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.

  • Gfry3

    Solid post depalma! Those limits actually seem reasonable. And like you said start the huge GPP’s at $5 in that case, then anyone can still feel ok about getting into the huge $$ GPP’s if they choose but still can play in the shark-less fields of small tourneys.

  • TheRyanFlaherty

    @whodat2 said...

    How about only unique lineups.
    Double the lineup.
    Double the salary.
    If you submit a lineup that’s already taken, then the site won’t accept the lineup, and tell you to try another one.

    Not really a fan of that.
    One of the draws to DFS is that the salary and ways to construct a team are theoretically equal to everyone.
    While an all unique lu’s rule could work for smaller leagues, it would open up even more ways to manipulate the system if it went beyond that.

    While this is also likely not an optimal solution, I’ve wondered what it would be like if a site had real time salaries that went up and down throughout the day.
    An optimal lineup at 3pm may not fit at 5.
    Everyone wouldn’t be able to have the same value guys or studs if their prices were adjusting throughout the day…
    While interesting, that would probably be.a mess too as syndicates could manipulate pricing and it would favor pros and people that had the ability to make changes throughout the day….so really not a much better solution.

    The real solution is actually simple: it involves listening to the people that may play $10 a day…a week…the people that stopped playing…those that won’t deposit because they think it’s a scam.
    I’d wager those voices feel largely ignored and if it continues on that path DFS will continue it’s downward trend…Simple as that.

  • JimKronlund

    @depalma13 said...

    The easiest way to stop it is for the sites to block players from contests based on how much of a lifetime profit they have.

    These sites know if you have a profit or not. If you have a lifetime profit of 2K, you don’t get to enter $1 contests (cash or gpp) until you’re winnings fall below that level. Profit 5k, get removed from $2 and $1 contests. Profit $10k you are out of $3 and below. Profit 15k no $4 contests or below. Above that, you are on your own.

    If the sites want to run big GPPs, start them at $5 and than it is up to the player if he wants to go up against the sharks in their pool. The sites can even eliminate the entry caps because everyone knows what they are getting into at that point.

    As for the lineup sellers. If their lineups are successful, the people buying them will profit quickly and be removed form the smaller dollar contests. If they remain, it will become quite obvious that the lineups are bad and the players are not winning with them.

    But what about the smaller $ guys that may had a single bullet win but still can only afford the smaller amounts.

  • deactivated51600

    @TheRyanFlaherty said...

    people that may play $10 a day…a week…the people that stopped playing

    I am one of the people who has significantly reduced my volume of play and deposits. I still enjoy it just as much and play every day, i just put in about 90-95% less volume now.

    One thing that DK could do to motivate me to immediately ramp up my deposits and daily volume would be to increase the max entries allowed on Quarter Arcade and $1 MME gpp’s in every sport from 50 to 150. This had been allowed in past but then discontinued for some reason.

  • Gfry3

    I guess to me the smaller guys that hit one are 1. not likely to go over $2k with that win 2. If they are small will likely lose some to get under the $2k anyway and 3. If they hit say a $5k then they should have no problem entering a few $5 tournaments/games until they are under $2k, its not like they would be down money. and if they played $5 etc maybe they keep winning!

    Only thing that is semi pointless is discussing this ha, you know full well this or anything similar will ever happen. The sites work now so why would they change them, in the long term sure its bad but the people running the show seem to focus on the here and now.

  • depalma13

    @JimKronlund said...

    But what about the smaller $ guys that may had a single bullet win but still can only afford the smaller amounts.

    That is why I suggested profit and not winnings. One big score does not mean you have a profit. If it does mean you have a profit, than you have the money to move up. If you lose it, than you can go back to playing lower stakes. I think the profit levels I suggested are very reasonable.

    If your significant other took your profit, or you used it for a family trip or purchase, well that’s part of being a success.

    The dollar players are facing the sharks now. I would think getting the sharks out of the small dollar contests would be better for everyone that isn’t actually a shark.

  • fediganattheshore

    Good thing Mazwa/RagingPhillip don’t work together…

    https://www.draftkings.com/contest/gamecenter/35895720?uc=634306017

    more than one of their lineups are exactly the same and in the same order…

    and yes I get that it’s not +EV to have exact same lineups in GPPs…but kinda funny they can claim not to be circumventing entry limits and then have multiple same lineups in a GPP

  • Cal

    RG CoFounder & Admin

    • 832

      RG Overall Ranking

    • $1M Prize Winner

    • x4

      2015 DraftKings FFWC Finalist

    @fediganattheshore said...

    Good thing Mazwa/RagingPhillip don’t work together…

    They do work together.

    The way the play currently is allowed, from what I understand. It seems similar to how PG/CA work together – lineups built around a similar strategy or set of projections but not interconnected in an overt manner to evade entry limits. The golf milly maker they won this summer, where ownership percentages were nearly identical between their two sets of 150 lineups, is what is currently not allowed by the Community Guidelines (and I think RangerC’s post about it led to the the Community Guidelines).

    This is my understanding from several talks with DK, but I’m not 100% since they won’t give details on specific cases and because the Guidelines can be interpreted in different ways. Community Guidelines were a good first step but the whole thing needs to be revisited and clarified. They need to make it crystal clear what is right and wrong so that everyone is on the same page. They also need to take another step at limiting team play – at the very least it’s a huge optics problem.

    The good news is it seems everyone at DK is becoming increasingly aware of the problem. I had a call with DK legal last week that was refreshing – their legal team has an increasing role in matters like this as their company gets bigger and faces legal concerns from all angles. They had a solid grasp of the issue and want to make changes in 2017. They also read these forums. Threads like this help raise awareness – we just need to make sure we keep them constructive.

  • tsteeves

    @Cal said...

    The good news is it seems everyone at DK is becoming increasingly aware of the problem. I had a call with DK legal last week that was refreshing – their legal team has an increasing role in matters like this as their company gets bigger and faces legal concerns from all angles. They had a solid grasp of the issue and want to make changes in 2017.

    This is my 2 cents.

    Maybe moving forward in 2017 DK will actually care about game integrity but at this point myself and I imagine many others don’t have much confidence things will change all that much. DK had chances in 2016 to set a precedent, however they failed to do so. With the merger on the horizon I’m doubting DK’s compliance team will suddenly start punishing those that skirt the rules. It’ll be business as usual at DK but maybe when the merger happens and both companies compliance and legal departments get together, a more thorough understanding and handling of these issues will exist.

  • SnowShark

    The last 2 nights I’ve played is the worst I’ve ever seen it. This season as a whole as changed my outlook on many sites and pros. The colluding and sharing of lineups is so obvious that many of the 50/50 and double ups seem to be filling up at a much slower rate through out the day. I am talking cash games specifically. The only way I can think of to change it is add in multi position eligibility on FanDuel specifically. I normally don’t play cash games on DK so i don’t know if its as rampant on there as it is on FD or if that idea might actually work. Also clueless to the fact that sharing cash games between friends is legal. Probably the most unethical thing about DFS right now. Very sad to see my favorite hobby die right in front of my eyes. Sites need to be proactive for once and that includes Rotogrinders

  • Pitch120

    @SnowShark said...

    The last 2 nights I’ve played is the worst I’ve ever seen it. This season as a whole as changed my outlook on many sites and pros. The colluding and sharing of lineups is so obvious that many of the 50/50 and double ups seem to be filling up at a much slower rate through out the day. I am talking cash games specifically. The only way I can think of to change it is add in multi position eligibility on FanDuel specifically. I normally don’t play cash games on DK so i don’t know if its as rampant on there as it is on FD or if that idea might actually work. Also clueless to the fact that sharing cash games between friends is legal. Probably the most unethical thing about DFS right now. Very sad to see my favorite hobby die right in front of my eyes. Sites need to be proactive for once and that includes Rotogrinders

    It’s a combo of lineup sharing and jut too much information. Everyone knows everything, There’s too many sites giving advice.

    Two years ago, a Melo or Noah would’ve been 1/3rd their ownership that they were yesterday. They would’ve been shrewd plays. But now, all the “pros” just talk to each other and write the same content, so ownership for guys like that just fly up.

    The irony is, the little guy still loses. Because those same “pros” can put Melo/Noah in some lineups and not in others. So if those two DONT go off, they still have exposure to other guys because they are spending the money. The “non pro” can only play one or a few lineups.

  • Njsum1

    @Pitch120 said...

    It’s a combo of lineup sharing and jut too much information. Everyone knows everything, There’s too many sites giving advice.

    Two years ago, a Melo or Noah would’ve been 1/3rd their ownership that they were yesterday. They would’ve been shrewd plays. But now, all the “pros” just talk to each other and write the same content, so ownership for guys like that just fly up.

    The irony is, the little guy still loses. Because those same “pros” can put Melo/Noah in some lineups and not in others. So if those two DONT go off, they still have exposure to other guys because they are spending the money. The “non pro” can only play one or a few lineups.

    First 2 paragraphs are spot on, and those points are pretty much understood and accepted. As dfs grew in popularity so did sites providing content and advice, making info more readily available to the casual player.

    Yet I completely disagree with the last paragraph. All the “non pro” has to do if they feel like they are at a disadvantage cause they can’t have exposure to other plays is drop down in stakes. For example, If you were making 3 lineups in the $4 make 12 in the $1. Making 3 in the $1, make 12 in the quarter arcade. Simple as that.

  • Pitch120

    @Njsum1 said...

    First 2 paragraphs are spot on, and those points are pretty much understood and accepted. As dfs grew in popularity so did sites providing content and advice, making info more readily available to the casual player.

    Yet I completely disagree with the last paragraph. All the “non pro” has to do if they feel like they are at a disadvantage cause they can’t have exposure to other plays is drop down in stakes. For example, If you were making 3 lineups in the $4 make 12 in the $1. Making 3 in the $1, make 12 in the quarter arcade. Simple as that.

    The pros still play the smaller tournaments. The $2 double up on FD yesterday (and everyday)…It’s all pros making giant trains.

    And people want to win some semblance of money. The quarter arcade (with a ton of people anyway) pays out nothing.

  • Njsum1

    I understand that pros play smaller tourneys yet that wasn’t the crux of your argument. You said non pros are at a disadvantage because they can’t deviate off chalk and make more lineups due to budget constraints. And i said of course they can by going down in stakes.

    Also doesn’t matter what stakes you play at, your ROI has to do with money made (or lost) based on the dollar amount you play. You shouldn’t have a higher expectation for profit playing 3 lineups in the $4 than 12 lineups in $1, or 48 lineups in the quarter arcade.

  • pmsimkins

    • 2014 FanDuel WFBC Finalist

    • 2015 FanDuel WFBBC Finalist

    @Njsum1 said...

    You shouldn’t have a higher expectation for profit playing 3 lineups in the $4 than 12 lineups in $1, or 48 lineups in the quarter arcade.

    That’s entirely incorrect.

  • Njsum1

    The point I was trying to make is that you can make decent money in the quarter arcade.

    Also, if what I posted is incorrect, and I don’t mind being corrected if I’m wrong, your post saying so without giving an explanation as to why, or at the very least pointing out which of the three scenarios mentioned has a higher expectation for profit, was entirely unhelpful.

  • NESBears120

    How about DK gives every player a badge based on ROI they can be beginner/intermediate/advanced. Then Tourneys and cash games for each level. Ex… have a $5 sharpshooter tourney for the advanced guys with a bigger prize Poole then have a $3 tourney for the smaller guys and a $1 tourney for the smallest guys with smaller prize pools and put out cash games and other tourneys with this line of thinking as well… to help the smaller guys out allow players to play up levels, but not down so a beginner can play in an intermediate or advanced tourney, but an advanced player can’t play against the beginners. That way the people that decide to play up know what they are playing against and it’s their fault if they play against colluding sharks

  • pmsimkins

    • 2014 FanDuel WFBC Finalist

    • 2015 FanDuel WFBBC Finalist

    @Njsum1 said...

    The point I was trying to make is that you can make decent money in the quarter arcade.

    Also, if what I posted is incorrect, and I don’t mind being corrected if I’m wrong, your post saying so without giving an explanation as to why, or at the very least pointing out which of the three scenarios mentioned has a higher expectation for profit, was entirely unhelpful.

    It’s been explained before, which is why I didn’t take the time.

    Assuming a player has statistical skill in setting a lineup, his\her 1st LU will outperform the 48th lineup long term.

    The other factors will be size of tournament, pay structure, how the player constructs multiple lineups etc.

    Generally a good player will have a higher ROI with a single LU in higher dollar tourneys. This comes with more variance though and requires a larger bankroll relative to total dollars wagered daily.

  • Njsum1

    Thanks…I’ve always felt this to be true judging from my own results. Although I’ve found to do better with 2 or 3 lineups, (on average, depending on slate, contest, etc) than just 1 or over 5. Probably no statistical reason for it, just how it works for me. Cheers

  • MickyD10970

    • 897

      RG Overall Ranking

    @NESBears120 said...

    How about DK gives every player a badge based on ROI they can be beginner/intermediate/advanced. Then Tourneys and cash games for each level. Ex… have a $5 sharpshooter tourney for the advanced guys with a bigger prize Poole then have a $3 tourney for the smaller guys and a $1 tourney for the smallest guys with smaller prize pools and put out cash games and other tourneys with this line of thinking as well… to help the smaller guys out allow players to play up levels, but not down so a beginner can play in an intermediate or advanced tourney, but an advanced player can’t play against the beginners. That way the people that decide to play up know what they are playing against and it’s their fault if they play against colluding sharks

    This is never going to happen….end of story. After 5 + years Fanduel still does not have a matchup blocker and Draftkings only lets you block 3 players which is isn’t even enough to block exposure from most of the lineup sharing teams. (my guess is there are many more than anyone imagines, some are just more high profile) Cash games at all $ amounts are basically unplayable and definately not fun anymore. The players are too good and there is no $ amount that is safe. If the sites wanted a true even playing field they would have unlimited matchup blocking. (I don’t want to play even 1 game at each dollar level against Sahil and believe me there are many more nearly as good)

  • deactivated51600

    @Cal said...

    This is my understanding from several talks with DK

    Cal.. since you are in a position to speak with people at DK can you please ask them to consider reupping(?) the max entry in .25 and $1 mme’s to 150 instead of 50.

  • ThatStunna

    • 48

      RG Overall Ranking

    • Ranked #38

      RG Tiered Ranking

    • 2016 DraftKings FFWC Finalist

    • 2017 DraftKings FBWC Finalist

    For what it’s worth, on Jan 4 there were 5 people’s entries (6 total entries) that were all identical in the $1k on Fanduel, which is 134 max entries. 20% of that contest goes to first place, so tying with a lineup has a fairly big penalty (unlike in large double ups or 50-50s). Either these people are bad at colluding efficiently or lots of people were thinking the same way without actually colluding.

    Youdacao/booourns also earns a brass balls award for duping his own lineup, since that second copy of the lineup is pretty dubious short of a tie with other people (which did happen, but is weird to bet on).

    Pretty much every double up or 50-50 is broken, with the possible exception of 100+ person 50-50s; that’s likely true even if you eliminated every double up team of pros, since there are lots of projection sellers out there. It does suck when people join and lineup train small contests but it’s honestly your fault if you choose to join the horrible giant double ups. Sites run those with a terrible structure because they make money; if you join them (and aren’t playing for fun), then you’re rewarding them.

    As I always tell people, stick to contests with more money at the top that thus penalize dupe entries. People don’t notice lineup trains that don’t cash, but every duplicate lineup in a full contest increases your chance of getting first.

  • emitnulB

    • 132

      RG Overall Ranking

    • Ranked #15

      RG Tiered Ranking

    • 2019 $1M Prize Winner

    • 2018 DraftKings FBBWC Finalist

    @MickyD10970 said...

    This is never going to happen….end of story. After 5 + years Fanduel still does not have a matchup blocker and Draftkings only lets you block 3 players which is isn’t even enough to block exposure from most of the lineup sharing teams. (my guess is there are many more than anyone imagines, some are just more high profile) Cash games at all $ amounts are basically unplayable and definately not fun anymore. The players are too good and there is no $ amount that is safe. If the sites wanted a true even playing field they would have unlimited matchup blocking. (I don’t want to play even 1 game at each dollar level against Sahil and believe me there are many more nearly as good)

    How do you have an even playing field and allow people to not play against people who they think they are losing to? Match up blockers are a tool to create an uneven playing field. They just allow you to only play against people who you think you are beating.

  • daviskg8

    i feel pretty

  • MickyD10970

    • 897

      RG Overall Ranking

    @emitnulB said...

    How do you have an even playing field and allow people to not play against people who they think they are losing to? Match up blockers are a tool to create an uneven playing field. They just allow you to only play against people who you think you are beating.

    Not sure I understand your question. A matchup blocker allows you to avoid those players you have blocked. Maybe I worded it a little confusing. There will never be a level playing field under any conditions under current meta but I would not have stopped playing cash games if I didn’t get tired of the super pros picking up every game I posted. Especially annoying on Fan Duel where the same person can scoop all your action. I’m sure there are many others that feel the way I do. I have a job and family and no optimizer or advanced statistics degree to create one. I don’t have “friends” that I can piggyback off of and exchange my best sport for theirs. (yes Cal I know it is legal, it just shouldn’t be) I cannot spend all day researching. My knowledge of sports and players was fine initially but all the available information and touts has rendered any advantage I had useless. No complaints there, that is life but there is absolutely no reason that the sites should not allow its players to limit or block players of their choosing. There are plenty of people out there who have not or will not use blocker to attack. I guess just wishful thinking on my part to want to post 10 or 20 games and get 10 or 20 different opponents and hey if I want to block some players from grabbing my games then so be it. An all of you “build better lineups” people please refrain from piping in. The teams and pros have basically ruined DFS and anyone who does not see this is not looking very hard. It’s fine I went from $100’s a day in play to maybe $10-$25 and often nothing at all. I now play to alleviate boredom but willno longer risk any serious amounts of money.

    Thanks for letting me ramble.

  • 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).