INDUSTRY FORUM

Comments

  • shark61350

    Link to NY Times Article:http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/10/12/sports/fantasy-sports-draftkings-fanduel-insiders-edge-football.html?_r=0

    Wow! I had also tied to bring this to both Mr. Robbins & Mr. Beck’s attention.

    https://rotogrinders.com/threads/jason-robins-grinderslive-interview-with-dan-back-tomorrow-at-2-30-et-ask-your-questions-here-875905?page=4

    “Hi Mr. Robbins, this was my 1st season playing MLB DFS & I had a very steep learning curve. This summer I was frequently challenged by screen name “Rick Sawyer”. I want to estimate 10 times over a period of a month from between 5-10 dollars. That was too rich for my blood as I was quite horrible at the time.

    Recent news has came out on Reddit that he is employed by Draftkings. I was able to discover he is employed as your Business Planning Manager.

    Was I specifically targeted by DK employees using my DK game data along with other users as “easy money” on FanDuel? My screen names on DK/FD are completely separate. I’m curious as to how the connection was made between my separate screen names on separate sites.

    Thank you for coming here to address our concerns & have a fantastic weekend.”

    I didn’t play the guy but I wonder how many people did??

    Also, I’m not certain but I think this user also challenged me on DK.

  • Heterodox

    @Putz said...

    they would realize that their chances of winning are really not that good

    I think people understand this already. People don’t give the public enough credit. None of us is immune to advertising, its a simple fact, and casinos and lotteries in general do quite well, both because they play on our triggers and because they offer an experience that people find enjoyable for one reason or another.

    I also think Voulgaris is extremely disingenuous, deliberately misstating facts and then retracting them, accusing others of ulterior motives without disclosing his own, acting as though sports bettors don’t take money from individuals because they’re betting against the house. Where exactly does the house get its money? Would he have a house to bet against if casual bettors weren’t losing to it, mainly because of the advantages the house has in terms of analytical technology, financial resources, and access to information?

    But this is a distraction from the real issues. It amazes me that people keep trying to make the reporters, newspapers, headlines, vocally critical players, etc, the issue. Its the sites’ fault we’re here. When Joe Drape publishes an actual lie, then we can talk about that. Until then, how about some recognition that without his articles, nothing would be happening on these issues, and the fact that it came to that is on the sites. People need to stop making everything else the issue.

  • walterg55

    @Heterodox said...

    It amazes me that people keep trying to make the reporters, newspapers, headlines, vocally critical players, etc, the issue. Its the sites’ fault we’re here. When Joe Drape publishes an actual lie, then we can talk about that. Until then, how about some recognition that without his articles, nothing would be happening on these issues, and the fact that it came to that is on the sites. People need to stop making everything else the issue.

    This

  • JEFFRAMBO

    @itsbristolbaby46 said...

    Here is where I read the Haralabos Voulgaris material:
    http://finance.yahoo.com/news/millionaire-sports-gambler-explains-why-180100740.html

    Yep, that’s the article I read as well. I don’t think Voulgaris is playing DFS and if he is, not at any substantial volume or at levels of success worth mentioning as it would be more widely known. He is a very prolific sports bettor so I doubt he would be able to keep his DFS play under wraps. The writer of the article just went to him because he was accessible for a quote and has knowledge of sports betting.

  • itsbristolbaby46

    Actually, I think the quotes are taken form an interview he did on the Dan Le Batard show, but it is really not important. Neither is whether he plays. He most certainly knows the lay of the ground. I don’t even have a problem that pros are submitting 100s if not 1000s of line ups. I do have a problem with the tools that they have available to them that are not readily available to the public. I do have a problem with the fact that there is a very real possibility that the employees at these two sites are getting much better quality information and information that shouldn’t even be available to anyone playing – that of course is what the investigation will determine. I do think the commercials should be much more forth coming on what the odds are of winning. To say that a non-pro still wins on occasion is a specious argument to me in that their are probably as many if not more line ups put in by a non-pro as there are by pros. There are so many more non-pros playing than pros. The problem is that the probability of any one person winning is more or less nil because with those 1000 line ups put in by a pro he has created a situation where it is going to take the almost perfect line up to win. So when a non-pro sees a winning line up and says, “How in the hell did they have that guy in the line up?”, he has no clue that it is because it was probably a pro’s 987th line up configuration that had that player. My solution is to stick to single entry contests but there are so few of those compared to multi-entry contests. Wonder why, lol. Those half hour infomercials should be illegal. Yes, a non-pro wins on occasion, but then again, some poor dumb son of bitch was probably helped by drinking snake oil too. It’s just the 99.99999% that weren’t helped that caused the problem.

  • Stewburtx8

    • 2012 FanDuel WFBC Finalist

    @MikeMineo said...

    Obviously anyone who enjoys DFS, as I do, falls into #2. I would think everyone on this forum is in #2. You know I don’t want to see the industry shut down (I’m a winning player; top 4% on RG despite an average entry of $3; why would I want to lose a source of $?) – but it’s simply not a battle of shutting down vs no regulation at all. Not everyone who has a difference of opinion to yours wants the industry to blow up and never return. But if any employee wrongdoing was found then I don’t feel sympathy for the two sites shutting down. Competition will rise. I have no attachment or trust in regard to one or another.

    There are MANY issues, only some of them laid out in the article, that DK/FD outright refuse to address — hence the need for Madison Calvert to speak out on Reddit, after DK didn’t respond and he received nothing but criticism and doubt from other forums, as he continues to. do some of you guys REALLY think Madison Calvert is lying and is asking to be sued for libel by million-dollar lawyers? like, seriously? he has nothing to gain. he isn’t initiating any lawsuits. he’s a concerned player, not anything more. to try and dismiss this entire instance is ridiculous, and insulting to a guy willing to put his personal identification out there on the NY Times vs a billion-dollar company because he thinks there is something wrong.

    Stew, we differ not in what we want to see (a strong regulated industry), but in our trust of the big two DFS sites. I see you have been playing for many years. I started about a year ago. I completely understand why you would be more trusting of either site than I am; you played as the company grew, in addition to likely attending sponsored events or developing personal relationships with employees/figures at both sites with genuinely good people who want to see the DFS industry fair and strong. I’m just assuming, since you’re a good player who has played for some time. as you know, DK/FD has some great, genuine employees who would never even consider cheating. but in no way do I trust EVERY single employee or leader at any business. in an unregulated industry I see that as a problem, if I’m going to try and assume no cheating is going on.

    and I take an even bigger issue when someone like Calvert is attacked for simply relaying what happened to him. or when a reporter’s credibility is questioned when he writes something you don’t like. if you want to bash the guy filing a class-action lawsuit against FD then by all means; now that’s a guy who’s using the moment to his advantage.

    Do you see the potential bias reflected by those like yourself (playing as the industry grew)? The average consumer who joined within past 12 months should have NO REASON to trust Draftkings based on their lack of responsiveness and general evasion of particular issues. in their general response to this entire debacle, the company seems intent on prioritizing saying how awful the media’s treatment of Ethan Haskell is, as opposed to answering oft-asked questions like who has access to data, which safeguards/penalties are in place to prevent against data selling/sharing, and several additional questions posed by the article’s allegations alone, such as why is there such a lack of responsiveness in regard to scripting issues?

    I am not of the belief that every individual or instance requires giving DK the benefit of the doubt, such as is the case here with some. There is no DFS players’ union, so any player should have the right to be as skeptical and answer-hungry as I am. the only regard in the industry is currently for organizations and high rollers, and I’m not the only one who feels this way. lack of regulation makes FD/DK prioritize those who generate the most rake, plain and simple. why would they not?

    I also strongly disagree that this is a poorly written article. The writer followed up with the accuser, got all relevant information, attempted to follow up with DK, verified his source with photographic evidence (Calvert did-DK never denied his presence), etc etc. I’m guessing it’s only a “poorly written article” to you because it threatens hobby and/or source of income. it doesn’t break any journalistic standards or ethics. if someone wants to point out an objective falsehood in the article then I’m all ears. a reporter doesn’t have to be a DFS expert to write a true story on the topic.

    You can think I want the industry to fail all you want, but keep in mind I’m simply a person who loves DFS, wasn’t a part of the development process that nurtured a very obvious circle of friends, and sees no reason to trust a site that has failed to answer questions many times. again, where is their response to this article? if Calvert did indeed lie, DK’s response would be swift and definitive. the thing is though, he didn’t. the Draftkings founder doesn’t call up just any random accuser.

    We clearly have our differences in opinion/trust, but it’s certainly not because I want to see the industry shut down. I want to see it regulated — fairly and effectively, but I do not have confidence in DK or FD anymore to self-regulate themselves, hence the need for a consumer-based charge that uses the media as a speaking platform for valid points backed by evidence. since issues persistently arise and are not resolved in the DFS industry, and with a lack of for-player representative, many are taking their issues to different platforms.

    This is by far your best post across many threads on this topic. Thank you for providing your actual stance (without injecting various theories) and I can’t say I completely disagree with anything you said above. Like you said, I choose to have more faith in the industry as I’ve been playing for 4 years now and I’ve seen the industry grow. That being said, I think changes certainly need to occur to better protect data.

    Honestly, I do not have a lot of personal connections with anyone at any of the sites other than through these forums. There are a few people that have reached out to me in various instances (mainly for college basketball feedback) so that is the extent of the guys I talk to. I met a few of the guys at Fanduel back in 2012 but I can’t say I’ve maintained connections/discussions with any of them.

    I also am not trying to be optimistic about all of this due to a potential loss of income. DFS has provided a very small income for me over the last 3 years (low 5 figures in 2012 due to DFBC 4th place finish, 4 figures in 2013 and 2014), but nothing I couldn’t do without. For me, it’s all about competition and entertainment, and just increasing my enjoyment of sports. DFS gives me a way to just enjoy sports more than I already do. That is what I wouldn’t want to do without.

    I have not tried to discredit Calvert once. I think he may potentially have an ax to grind to come forward like this (after not receiving a response over 2 days in the middle of a crisis), but I do not doubt that what he said is true. Now it’s certainly possible the details aren’t exactly as the story portrays, as no one knows what Aguiar was looking at. I’ll leave my personal thoughts aside on him but I wouldn’t say I have any strong trust that he didn’t look at some back-end ownership percentages and blurt out what Calvert claims he said. Or maybe he looked at Fanduel and based his thoughts on that. Only he knows. Not a smart thing to say regardless.

    My main issues with the article is a lot of small things that I feel are sensationalized. For example: “On RotoGrinders, a site that closely follows the fantasy sports industry, the exploits of the top players — many of them employees of DraftKings or FanDuel.” No, many of the top players do not work for Fanduel or Draftkings. Only a small handful of them do unless they are trying to count contractors (DK Pros) that have no access to Draftkings servers or information that could be a conflict of interest.

    OR “Leonard Don Diego first worked at FanDuel but is now an engagement manager at DraftKings. A year ago, he was accused of sharing lineups, according to a RotoGrinders thread.” This is written to make the reader think he was taking information off one of the sites and then sharing lineups with a bunch of other people using that information. In actuality, the complaint was that him and one other player were sharing lineups, something that MANY people in the industry do and people have complained about for years. Him working at both of the sites had nothing to do with the complaint.

    OR “Haskell’s big win followed a hot streak in August, when he finished in the top 10 of 13 Major League Baseball contests, including one contest, with a $25 buy-in, in which he beat nearly 13,000 others to win $50,000, according to the website Larry Brown Sports.” While this may be true, it sensationalized by not discussing the huge amount of entries he had in each of these contests. A casual reader will think he fired a single bullet into these contests and finished top ten 13 times in a month against thousands of players. Just my opinions. Maybe it’s nitpicking, but after the first article this guy wrote that was completely over the top (and included a retraction of the title), I’m skeptical of his intentions to just report the facts without interjecting sensationalism for clicks/views.

  • MikeMineo

    Some great points. Thanks for reading and responding with relevant and solid points.

    Oh, I never meant that you specifically were bashing Calvert; it was just in reference to some others’ comments.

    No, certainly your criticisms of the article are valid; it’s not nitpicking. He should have clarified that those winnings weren’t off a single bullet, that the description of RG is off, and also elaborated on the other bit more, for sure. I found the article as a whole to be fine in regard to the reporting on Calvert/this situation in particular. I don’t think it’s a flawless piece of award-winning journalism, but I also don’t think the journalist has any axes to grind – those mistakes just seem from someone who doesn’t know much about DFS, not someone intentionally skewing data.

    You’d be entirely correct to submit those corrections to NYT, in fact – a job that DK’s PR dept should be doing, not Stew lol.

  • pennstater1

    forget that how can draft kings prove that their own employees dont play under say a siblings name

    check out this weeks millionaire maker week 5 probably going to place in the top 100

    user Sawyer6565

    nah that cant be must be someone else

  • JEFFRAMBO

    @itsbristolbaby46 said...

    I do have a problem with the tools that they have available to them that are not readily available to the public.

    What tools do you believe are available to these “pros” that are not readily available to the “public?” I have yet to see or hear of any tools unavailable to me or anyone else being used by any players in DFS, so I would appreciate you pointing me in the direction of something out there I’m not aware of.

    As far as continuing to make this an “us versus them” argument… it is growing old because in reality there is no industry standard definition for what a “DFS Professional” is and isn’t. Based on the implied definition that many seem to inaccurately have here that a pro is someone who has the bankroll and time to dedicate moreso than themselves, then truthfully anybody is one big score away from being a pro by those standards. Which essentially just boils down to jealousy and/or envy.

    The only foul play in any of this is if DFS site employees do indeed have (or had) access to information that they were able to use for an advantage over non-DFS site employees. Why can’t we just concentrate on getting to the bottom of adjudicating that issue versus wasting time by pitting the Haves against the Have Nots.

  • deejones49

    It’s simple no cell phones at work and monitor their PC

  • Putz

    @deejones49 said...

    It’s simple no cell phones at work and monitor their PC

    Happens quite a bit in the finance and defense industries when people have access to sensitive data.

  • tonytone1908

    It seems what people want is some kind of regulation. What happens then? OVER-regulation. By who? The government. Oh yes, just the people I want involved so they can take even more of my money. Sites will want 3 forms of ID, 4 proofs of address, automatic 30% taken out for taxes on every win, etc., etc.

    I know we all want assurances from improprieties but believe me, we don’t want the government involved and taking this over and making it their new lottery game. There are many industries that self-regulate themselves, maybe this should be one?

    Everyone is crying for something they want but once they get it I don’t think they’ll be happy with the results. The truth is this is something the companies should have already had policies in place themselves. You can’t win a candybar sweepstakes if you’re even related to someone in the company running it. Should be the same here but should have happened from the start. Yes, some people may have done some shady $#!+ but there was nothing in the rule books or policies to stop them from doing so. Nobody broke any “rules” they just bent the few that were there. Unfortunately it takes something like this to wake up a growing industry to it’s already growing problems.

    Let’s just hope it works out in a way that actually benefits us. I don’t think DFS is going away, there is way too much damn advertising money to be lost, the leagues and their affiliates are not going to let it happen.

  • itsbristolbaby46

    Lol. Us vs them. Nice red herring. Most of the pros I am referring to work at these sites. Unless you are one of them, how do you know what they can do or have developed to take advantage of their situation. Isn’t that the whole purpose of the investigation? I know they mentioned the ability to immediately lock in “fish” automatically. I don’t have that available to me. Do you? It certainly sounded like they were even able to possibly look at another players picks. You act like these employees aren’t pros and yet they are listed right here on this site as top players. You may act confused about what constitutes a pro, but I don’t think most are. And once again, who cares what you call them. Never once did I even come close to saying all pros have access to or utilize questionable tools to win. I am a member of a site that is led by a person who I think works extremely hard and is very sharp. Please don’t tell him know how envious and hateful I am of him, lol.

    They talk about scripting and the ability to change hundreds of line ups in seconds. I have never been offered that ability. Why doesn’t the site have a tool for it? Nor does my guy have the ability to lock in fish automatically. I grant you he is not a big player, but he is the biggest one I know and he has never been offered these “tools”.

    What you and I concentrate on matters diddly anyway. At least what I concentrate on matters diddly. All I care is that they clean it up. I will also be interested in a site that maybe bans scripting and offers a lot more single entry contests, and doesn’t allow anyone (see no distinction here between pro or amateur) to identify and lock in novices automatically. You can concentrate on anything you want, it won’t matter a hill of beans what that is unless you are in a position to influence the path of the investigation. I am most certainly not.

    Yes, you have me, I am jealous and envious of those who have succeeded. It always boils down to that. No one could possibly just want to a have a fun, fair contest, lol. I am to this point only involved in dfs for entertainment. If I showed some adeptness to it, I could see devoting more time and energy to it, but I will certainly be waiting to see what this investigation discovers and never delude myself that playing in multi-entry contests would ever be profitable or enjoyable for me.

    Now you call these things anything you want, but I will continue to call them tools. Same as poker sites were always vigilantly trying to prevent poker bots these sites will always have to be vigilant against people who will always try to game the system. As was stated here in the Times: ““If you are going to purport you are a billion-dollar business, and advertise on billboards and televisions throughout the country, you need to act like a billion-dollar business,” said Marc Edelman, a law professor at Baruch College and Fordham University and an expert on fantasy sports. “And that includes, among other things, putting in place very sophisticated firewalls and controls to prevent these types of instances from happening in the first place.”

    The fact that this was not done is in and of itself enough to raise an eyebrow. These are not earth shattering ideas. There is no way that the CEOs of these companies were not aware of this need. The fact that they decided not to institute these obvious controls, and the fact that it was very beneficial for them to have these pros as employees to build their customer base, and the fact that these pros wouldn’t have taken the job without the ability to play at other sites certainly points to an intentional disregard of the welfare of their customers. I am sure all these playing employees are above board because who has ever heard of a gambler ever trying to gain an advantage. No one in online poker ever tried to cheat…..

    So, since you seem to think you have the ability to influence this investigation, I wish you all the best, and hope that you will be vigilant in adjudicating all the issues, and creating an environment that allows everyone to know exactly what it is that they are signing up for. And that you advocate vigorously for these companies to educate it’s customers so that they are making well informed choices instead of setting them up for the role of donks.

    In fact, are there any sites who do not allow scripting or allow programs to identify and lock in novices automatically? I will no longer be playing FD or DK. They will be losing my $5 of rake every week, lol.

  • joonbae

    • Blogger of the Month

    Marxists are laughing everywhere. This thread is an early sign of class warfare among the bourgeoisie and proletariat of the DFS user base. How about both sides (those making accusations and those others in denial) coming together to pour all of their energies on proposed solutions that will make DFS safer, fairer, more transparent. So that it is defensible and promotable in a sustainable way.

    Talk about infighting and its many broken records. Let’s stop shooting the whistleblowers with fear, uncertainty, and doubt. It’s bad enough we’re armchair quarterbacks on Sundays. Now we’re all armchair trial lawyers?

    As users, we’re the most competent people to come up with a list of solutions that can improve DFS one inch at a time.

    Ok, I’ll start. Operators should limit multi entry GPPs to 20 entries per player. If sites cannot fill the games to pay for the nosebleed prize guarantees, fire your marketing and mgmt teams because that’s what your stupid-crazy tv ad spend is intended to do (bring in new players). Game integrity is supposed to reduce user churn and promote repeat business and volume play.

  • itsbristolbaby46

    That bs about the have and have nots is a total canard. All anyone is asking for is for things that should have been instituted in the very first place and weren’t for very obvious reasons, and that questionable behavior and outcomes be investigated. Why is that surprising? Why is anyone unhappy that there is an investigation into the fairness and transparency of these contests, whether they are a have or a have not? If I was a have and there is cheating going on, I would be ten times more upset. I’m just disgusted that every time something comes along some dckheads have got to come along and fck it up. If I was making a living at this and I thought someone was cheating me, Katy bar the door. That is what is very curious about the haves that are on here that are not upset by what might be going on? Why aren’t they? I was in the investment field for a long time before retiring ten years ago, and believe me, when you were screwed over by insider trading, you didn’t sit there with a grin on your face and ask for more vaseline. If there is nothing there, then let the investigation show that. Why is that threatening?

  • madmanjayWV

    @joonbae said...

    Ok, I’ll start. Operators should limit multi entry GPPs to 20 entries per player

    U were doing great until here..do not care if Heywood has 500 CFB LUs in a 20,000 man GPP..could care less..as long as he’s changing them all by hand with no “EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION” scripts via FANDUEL

    b4 any one blows a GASKET..i’m not saying the CFB guru Heywood uses scripts..dunno, really don’t care..is what it is and is outta my control…but ppl do…limiting crappy GPPs to 20 PPL is insane to me…almost as insane as FD’s ability to not offer solid $1 GPPs in CFB, which is of no priority…so DK it is…

    there are a lot of GREAT other DFS sites..and while the BIG 2 “LEAD THE WAY” — perhaps off the cliff, but i jest — maybe people should focus on 1 or 2 new sites and try them out..it seems most ppl on RG from my experiences, or I’d say 50+ percent, are more cash game players. There is $$$ to be won on other sites aside from the big 2.

    RIP ~~ BUZZDRAFT ~~

  • JEFFRAMBO

    1. Please identify one of the “pros” you are referencing. Those contracted by sites to provide analysis/user content are not employees based on the current landscape, but rather provide content on contractual basis. Splitting hairs, but that is worth clarifying.

    2. DFS sites are not “offering” specific players tools such as scripts as your post insinuates. If you want a script, program one yourself or go to eLance/oDesk/Upwork or your freelance site of choice, and contract someone to build it. As long as it is based on the technical parameters of whichever site(s) you play on and with their permission, then you are permitted to employ it. This is what everyone has done to date who utilizes a script for automating manual processes (such as player swaps across multiple lineups). Your approach in this particular aspect of your post is likened to saying you bought a house but feel cheated because the seller didn’t offer you a pool to go with in. Therefore if you want a pool with a house that didn’t sell with one, go buy it yourself.

    3. As for locking in “fish” automatically, this is something that will be addressed going forward over the next few weeks from all indications I have seen. This is not kosher and changes should occur to remedy this.

    4. Any ability to look at another player’s selections would be engaging in theft by deception and is grounds for criminal charges. If anyone is found to have benefited from this, it would not have been due to any “tools,” but rather flat-out fraud stemming from employee systems abuse coupled with player collusion.

    5. Quoting Marc Edelman isn’t going to boast the foundation of your post any more than me quoting John Pappalardo in mine. Both will take a formal stance based on the position that supports the entity paying their retainer or contracting them to lobby. In this case Edelman has been on the record as far back as 2013 voicing his opposition to short-duration fantasy contests and questioning its legalities. You have to remember at the end of the day, trial lawyers are not in the business of deciding law or adjudicating it. They are in the business of making their best interpretations of existing law and submitting oral arguments to support their interpretation. So never take a lawyer’s opinion as being the end-all be-all on a subject, regardless of if you are for or against said subject.

    6. Does the industry lack in professionalism as a whole due to the perceived “frat-like” image? Yes. I agree wholeheartedly and think either certain executives need to be replaced with better groomed traditional industry professionals or advisory boards need to be installed to groom those in their existing positions to better equip them for the future. As a CEO-Founder, it is one of the hardest things to do to admit to your shortcomings in the growth/maturation stage of your start-up, but to get over that hurdle that often presents itself around the sophomore or junior stages, you need to be able to put ego aside.

    7. Your sarcasm is noted but I still think your misuse of the term “pro” is doing more harm than good in conveying the merits of your argument. Anyone can proclaim themselves to be a pro in DFS and lay rightful claim to it through one meaning or another… but should we loosely refer to someone as a pro simply because they are employed by any one particular site and happen to play DFS themselves? I say no.

    8. I actually am opposed to any DFS site being in the business of educating their customer base beyond providing them a simple outline of their “house rules” (scoring, stats used, weather related rules, tiebreaker rules, terms of service, etc.). Sites being in the business of providing analytical content and such is what prompted all of this mess to begin with and it never should have gotten to this point. I was opposed to it long before this and will be opposed to it long after this. That is why you have 3rd party sites such as RotoGrinders that any person is capable of finding on their own should they elect to try to gain outside research to create an edge for themselves. Since you want to reference poker … one player to a hand.

  • joonbae

    • Blogger of the Month

    @madmanjayWV said...

    U were doing great until here..do not care if Heywood has 500 CFB LUs in a 20,000 man GPP..could care less..as long as he’s changing them all by hand with no “EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION” scripts via FANDUEL

    b4 any one blows a GASKET..i’m not saying the CFB guru Heywood uses scripts..dunno, really don’t care..is what it is and is outta my control…but ppl do…limiting crappy GPPs to 20 PPL is insane to me…almost as insane as FD’s ability to not offer solid $1 GPPs in CFB, which is of no priority…so DK it is…

    there are a lot of GREAT other DFS sites..and while the BIG 2 “LEAD THE WAY” — perhaps off the cliff, but i jest — maybe people should focus on 1 or 2 new sites and try them out..it seems most ppl on RG from my experiences, or I’d say 50+ percent, are more cash game players. There is $$$ to be won on other sites aside from the big 2.

    RIP ~~ BUZZDRAFT ~~

    Fair point on the manual vs automation aspect. At least we are back to going back and forth on solutions.

    I also wish they had more $1 Gpps.

  • joonbae

    • Blogger of the Month

    @itsbristolbaby46 said...

    That bs about the have and have nots is a total canard. All anyone is asking for is for things that should have been instituted in the very first place and weren’t for very obvious reasons, and that questionable behavior and outcomes be investigated. Why is that surprising? Why is anyone unhappy that there is an investigation into the fairness and transparency of these contests, whether they are a have or a have not? If I was a have and there is cheating going on, I would be ten times more upset. I’m just disgusted that every time something comes along some dckheads have got to come along and fck it up. If I was making a living at this and I thought someone was cheating me, Katy bar the door. That is what is very curious about the haves that are on here that are not upset by what might be going on? Why aren’t they? I was in the investment field for a long time before retiring ten years ago, and believe me, when you were screwed over by insider trading, you didn’t sit there with a grin on your face and ask for more vaseline. If there is nothing there, then let the investigation show that. Why is that threatening?

    I’m pretty sure you misunderstood me due to your use of the word canard. The infighting point I was making is that there is a pattern of attack, defend by attacking, then it devolves into a “you have facts?!?!” back and forth.

    It’s like reporting suspicious activity only to have your neighbors and police react with a big “you have facts?!? Shut up unless you have proof.” Then it goes to “do you have facts that I don’t have the facts? My facts are as good as your facts which are not facts at all!” Then the other guy goes “you just made my case.” Then a troll hops onboard and goes “see!? This is proof your self interest in blinding you!” Then go back to the beginning … “Do you have facts that my pov is biased?!” Then “do you have facts that I don’t? Rinse, repeat. Person with last word wins until the next guy with the last word + 1. And it goes on and on.

  • JEFFRAMBO

    @itsbristolbaby46 said...

    Why is anyone unhappy that there is an investigation into the fairness and transparency of these contests,

    I do not think anyone with the ability to operate at even half their mental capacity is opposed to this. I’m certainly not and would caution you to ignore anyone who says they are opposed.

    My gripes come from the fact that too many are using this incident as a catch-all to go after those who are successful, basically by outright accusing them of being in on “it” (whatever “it” is determined to be) since nothing can explain their continued success. That’s my beef and my mention of the haves and have nots as it relates to your issues with not being afforded the same “tools” that are supposedly out there.

    Should we have transparency from the site operators? Better believe it. Should we be ensured and shown that we are engaging in a fair game that maintains the fullest extent of integrity? Better believe it. Should we see the dismissal of anyone who was attempting to profit from advantages that were not afforded to non-site employees? Better believe it. But all that being said, should we demand the sites educate everyone as to how to be winning players or provide them with tools that allow them to be such? No, not at all. That’s incumbent upon you as a player within what is permitted by the terms of service on whichever site(s) you play on.

    So don’t mistake or imply I was opposed to any investigation taking place. I am simply in favor of keeping things on task for what are the true issues at hand are and in my eyes that’s us — as a community of players — knowing what the standard operating procedures are for DFS employees as it relates to data integrity, their personal access to said data, and if their play on third party DFS sites were tainted by the aforementioned items. Anything beyond that is reaching in my opinion and is no different than saying “Well, that explains why I was losing all this time… they duped me!” versus taking accountability for your own success or shortcomings.

  • bigloser11

    A saying—

    Believe 1/2 of what you see, 1/4 of what you read, nothing of what you hear.

    The ‘information super highway’, the connected society etc has been anything but. jm

  • srolleDFS

    @joonbae said...

    Marxists are laughing everywhere. This thread is an early sign of class warfare among the bourgeoisie and proletariat of the DFS user base.

    if you havent studied marx, dont let this phase you. it is nonsense.

  • AdamLoebSmall

    @srolleDFS said...

    it seems low probability that madison’s allegations are true. just from bayes.

    estimate these 3 probabilities.

    1. probability a dk employee would commit fraud to win more at dfs. not anyone in particular, just an average person.

    2. probability a person that plays dfs and works at dk would issue a H2H challenge.

    3. probability someone someone committing fraud would specifically use the H2H challenges to do the fraud (seems kinda dumb, bc you r creating an unnecessary paper trail.)

    then do P(#1)*P(#3)/P(#2) – thats the chance this was fraud.

    for me i would go #1 – 1%, #2 – 10%, #3 30%. so……

    .01*.30/.10 = 3%.. .not that high.

    make your own estimates… then do the math. its tricky, because brains are not wired to do conditional probability estimates correctly.

    Wow…. So let’s get this straight. A company holds hundreds of millions of dollars on deposit for use in games on the internet. Some employees of that company almost certainly have access to information that would give them advantages in the games if competing with their customer base – information that may include things like how much money a player deposits and withdraws, how much they typically keep on the site, how often they play, win/loss rates, past lineups, possibly even their lineups for upcoming contests… And you think there’s only a 1% chance that any of these employees would commit fraud in order to win more money?

    I’m not saying any particular story is true, and I don’t know Madison or really know who he is. It seems credible to me. But either way, it’s borderline insanity to believe this strongly in the goodwill of a group of people you don’t even know to not act on this type of temptation. I strongly believe the companies involved will get past all of this and do a much better job of protecting game data in the future.

    BTW, I’ve never read a Joe Drape article other than the two recent ones about DFS, but if you want to hate on someone about click-baity headlines, hate on the editors. The headline for his first article was awful, but I really doubt he’s the one who wrote it.

  • emac

    @srolleDFS said...

    if you havent studied marx, dont let this phase you. it is nonsense.

    Nooooooo, don’t say that. I just found a way to put my Sociology 110 class to good use!

    Freerolls are the opiate of The Masses :)

  • AdamLoebSmall

    @JEFFRAMBO said...

    8. I actually am opposed to any DFS site being in the business of educating their customer base beyond providing them a simple outline of their “house rules” (scoring, stats used, weather related rules, tiebreaker rules, terms of service, etc.). Sites being in the business of providing analytical content and such is what prompted all of this mess to begin with and it never should have gotten to this point. I was opposed to it long before this and will be opposed to it long after this. That is why you have 3rd party sites such as RotoGrinders that any person is capable of finding on their own should they elect to try to gain outside research to create an edge for themselves.

    This is an unrealistic goal, unfortunately. The sites are going to want to do this for a variety of reasons. For one, they’d rather have the players engaged with their own content than on outside sites like RotoGrinders for several, fairly obvious reasons. Why would they want players on another site they don’t own if they can have them engaged on their own? If their customers are primarily on outside sites, they have a higher risk of losing them to competing operators. DK and FD both, as well as others, are always going to want as much control as possible over as many aspects of their users’ DFS experience as they can control.

    Also, eventually they’re going to want to give their newer or more casual customers tools that will help them stay in the games longer. Whether or not these tools actually make them better is sometimes less important than the players feeling like they’re learning and getting better. But usually they do both. This isn’t a particularly good thing for winning regs, especially non-elite winners. But it keeps the ecosystem healthier than it’d be otherwise.

  • tonytone1908

    @JEFFRAMBO said...

    1. Please identify one of the “pros” you are referencing. Those contracted by sites to provide analysis/user content are not employees based on the current landscape, but rather provide content on contractual basis. Splitting hairs, but that is worth clarifying.

    2. DFS sites are not “offering” specific players tools such as scripts as your post insinuates. If you want a script, program one yourself or go to eLance/oDesk/Upwork or your freelance site of choice, and contract someone to build it. As long as it is based on the technical parameters of whichever site(s) you play on and with their permission, then you are permitted to employ it. This is what everyone has done to date who utilizes a script for automating manual processes (such as player swaps across multiple lineups). Your approach in this particular aspect of your post is likened to saying you bought a house but feel cheated because the seller didn’t offer you a pool to go with in. Therefore if you want a pool with a house that didn’t sell with one, go buy it yourself.

    3. As for locking in “fish” automatically, this is something that will be addressed going forward over the next few weeks from all indications I have seen. This is not kosher and changes should occur to remedy this.

    4. Any ability to look at another player’s selections would be engaging in theft by deception and is grounds for criminal charges. If anyone is found to have benefited from this, it would not have been due to any “tools,” but rather flat-out fraud stemming from employee systems abuse coupled with player collusion.

    5. Quoting Marc Edelman isn’t going to boast the foundation of your post any more than me quoting John Pappalardo in mine. Both will take a formal stance based on the position that supports the entity paying their retainer or contracting them to lobby. In this case Edelman has been on the record as far back as 2013 voicing his opposition to short-duration fantasy contests and questioning its legalities. You have to remember at the end of the day, trial lawyers are not in the business of deciding law or adjudicating it. They are in the business of making their best interpretations of existing law and submitting oral arguments to support their interpretation. So never take a lawyer’s opinion as being the end-all be-all on a subject, regardless of if you are for or against said subject.

    6. Does the industry lack in professionalism as a whole due to the perceived “frat-like” image? Yes. I agree wholeheartedly and think either certain executives need to be replaced with better groomed traditional industry professionals or advisory boards need to be installed to groom those in their existing positions to better equip them for the future. As a CEO-Founder, it is one of the hardest things to do to admit to your shortcomings in the growth/maturation stage of your start-up, but to get over that hurdle that often presents itself around the sophomore or junior stages, you need to be able to put ego aside.

    7. Your sarcasm is noted but I still think your misuse of the term “pro” is doing more harm than good in conveying the merits of your argument. Anyone can proclaim themselves to be a pro in DFS and lay rightful claim to it through one meaning or another… but should we loosely refer to someone as a pro simply because they are employed by any one particular site and happen to play DFS themselves? I say no.

    8. I actually am opposed to any DFS site being in the business of educating their customer base beyond providing them a simple outline of their “house rules” (scoring, stats used, weather related rules, tiebreaker rules, terms of service, etc.). Sites being in the business of providing analytical content and such is what prompted all of this mess to begin with and it never should have gotten to this point. I was opposed to it long before this and will be opposed to it long after this. That is why you have 3rd party sites such as RotoGrinders that any person is capable of finding on their own should they elect to try to gain outside research to create an edge for themselves. Since you want to reference poker … one player to a hand.

    I’m curious as to how you think this will be or should be done. Sorry, I was only trying to quote #3

    3. As for locking in “fish” automatically, this is something that will be addressed going forward over the next few weeks from all indications I have seen. This is not kosher and changes should occur to remedy this.

  • 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).