only 55 entries)

    I just find this funny because I used to read about some other people posting how Kunu88/MakeItRain84/Daut44/etc. collude, and these users (check their post history) would post like “why would we collude, it’s negative EV to collude when there are so few people in a double up, blah, blah, blah,” or something like “yea we just share some projections, but we would never share the same lineup.” It’s actually funny because your EV doesn’t actually get hurt if you have identical lineups as everyone else (it’s still the same EV), and I love how they tried to use this flawed math argument to try and “convince” people they don’t actually collude or have any incentive to collude.

    The 1k double up only has 55 users, and these 5 have the exact same lineup (no other team is duplicated except this team). 55 is a small number of people too. It’s obvious they worked together because not only do they have the exact same lineup, but all players are in the same order.

    Personally, I don’t actually care because it doesn’t affect my EV either (I either beat all 5 or lose to all 5), but I do care that these people want to try and convince people that they don’t actually work together when they obviously do (which might be a violation in itself? – not positive on the exact rule, but it doesn’t sound ethical). For me, the lying and trying to give some BS arguments is worse than actually having the same lineup.

    Seeing this, I have way more respect for users like SaahilSud, youdacao, underjones, rayofhope, BirdWings, CSURAM88, Notorious, etc. (who ever else is in the same double up) because at least they are coming up with things on their own, and even if they do work with others, at least they aren’t so blatantly obvious and then try to come up with some BS excuse like they don’t actually collude.

  • steelcitydozer

    I’m a casual player never playing anything above $5 . It is a shame that dk allows this To go on. but as stated before they cater to the pros and rely on them to fill the huge gpps to collect their rake. A new player or casual sees a $4 gpp and says wow I could win 100k for $4. Not thinking that at least 20 pros have 150 lineups each ,and then when people are colluding together almost all combinations of superstars and value plays are covered with their optimizers. it’s disheartening to say the least. Might as well wipe my butt with $4 rather than pad dks and pros pockets. That’s why I will not even play NBA anymore . I’ll splash quarters around for fun in NFL and NHL but that’s what it is entertainment

  • Epicsic

    @Cal said...

    I disagree. I think another user not that far from your line of thinking could say “I think it is wrong for a group of sharp players in a private chat to analyze which players are the best value plays” or “I think it is cheating for an optimizer to exist even if you have to lock in two players before hitting the optimize button.” I think the answer is to draw the line as clearly as possible. Improve/evolve it as needed. Personally, I think the top players regularly having the same lineups in cash games is a bad look for DFS so I’d like to see clearer rules to prevent it.

    No because at the end of the day those “sharp players” after all there analyzing and using optimizers should still make there lineups on there own. Not pooling together on the SAME lineup to take down a tourney and split the winnings .

  • rainbowtroutman

    @gmupats87 said...

    So even if they don’t collude and share lineups just know there are so many unethical things going on in this industry it’s not even funny.

    You think all these sites like fantasy cruncher and fantasy labs was created because they love the game? No it’s because edge is diminishing and they are trying to squeeze whatever penny is remaining.

    I know it’s fun sweating games and it makes the games more enjoyable but do yourself a favor and get out. You will never be able to beat the pros consistently.

    ^^THIS^^

  • jah2323

    @gmupats87 said...

    I played 10K a night and Sunday was my last day. I placed a 20 year ban on myself because of this BS. Let’s be honest guys, unless there are some regulations when the merger is official and the new site is launched , ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WILL HAPPEN. sites have no option but to cater to the pros. The sites haven’t turned a profit that is why referrals are gone, rake is rising, etc.

    I know many pros in the top 25 selling lineups. So even if they don’t collude and share lineups just know there are so many unethical things going on in this industry it’s not even funny.

    You think all these sites like fantasy cruncher and fantasy labs was created because they love the game? No it’s because edge is diminishing and they are trying to squeeze whatever penny is remaining.

    I know it’s fun sweating games and it makes the games more enjoyable but do yourself a favor and get out. You will never be able to beat the pros consistently.

    Very interesting to read posts like this one and the one from MickyD10970. Guys that were high $ players or playing professionally calling it a day. Going back to a milly maker in golf this summer when Daut/MIR were involved in, as they call it “working together,” really opened my eyes. I’ve only played for barely over a year and only play low-micro stakes, but began to see many of these things even in my contests. I quit cash long ago due to this nonsense and haven’t deposited in months. I will just finish out what little money I have remaining on the sites and won’t deposit again unless serious changes are made. I certainly don’t expect this to happen and fully expect DFS to go the way of another online hobby I once had, funny how many of the same figures will contribute to the collapse of both.

  • enkidu_dfs

    There are some relatively easy ways to systematically find some of these players who routinely share lineups/act as a single entity (assuming you know a little programming or scripting). I’ve been planning on writing up a longer form article/paper on this, but here’s a quick exercise to try:

    - download a csv of lineups from a big DK tournament (I focus on the main slate NBA $3/$4 contests) – for each user account that plays more than, say, 50 entries, determine the set of players they use in all their lineups – then use something like Jaccard similarity to compare those sets of players against each other, pairwise by user – find the users whose player sets are similar to a statistically significant degree – do this for a few daily tournaments, find which users are consistently highly similar

    You’ll find some pretty interesting clusters of users. There was one in particular, a cluster that grew to about 8 user accounts as of the end of Novemeber, all max entering with the same distinctive lineup constructions. As of I think 11/31 or so, the entire cluster disappeared. A few days later it returned, but only with the three core users (I think DK cracked down on the multiple account issue, but allowed them to maintain their main accounts). Another large cluster also disappeared at the same time, but never returned.

    And these clusters of users bank a ton of money, just on these lower priced tournaments. A handful of the top players consistently show up as being highly connected. I emailed DK about the reappearance of the core of that one cluster and they blew me off with a form response.

  • sethayates

    @enkidu_dfs said...

    There are some relatively easy ways to systematically find some of these players who routinely share lineups/act as a single entity (assuming you know a little programming or scripting). I’ve been planning on writing up a longer form article/paper on this, but here’s a quick exercise to try:

    - download a csv of lineups from a big DK tournament (I focus on the main slate NBA $3/$4 contests) – for each user account that plays more than, say, 50 entries, determine the set of players they use in all their lineups – then use something like Jaccard similarity to compare those sets of players against each other, pairwise by user – find the users whose player sets are similar to a statistically significant degree – do this for a few daily tournaments, find which users are consistently highly similar

    You’ll find some pretty interesting clusters of users. There was one in particular, a cluster that grew to about 8 user accounts as of the end of Novemeber, all max entering with the same distinctive lineup constructions. As of I think 11/31 or so, the entire cluster disappeared. A few days later it returned, but only with the three core users (I think DK cracked down on the multiple account issue, but allowed them to maintain their main accounts). Another large cluster also disappeared at the same time, but never returned.

    And these clusters of users bank a ton of money, just on these lower priced tournaments. A handful of the top players consistently show up as being highly connected. I emailed DK about the reappearance of the core of that one cluster and they blew me off with a form response.

    Are you sure that this simply can’t be explained by users getting a 30-day or -60-day trial to a projections site (FantasyCrucher, Fantasylabs, Basketball Monster, Etc) and then simply quitting when the subscription ran out?

    Also, the subscription may not have run out but the players were consistently realizing that the game was unbeatable or they were losing too much money too quickly so they all quit around the same time.

  • Cal

    RG CoFounder & Admin

    • 575

      RG Overall Ranking

    • $1M Prize Winner

    • x4

      2015 DraftKings FFWC Finalist

    @jah2323 said...

    I quit cash long ago due to this nonsense and haven’t deposited in months. I will just finish out what little money I have remaining on the sites and won’t deposit again unless serious changes are made.

    I think a post like this resonates jah. What changes would you want to see before you would deposit again? How do you recommend DK/FD codify the rules around this?

  • jah2323

    @Cal said...

    I think a post like this resonates jah. What changes would you want to see before you would deposit again? How do you recommend DK/FD codify the rules around this?

    When I read the preview of db’s podcast today I was curious what he had to say. As some have said before, I certainly think there’s a way for the sites to weed out the behavior that will ultimately only harm them. I think db summed it up pretty well and laid out a plan the sites should be able to accomplish relatively easily. Again, I don’t expect any of these things to ever happen, but listening to the podcast and hearing it come from someone as connected as db is, who knows, maybe I’m wrong. Obv, same cash game lineups is just a small part of the overall issues in DFS. What about tournaments where I’m sure behavior like we saw this past summer in golf is taking place on a nightly basis? It’s too easy for the sites to say we looked into the situation and found there was no wrongdoing. I’m sorry, but what took place this past summer in multiple golf majors was a joke and the response from DK didn’t help the cause, IMO.

  • rainbowtroutman

    @Cal said...

    I think a post like this resonates jah. What changes would you want to see before you would deposit again? How do you recommend DK/FD codify the rules around this?

    Cal C’mon man—You know what changes need to be made. You read these threads every day and you know what the problems are. Fanduel and DK know what the problems are. The sites have proven they just don’t care for the average player,catering to the pros. You know that. If they don’t make changes, and quick, this is a dying hobby. It is not up to the players to recommend changes,the sites know what to do. Whether they do it is another story,but as has been mentioned 33,000 times (especially by Dude Abides,who always has insightfull posts). Since you speak to the sites,tell them to read these threads,and then they will know the problems.

  • Cal

    RG CoFounder & Admin

    • 575

      RG Overall Ranking

    • $1M Prize Winner

    • x4

      2015 DraftKings FFWC Finalist

    @rainbowtroutman said...

    Cal C’mon man—You know what changes need to be made. You read these threads every day and you know what the problems are. Fanduel and DK know what the problems are. The sites have proven they just don’t care for the average player,catering to the pros. You know that. If they don’t make changes, and quick, this is a dying hobby. It is not up to the players to recommend changes,the sites know what to do. Whether they do it is another story,but as has been mentioned 33,000 times (especially by Dude Abides,who always has insightfull posts). Since you speak to the sites,tell them to read these threads,and then they will know the problems.

    Multiple people at DK read these threads. I’ve said many times I think RangerC’s post on ragingphillip/mazwa directly led to the Community Guidelines. They would need to add to those Guidelines to address the issues in this thread (or take a different approach than the Guidelines completely). It’s not as easy as you’re making it out to be, though. There has to be thought put into it and you have to be careful to not create more new problems when trying to fix an old one. I think Dan laid it out pretty well in his podcast today.

  • MickyD10970

    • 348

      RG Overall Ranking

    • Ranked #27

      RG Tiered Ranking

    @Cal said...

    Multiple people at DK read these threads. I’ve said many times I think RangerC’s post on ragingphillip/mazwa directly led to the Community Guidelines. They would need to add to those Guidelines to address the issues in this thread (or take a different approach than the Guidelines completely). It’s not as easy as you’re making it out to be, though. There has to be thought put into it and you have to be careful to not create more new problems when trying to fix an old one. I think Dan laid it out pretty well in his podcast today.

    It’s actually real easy, enkido pointed out a great way. Even St Louis Cards knows whats going on, How hard is it to build your own lineup! I work a full time job and have 3 kids and I can figure it out. I get all the excuses, Rotogrinders money comes from the sites. The Guidelines are a joke and only there for optics. The sites know darn well what’s going on and how to fix it. All these years and Fanduel still cant produce a CSV for entries or a matchup blocker. DK allows 3 blocks which can’t even help you block one of the several syndicates. I can only imagine all the buried skeletons, Collusion is rampant and only a few care, in the meantime the common player goes broke.
    JMHO

  • MickyD10970

    • 348

      RG Overall Ranking

    • Ranked #27

      RG Tiered Ranking

    @Cal said...

    I think Dan laid it out pretty well in his podcast today

    To some extent. However, team players changing a defense or kicker really solves nothing. Those are generally the positions that you can flip a coin on… especially kickers. It’s just always the minimum to get the heat off until the next controversy threatens the bottom line.

  • Schwabs1

    @jah2323 said...

    When I read the preview of db’s podcast today I was curious what he had to say. As some have said before, I certainly think there’s a way for the sites to weed out the behavior that will ultimately only harm them. I think db summed it up pretty well and laid out a plan the sites should be able to accomplish relatively easily. Again, I don’t expect any of these things to ever happen, but listening to the podcast and hearing it come from someone as connected as db is, who knows, maybe I’m wrong. Obv, same cash game lineups is just a small part of the overall issues in DFS. What about tournaments where I’m sure behavior like we saw this past summer in golf is taking place on a nightly basis? It’s too easy for the sites to say we looked into the situation and found there was no wrongdoing. I’m sorry, but what took place this past summer in multiple golf majors was a joke and the response from DK didn’t help the cause, IMO.

    @jah2323 Would u elaborate what happened in the Golf Majors?

    Some Excellent information here boys & the pissing & moaning is to be expected (and some to most warranted imo)
    However, as we know, the little man’s been getting beaten down since the dawn of time- never gonna (completely)change. All we can do is continue to beat on the door. Which I believe we should, cuz, don’t kid yourself, we want to continue to play DFS (Yes fairly would be nice, I understand)

    Corporations can be extremely arrogant in thinking they can outlast the negative pub. I have to hope this one realizes bfor it’s too late that in order to ‘Thrive’ (Not just exist) the negativity must at the least, diminish.

    Dealing w/the now: I find Tourneys (like the $33 NBA one tonight) easier to cash than 50/50’s & such. I really only play these and not w/the expectation of winning, but to cash.

    I wish I had more to offer, I will just say for every hole you plug, another is bound to emerge eventually.

  • jah2323

    Here you go Schwabs1,

    https://rotogrinders.com/threads/daut44-makeitrain84-allegedly-colluding-in-milly-maker-to-have-300-entries-1371841

    https://rotogrinders.com/threads/mazwa-ragingphillip-colluded-to-circumvent-150-lu-limit-won-millionaire-maker-1368653?page=1

  • Cal

    RG CoFounder & Admin

    • 575

      RG Overall Ranking

    • $1M Prize Winner

    • x4

      2015 DraftKings FFWC Finalist

    @MickyD10970 said...

    It’s actually real easy, enkido pointed out a great way. Even St Louis Cards knows whats going on, How hard is it to build your own lineup!

    We’re not on the same page. Enkidu is pointing out how to catch players using the same lineups. We don’t need to do that in the case of daut/makeitrain. There have been so many posts about it on RG that it is high profile. It’s currently allowed by the sites – making a lineup with friends and then playing that lineup in cash games is allowed. The first step is to codify the rules or guidelines to disallow this. Those guidelines should end the high profile cases because those players will not want their accounts banned. Then enkidu’s post comes into play – catching players who circumvent the guidelines.

  • dude_abides7

    @enkidu_dfs said...

    There are some relatively easy ways to systematically find some of these players who routinely share lineups/act as a single entity (assuming you know a little programming or scripting). I’ve been planning on writing up a longer form article/paper on this, but here’s a quick exercise to try:

    – download a csv of lineups from a big DK tournament (I focus on the main slate NBA $3/$4 contests) – for each user account that plays more than, say, 50 entries, determine the set of players they use in all their lineups – then use something like Jaccard similarity to compare those sets of players against each other, pairwise by user – find the users whose player sets are similar to a statistically significant degree – do this for a few daily tournaments, find which users are consistently highly similar

    You’ll find some pretty interesting clusters of users. There was one in particular, a cluster that grew to about 8 user accounts as of the end of Novemeber, all max entering with the same distinctive lineup constructions. As of I think 11/31 or so, the entire cluster disappeared. A few days later it returned, but only with the three core users (I think DK cracked down on the multiple account issue, but allowed them to maintain their main accounts). Another large cluster also disappeared at the same time, but never returned.

    And these clusters of users bank a ton of money, just on these lower priced tournaments. A handful of the top players consistently show up as being highly connected. I emailed DK about the reappearance of the core of that one cluster and they blew me off with a form response.

    Ummm….I didn’t technically understand a thing you said, but it sounds pretty damn smart. I’d like to hear more of this analysis and maybe some actual data you have to support it, sans the user names of course.

  • dude_abides7

    @MickyD10970 said...

    To some extent. However, team players changing a defense or kicker really solves nothing. Those are generally the positions that you can flip a coin on… especially kickers. It’s just always the minimum to get the heat off until the next controversy threatens the bottom line.

    I actually don’t think you are being cynical here and it is a valid point. If you are an individual or ‘syndicate’ that tightropes the gray area of the rules for a living in order to ‘gain your edge’, I don’t think it is that far of a stretch to think these same individuals would be smart enough to know how to dodge measures put in place to prevent their colluding.

    Inherently, pure collusion is nearly impossible to “prove”. A simple marginal, intentional tweak or throw away entry to give the impression you are playing within the guidelines would be enough to head off any red flags.

    I don’t think there is any single bullet here. I just think the sites aren’t doing nearly enough and I think that fosters the opinion that that sites are in the bag with the volume guys. It doesn’t seem they are in any hurry to dispel this notion. I wonder why that is?

  • Cal

    RG CoFounder & Admin

    • 575

      RG Overall Ranking

    • $1M Prize Winner

    • x4

      2015 DraftKings FFWC Finalist

    @dude_abides7 said...

    I actually don’t think you are being cynical here and it is a valid point. If you are an individual or ‘syndicate’ that tightropes the gray area of the rules for a living in order to ‘gain your edge’, I don’t think it is that far of a stretch to think these same individuals would be smart enough to know how to dodge measures to prevent their colluding.

    Inherently, pure collusion is nearly impossible to “prove”. A simple marginal, intentional tweak or throw away entry to give the impression you are playing within the guidelines would be enough to head off any red flags.

    Agree. That’s part of what I’m considering when I say this isn’t as simple as some make it out to be. An unintended side effect of trying to create rules to address this could be clarifying rules for how to work together.

  • MickyD10970

    • 348

      RG Overall Ranking

    • Ranked #27

      RG Tiered Ranking

    @Cal said...

    Agree. That’s part of what I’m considering when I say this isn’t as simple as some make it out to be. An unintended side effect of trying to create rules to address this could be clarifying rules for how to work together.

    Would certainly be better than the current meta where certain pros and known colluders continue to push the rule boundaries until they are slapped on the wrist and told not to do it again or sometimes their behaiver is made ok within the rules. At least then you would have rules in place for team play that apply to EVERYONE. Not that that will make things any better for the landscape in general but at least there would be more than “guidelines”

    On a side note I am not trying to bust your chops Cal but the way the last year has gone in this industry is beyond frightening.

  • Cal

    RG CoFounder & Admin

    • 575

      RG Overall Ranking

    • $1M Prize Winner

    • x4

      2015 DraftKings FFWC Finalist

    @MickyD10970 said...

    Would certainly be better than the current meta where certain pros and known colluders continue to push the rule boundaries until they are slapped on the wrist and told not to do it again or sometimes their behaiver is made ok within the rules. At least then you would have rules in place for team play that apply to EVERYONE. Not that that will make things any better for the landscape in general but at least there would be more than “guidelines”

    On a side note I am not trying to bust your chops Cal but the way the last year has gone in this industry is beyond frightening.

    Not worried about chop busting, just trying to keep the thread on the course that I think makes it most productive. Your sentiment in the first paragraph is similar to what I said to a DK rep yesterday – no clear great answer but plenty of things would be better than status quo.

  • JimKronlund

    @sethayates said...

    I have a question for you guys. Put yourself in DraftKings’ shoes for a second. What amount of working together would you allow? Many people on this very forum collaborate to build DFS lineups. This site also has a lineup generator.

    I’m part of several different groups that discuss DFS through Twitter DMs, Slack channels, Google chat and some people even DM me on here. Back when CFB existed I was part of a group that discussed CFB. Since that was my weakest sport I almost always played a lineup given to me by one of the other members of the group. In exchange I would send that person a lineup for a different sport if they requested one.

    Many many people send me messages on Twitter asking if I can look at their lineup. Some have even asked me if I can provide a lineup to them. I’ve done that a few times but I mainly ask that they build their own lineup first and then I’ll critique it.

    The question becomes what level of lineup sharing is allowed? The biggest names in the industry get attention when they share lineups. Wouldn’t you do the same thing though if you were really good at this but also had access to others who were equally skilled?

    On top of that, most of the people named in the original post of this thread subscribe to premium tools. Last season I was able to get the optimal lineups given out by various premium tools across the industry. I would check cash games and often find the biggest names simply using the optimal lineup. It’s quite possible that some people accused of sharing actually don’t even know each other. They just subscribe to the same thing.

    So what level of sharing is ok?

    Projections?
    Projections paired with a lineup builder?
    An Optimal Lineup?
    A group of friends that come to a consensus lineup?
    A purchased lineup?
    An article that details it’s best plays? (if you plug in the first option at each position it magically fits)

    Is the issue that these people are sharing lineups or is the issue that these people are too good? This contest where the top 334 spots were taken by just two lineups is a bad look for DFS. https://www.draftkings.com/contest/gamecenter/34926103?uc=612078479

    That will drive away casual players faster than anything else. What would you do about it though?

    A moral compass points toward zero collusion. There is not a grey area that says some collusion is ok.
    The difference between discussing on an open forum and what you are doing is night and day and to me it is clearly collusion. If you introduce something that you want to conveniently call a grey area then there is no guidelines at all.

  • enkidu_dfs

    @Cal said...

    We’re not on the same page. Enkidu is pointing out how to catch players using the same lineups.

    Just a minor clarification, the process I was describing looks for similar lineups, not the same lineups. For example, the 8-user cluster was entering a total of 1200 unique lineups into the tournaments, all using the same distinctive exposure %‘s.

  • enkidu_dfs

    @sethayates said...

    Are you sure that this simply can’t be explained by users getting a 30-day or -60-day trial to a projections site (FantasyCrucher, Fantasylabs, Basketball Monster, Etc) and then simply quitting when the subscription ran out?

    Also, the subscription may not have run out but the players were consistently realizing that the game was unbeatable or they were losing too much money too quickly so they all quit around the same time.

    I would hope that there is indeed an innocent/coincidental explanation, as opposed to jumping to conclusions. To your point on the users realizing they were losing money and giving up, it’s actually the opposite: they were making a ton of money. And to the idea of using the same subscription site, that’s definitely a reasonable possibility, but (as I mentioned just above this reply), the users were submitting unique lineups. So if they were using a service, that service was somehow making sure that it wasn’t providing any dupes to its unrelated users (even though it was providing lineups with the same distinctive exposures), which seems unlikely to me.

  • enkidu_dfs

    @dude_abides7 said...

    Ummm….I didn’t technically understand a thing you said, but it sounds pretty damn smart. I’d like to hear more of this analysis and maybe some actual data you have to support it, sans the user names of course.

    I could provide some pseudo-code or some anonymized graphs, but I was kind of hoping someone else might try for themselves, in order to verify to some extent the method I outlined.

  • Priptonite

    • Blogger of the Month

    My beef is less with two friends who work together to build their [insert sport here] lineups, and more with the lineup swapping syndicates. Player A trades his NHL lineup for Player B’s NBA and Player C’s NFL. Having a guy crush a sport while putting literally no effort into it is ridiculous.

  • 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).