NASCAR FORUM

Comments

  • stevietpfl

    Morning Grind co-host, Lead NASCAR Analyst

    • 2015 FanDuel MLB Playboy Mansion Finalist

    • 2015 FAWBC Finalist

    There’s been a lot of talk about NASCAR this year being too chalky, and with the off-week, I’m interested in everyone’s thoughts on how to improve it.

    I’ve said multiple times, I think adding a 7th driver would actually increase overlap. I really think adding stage points would change the whole strategy, and make you use guys you’d typically fade. Would certainly increase the player pool every weekend, and you wouldn’t be able to knock it down to 15-20 driver every week. I was a huge fan of the pass differential points, but I understand why DraftKings decided to get rid of them.

  • Jnvrmind

    Bigger reward points for the winner seems like a very racing way to go. It could even be a sliding scale #1,#2-#10,#11-#20,etc. Just more pronounced than it sits now.

  • jilesofthetrees

    • 2016 NASCAR Live Finalist

    @stevietpfl said...

    With the current format, adding a 7th driver would decrease possible lineup selection and add more overlap imo.

    We can eliminate 10-15 drivers each week, so we’re building lineups with 20-25 drivers at 6 per lineup. The chalk will stay the chalk.

    Overall I’m not sold there is a problem.

    However, the above statement is incorrect even granting your assumptions. Going from 6 to 7 has an upper limit of multiplying the number of lineups overall by ~30. Given salary structures / how DK has done it in the past… there would probably be around 6-10 times as many possible lineups within a given salary range with 7 relative to 6 drivers. (Rotodoc and I tweeted a little bit about this couple weeks ago about 5 vs 6 drivers and he did some legwork math for those interested.)

    Assuming your assertion of 20-25 ‘usable’ drivers the money spot for largest number of possible lineup constructions will be at the halfway point.. 10-12 driver lineups.

    Functionally the more choices you make people make the more ‘skill’ comes into play as well.

  • bric75

    • 12

      RG Overall Ranking

    • Ranked #9

      RG Tiered Ranking

    More accurate pricing would help

  • ajs1281

    Not a huge nascar player like most in this thread but I put in some every week and do ok at it. If I were going to blow it all up and start over to try to reduce chalk and ties while sticking with the 6 drivers. I would really need to look at numbers to see if they work but the concepts would be something close to this, with any or all together.

    More emphasis on finishing positions: Win 100, 2nd 85, 3rd 80…..5 points less down through top 10 (45), then 4 difference through top 15 (25) and 3 through top 20 so 20th is worth 10. Then 1 point difference through 30th and nothing for finishing worse than 31st. Big emphasis on wining, finishing up front and real penalties for wrecking or mechanical issues.

    Same with stages, I would go something like 10-7-5-3-2 for top 5. 6-10 in a stage gets .33 (lets get some random numbers in to help with ties in non-similar lineups)

    I would also group place differential to take some of the emphasis off of it:
    +1-5 places=1 point
    +6-10 places=3 points
    +11-15 places =6 points
    +16-20 places =10 points
    21 places=15 points
    -1-5 places= -1 point
    and so on, again numbers not as important as the concept right now and would have to be tweaked. The grouping would mean a new level of strategy in taking a top 10 car knowing they only have an upside of 3 points for place differential whether you take the car starting 6th or 10th instead of the possible 4 point swing currently. Also putting a cap on the upside means people wont simply be hunting the better drivers that start in the 30
    always knowing they could get same point differential out of driver starting 20s if it all works out. It also negates some of the downside risk so people may be more willing to take someone in top 10 they think will finish top 15 but the salary makes sense rather than being afraid of a massive point differential loss. These combined should ideally bring ownership down some as there would be more options with similar ceilings. This is only a thought because I would have to run alot of scenarios to see how many more times this leads to ties. If its too many ties, i would still de-emphasize this by maybe making it fractional to get the numbers to all be different enough to avoid ties. The idea is just to get more of the 40 drivers into play to change ownership levels.

    Throw in lap led and fastest lap bonuses at a fair ratio to keep dominators in play but not required to win every week and it could work.

    I think the stage points would help with strategy and the point differential coming down would make it interesting. Throw in a real penalty for gambling on the low end cars by not scoring them if they don’t finish top 30 which would also spread out more ownership into mid level drivers to make the cap work instead of the drivers in the back and cheap being all upside gambles like they are now if they get even an improvement from 40 to 31 it is the same as a driver falling from 2 to 12 in terms of position and place differential points.

  • DefinitelyMiami

    @ajs1281 said...

    Throw in a real penalty for gambling on the low end cars by not scoring them if they don’t finish top 30

    would be fine taking a 0 with Sorenson at times but what about when someone like Dale Jr when they crash out?

  • rush1228

    I would just like dk to fix the scoring to 40 cars instead of 43.Probably would take 10 minutes to do it and hasnt been done in over 2 years.

  • dbullsfan

    I would really like to see a bonus for winning the stages like 5 points. As a bonus I would like DK to take away the ability for me to look at my score until there is about 5 laps left as I would probably have more hair on my head than I do now.

  • ajs1281

    @DefinitelyMiami said...

    would be fine taking a 0 with Sorenson at times but what about when someone like Dale Jr when they crash out?

    It happens now, if you have drivers wreck it’s gonna be a bad time no matter the scoring system. If you put a floor on the point differential losing a star driver with a good start spot probably hurts less even with a zero for finishing points than the current system.

  • wormworth

    Based on last year and a half Martin Truex should be 15k on 1.5 mile tracks. That’s all the input I have for now lol.

  • jokerswild22

    Release pricing after qualifying.

  • heartman

    From the beginning of Nascar in 1947 there has always been one statistic that has been more important and held more weight than any other and that is finishing position. Nascar has used finishing position as it’s main stat to determine it’s champion up until the Chase format where a combination of finishing position points and wins now are the main tools. According to Nascar finishing position and wins are clearly and overwhelmingly the most important statistics.

    IMO Draftkings scoring is seriously flawed because it gives way too many points for laps led and place differential. Both of those stats are nowhere close to being as important as finishing position and Nascar agrees.

    To fix the problem this is what Draftkings needs to do in imo.

    !. Double the finishing position points from 1st to 40th. Instead of 1st being 46 change it to 92. Change 2nd from 42 to 84 and continue doubling all the way to 40th place.

    Fantasy Feud did this with their Nascar scoring and it was much better than DK imo.

    2. Reduce the laps led points from ,25 to .10.

    Nascar used to give just 2 points for most laps led. They dropped those 2 points this year and don’t give any points for most laps led anymore. It’s not an important stat.

    3. Reduce place differential from 1 pt to .5 (half) point.

    Way too many negative points when a driver has a problem. The amount of positions a driver gains or loses during a race is not that important.

    I understand the need to use a combination of statistics to build a legal fantasy contest but you need to give the stats their proper weight. It’s not even close right now.

    Finishing position trumps all other stats!

  • Billy4fingas

    Another thought is what if they changed the contest themselves and leave the scoring as is. With the limited number of drivers compared to athletes in other sports, wouldn’t it make sense to have smaller contest but a greater number of them?

    So instead of have 1 huge contest with 100,000 people paying one person a sexy amount of money. Why not break it into 10 contest with 10,000 people each. Lower the mme limit. Therefore, you have less people with less opportunity to create an overlap in each individual contest. People can still get there variety by using the multiple contest.

  • billholler

    @heartman

    As stated in my previous comment, I completely agree with the scoring for finishing positions although I still don’t understand why places 35-40 get any points at all.

    As far as reducing laps lead bonus and place differential bonus, that has already been done for this season. In my opinion those reductions are part of the reason there is such a small difference in winning and losing scores. The laps lead points are most definitely important. Removing or reducing that bonus eliminates the idea of a dominator. The idea of a driver leading 60% of the laps and possibly not even being viable from the DFS standpoint just seems ridiculous to me. Same thing for the place differential. That is a key element of handicapping a Nascar race. IMO, it is the biggest key. A guy that starts 20th and finished 10th should receive a significantly bigger bonus than a driver that starts 19th and finishes 15th.

    Don’t bring up wrecks or car trouble as an excuse. That is just part of the process and always will be.

  • heartman

    Finishing position should dwarf all other stats. Where you finish is more important than how many laps you lead.

    With the current scoring if a driver does lead 60% of the laps and he’s not in your lineup then you lose no matter how good your 6 drivers do.

  • Stewburtx8

    • 2012 FanDuel WFBC Finalist

    @heartman said...

    Finishing position should dwarf all other stats. Where you finish is more important than how many laps you lead.

    With the current scoring if a driver does lead 60% of the laps and he’s not in your lineup then you lose no matter how good your 6 drivers do.

    That is the “fantasy” element of the game we play though. In my opinion “fantasy” points do not have to be given in a way that perfectly aligns with the game or race on the field, track, pitch, etc.

    They should be scored in a way that is balanced and provides the most opportunity for skill. In that way, I think laps led/dominator points are probably more predictable that finishing position.

    So yes, over the course of the entire season, cumulative finishing position (points) and wins in Nascar are the most important. But in a one week sample size for this DFS game we play, I do not believe it has to be. Important? Sure. Very important even? Yes. But extremely, over the top important? In my opinion, no. Too much randomness can happen over the course of one race. This obviously affects DFS scoring anyways. But if we make finishing position the end all be all (minimize all the other scoring categories significantly), we might as well just bet on the race.

  • billholler

    @heartman said...

    Finishing position should dwarf all other stats. Where you finish is more important than how many laps you lead.

    With the current scoring if a driver does lead 60% of the laps and he’s not in your lineup then you lose no matter how good your 6 drivers do.

    Totally agree about the finishing position.

    If a driver leads 60% of laps and is not in your LU, you do not lose. You may cash but you aren’t getting a top 10 finish. If a guy dominates laps lead but doesn’t win the race, no way should you win a GPP if you didn’t roster him.

  • KYwins9

    • 828

      RG Overall Ranking

    @jokerswild22 said...

    Release pricing after qualifying.

    This is the best and easiest thing to do, its simply a layup. I mean no one is making or should be making lineups before qualifiying anyways. Adding stage points would just complicate things and lead to a lot of BS lineups winning.

  • giffenbone

    • x2

      2015 NASCAR Live Finalist

    Go with 0.5 points for place differential

    Go with 0.05 points per lap led (or 0.1)

    Go with 0.1 points for a fastest lap (or 0.25)

    And switch to NASCAR’s current scoring format

    40 point for 1st
    35 points for 2nd
    34 points for 3rd

    1 points for 36th – 40th

    Reduces the place differential issue some, reduces the dominator issue (everyone picking the polesitter in cash games nearly every race)

    I’ve back calculated numbers using these scoring formats, and it really reduces the polesitter percentage in the winning lineup.

  • heartman

    @Stewburtx8 said...

    That is the “fantasy” element of the game we play though. In my opinion “fantasy” points do not have to be given in a way that perfectly aligns with the game or race on the field, track, pitch, etc.

    They should be scored in a way that is balanced and provides the most opportunity for skill. In that way, I think laps led/dominator points are probably more predictable that finishing position.

    So yes, over the course of the entire season, cumulative finishing position (points) and wins in Nascar are the most important. But in a one week sample size for this DFS game we play, I do not believe it has to be. Important? Sure. Very important even? Yes. But extremely, over the top important? In my opinion, no. Too much randomness can happen over the course of one race. This obviously affects DFS scoring anyways. But if we make finishing position the end all be all (minimize all the other scoring categories significantly), we might as well just bet on the race.

    We are betting on the race. Betting that one lineup beats the other but that’s another argument.

    Laps led and Place diff have been given over-the-top importance here not finishing position.

    You have to give proper weight in any DFS sport.

    A touchdown is and should be worth more than a safety or 30 yard FG.

  • heartman

    @giffenbone said...

    Go with 0.5 points for place differential

    Go with 0.05 points per lap led (or 0.1)

    Go with 0.1 points for a fastest lap (or 0.25)

    And switch to NASCAR’s current scoring format

    40 point for 1st
    35 points for 2nd
    34 points for 3rd

    1 points for 36th – 40th

    Reduces the place differential issue some, reduces the dominator issue (everyone picking the polesitter in cash games nearly every race)

    I’ve back calculated numbers using these scoring formats, and it really reduces the polesitter percentage in the winning lineup.

    Completely agree here although I think doubling finishing points gives proper weight.

    The chances of Draftkings listening and making any changes are pretty slim though.

  • heartman

    The negative 30+ points for place differential for a top 5 qualifier has to go.

    IMO this severe crash penalty turns off more casual Nascar players than anything else.

    While you should lose your GPP contests with a crash you should still be able to win H2H’s and 50/50’s if 1 of your drivers crashes but the other 5 run great.

  • Stewburtx8

    • 2012 FanDuel WFBC Finalist

    @heartman said...

    We are betting on the race. Betting that one lineup beats the other but that’s another argument.

    Laps led and Place diff have been given over-the-top importance here not finishing position.

    You have to give proper weight in any DFS sport.

    A touchdown is and should be worth more than a safety or 30 yard FG.

    I guess my point is that if DFS Nascar becomes too much like betting on the race (finishing position is everything), then I would say it’s probably not legal. It’s already on very shaky ground based on the current laws should anyone choose to challenge it.

  • billholler

    @KYwins9 said...

    This is the best and easiest thing to do, its simply a layup. I mean no one is making or should be making lineups before qualifiying anyways

    This has already been discussed. Terrible idea from DK’s standpoint. With qualifying the afternoon or night before the actual race, that only gives DK about 18 hours to fill a GPP. Will only give a few hours for the races this season where qualifying is the same day as the race.

  • Stewburtx8

    • 2012 FanDuel WFBC Finalist

    @billholler said...

    This has already been discussed. Terrible idea from DK’s standpoint. With qualifying the afternoon or night before the actual race, that only gives DK about 18 hours to fill a GPP. Will only give a few hours for the races this season where qualifying is the same day as the race.

    THIS. GPP’s are already smaller than they should be for Nascar. If pricing was not released until after qualifying, GPP’s would just get smaller.

  • giffenbone

    • x2

      2015 NASCAR Live Finalist

    100% agree here. Releasing pricing after qualifying will just make contests even smaller than they are

  • 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).