INDUSTRY FORUM

Comments

  • Mphst18

    I am using the analysis of data to draw a conclusion and ask questions in the alleged scenario (the data is not alleged it is actual data). My views are not to be interpreted as fact but to allow individuals to determine if they feel they are playing a game with integrity or one that is monitoring for violations of entry limits and rules.

    Is this a form of circumventing Entry limits and or an alternate form of multi accounting (regardless of if they are actually two individuals)

    If two brothers or individuals take 50% of each others winnings and agree to risk the same amount every night (enter the same contests with the same number of entries) is this a violation guidelines/rule. Of note they may not technically be “pooling entry fees” as brother A does not send brother B any money for entry fees they just sum up or net profit at the end of the night and reconcile.

    They max enter every gpp mlb contest (for the max entries below 150 they don’t overlap entries (they may also not overlap for 150 but I am not digging through all that data as DK supposedly has a game integrity department that is supposed to be monitoring this stuff).

    Let’s look at 9/13 2016 data, the data for 9/6 shows the same as well and we can look at 9/20 data when that’s available: (my guess here it’s the same every day but just taking the Tue slates as that’s the big prize for DK)

    MLB $600K Power Hitter ($444, 45 max) – Chipolteaddict 45 entries, papagates 45 entries no lineup overlap

    MLB $30K Warning Track ($150, 3 max) – Chipolteaddict 3 entries, papagates 3 entries no lineup overlap

    MLB $5K Deep Mini Moonshot ($3, 50 max) – Chipolteaddict 50 entries, papagates 50 entries no lineup overlap

    MLB $10K Slider ($3, 3max) – Chipolteaddict 3 entries, papagates 3 entries no lineup overlap

    MLB $150K Payoff Pitch ($27, 150 max) – Chipolteaddict 150 entries, papagates 150 entries (I am not digging through 150 to determine overlap or not, other people are supposedly paid to do this)

  • Yeoman

    @zshoom said...

    Basically they are getting 150 extra shots at the top prize. I’m not sure how that could be seen as anything other than a huge advantage.

    If you buy twice as many lottery tickets as I do, you have twice the chance to win. You also lose your money twice as fast, in the long run. I don’t see how that’s to your advantage in any way.

    What I don’t see is how 300 lineups instead of 150 improves the ROI. At best the ROI is the same but you get to double the investment you’re putting in. As long as you’re consistently turning a positive return, that’s good for you…but it doesn’t strike me as fundamentally unfair, at least to the degree that it deserves the ire it seems to get.

    I do understand that this makes it worthwhile for professional players to play the small-buy-in GPPs. I think Mphst’s ideas are on point, there—prohibit black-level players from entering $3-and-under games. Or bar them from particular tournaments and let players decide if they want to face that level of competition or not.

  • badlands92

    @Yeoman said...

    If you buy twice as many lottery tickets as I do, you have twice the chance to win. You also lose your money twice as fast, in the long run. I don’t see how that’s to your advantage in any way.

    What I don’t see is how 300 lineups instead of 150 improves the ROI. At best the ROI is the same but you get to double the investment you’re putting in. As long as you’re consistently turning a positive return, that’s good for you…but it doesn’t strike me as fundamentally unfair, at least to the degree that it deserves the ire it seems to get.

    I do understand that this makes it worthwhile for professional players to play the small-buy-in GPPs. I think Mphst’s ideas are on point, there—prohibit black-level players from entering $3-and-under games. Or bar them from particular tournaments and let players decide if they want to face that level of competition or not.

    “If you buy twice as many lottery tickets as I do, you have twice the chance to win. You also lose your money twice as fast, in the long run. I don’t see how that’s to your advantage in any way.”

    Isn’t this assuming that A) “you” never wins despite doubling the amount of tickets and B) both gamblers start with the same amount of money?

    If money isn’t an issue for members, then there’s really no downfall to max entering or colluding. I doubt someone with $400k in their DK account mourns an off night after most of 150 $3 LUs fail.

  • badlands92

    FWIW, there were a lot of duplicates in the $3 early MLB contest. Granted, there were only 3 games.

  • Cal

    RG CoFounder & Admin

    • 414

      RG Overall Ranking

    • $1M Prize Winner

    • x4

      2015 DraftKings FFWC Finalist

    I haven’t read all the posts in this thread so this may already be mentioned, but bigpapagates and some DFS pros have discussed three mans and unregging publicly on his Twitter account. It’s still at the top of his feed:

    https://twitter.com/bigpapagates

    I messaged him on Twitter about this thread. He’s posted here before so maybe he’ll chime in.

  • Yeoman

    @badlands92 said...

    “If you buy twice as many lottery tickets as I do, you have twice the chance to win. You also lose your money twice as fast, in the long run. I don’t see how that’s to your advantage in any way.”

    Isn’t this assuming that A) “you” never wins despite doubling the amount of tickets and B) both gamblers start with the same amount of money?

    If money isn’t an issue for members, then there’s really no downfall to max entering or colluding. I doubt someone with $400k in their DK account mourns an off night after most of 150 $3 LUs fail.

    It doesn’t make either assumption. It assumes, as is the case in a lottery, that each ticket has the same expected return. Which, in the case of a lottery, is a lot less than the amount you’ve paid for it. If you’re losing money on average on each transaction you can’t make it up with volume.

    In the case of a really good DFS player, the return might be positive, so it makes sense to increase your investment. But doubling the investment does not double the ROI. Each additional ticket you enter reduces it slightly.

  • zshoom

    • 2016 Single Entry Series Finalist

    @Yeoman said...

    If you buy twice as many lottery tickets as I do, you have twice the chance to win. You also lose your money twice as fast, in the long run. I don’t see how that’s to your advantage in any way.

    What I don’t see is how 300 lineups instead of 150 improves the ROI. At best the ROI is the same but you get to double the investment you’re putting in. As long as you’re consistently turning a positive return, that’s good for you…but it doesn’t strike me as fundamentally unfair, at least to the degree that it deserves the ire it seems to get.

    I do understand that this makes it worthwhile for professional players to play the small-buy-in GPPs. I think Mphst’s ideas are on point, there—prohibit black-level players from entering $3-and-under games. Or bar them from particular tournaments and let players decide if they want to face that level of competition or not.

    Lets use a single entry tournament as an example.

    Player A enters one lineup, as the rules allow him to. He likes Aaron Sanchez, as well as Texas and Houston

    Players B and C decide that they will join forces and each enter a lineup. They both like Sanchez and are pretty confident in Texas and Houston being the top plays.

    Player A has to make some choices – He can afford Odor/Springer or Altuve/Beltran.

    Player BC can roll out both.

    Now increase that edge by 150.

    They are exponentially increasing their odds of winning a tournament by optimizing their 150 extra lineups with various combos (unlike the lottery, where each ticket is worth the same).

  • Yeoman

    They aren’t “exponentially increasing their odds.” With 150 entries their odds of winning the tournament are increased by some factor that’s less than 150 (or, conceivably, equal to 150, if all those various entries had exactly the same expected return).

    And to increase their odds of winning the tournament by let’s say 140, they had to pay 150 times as much. Their return per dollar would be better if they just played the one optimal entry.

    I don’t see how that’s different from the lottery example, except that (1) in the lottery, unlike (we like to think) DFS, there’s no skill involved that could ever create a positive expected return and (2) in DFS, unlike the lottery, those tickets had different expected returns and one of them was optimal, so playing more tickets reduces your ROI instead of leaving it the same.

  • fishcakeking

    FCK

    Unfortunately you are all pissing into the wind. MPHST means well and I applaud his effort. However….

    DK doesnt care. They wont care unless one fo the regulators questions them about this stuff.

    As for an individual case of skirting entry limits, again it doesnt matter. The question is how are the sites trying to enforce these things. Answer, they cant fight all the fires they are dealing with now. They have never given details into how they protect the players or enforce their rules.

    People look at this the wrong way. IMO. The right to play on DK is fully in the power of DK. This is isnt a court of law. If DK wanted to shut someone down, they just push a button.

    The reactive mentaltity of DFS is what has hurt it in the last year. It likely wont change.

    FCK

  • bolu

    mphst, you haven’t shown 3 mans with both of them in the last month. Maybe they used play 3 mans together and stopped? It’s hard to take you seriously about these two playing 3mans if you can’t show a single one with these two playing or registered.

  • deactivated59241

    • 450

      RG Overall Ranking

    • 2015 DraftKings FBBWC Finalist

    • x4

      2015 DraftKings FCFWC Finalist

    @Shipmymoney said...

    I have no idea what I am classified as, but part of the reason that the average and below average guys are the ones “admitting it is collusion” is that those are the same people looking for excuses for why they don’t make money and it is easy to just throw words around accusing players that are better than them of cheating. Not saying that is true for everyone who thinks it is collusion, but there is definitely a correlation there.

    This just isn’t true. I make a lot of money doing this and would never knock someone’s hustle that was operating within the rules/guidelines. That isn’t the case here.

    I know CA and PG are brothers. I know they work together. I know they settle on stacks they like and build off each other to double the entry amount and diversify the lineup cores they like. I don’t think, I know. Ask Daut, ask anyone who’s playing higher volume than you and I or just go check Martin’s (PG) twitter account. Mphst18 highlighted it perfectly and he doesn’t even know the behind the scenes stuff. This isn’t the court of law. If you need more proof than that, my guess is you walked the earth to make sure it wasn’t flat as well.

    You’re reply is just pretentious crap a lot of good players spew cause they’re likely to see each other at a live final or because someone is trying to keep their touting options open and don’t want to ruffle any feathers.

  • Mphst18

    @bolu said...

    mphst, you haven’t shown 3 mans with both of them in the last month. Maybe they used play 3 mans together and stopped? It’s hard to take you seriously about these two playing 3mans if you can’t show a single one with these two playing or registered.

    Just go to his Twitter I can’t give you more proof than out of the mans own mouth.

  • Mphst18

    @fishcakeking said...

    Unfortunately you are all pissing into the wind. MPHST means well and I applaud his effort. However….

    DK doesnt care. They wont care unless one fo the regulators questions them about this stuff.

    As for an individual case of skirting entry limits, again it doesnt matter. The question is how are the sites trying to enforce these things. Answer, they cant fight all the fires they are dealing with now. They have never given details into how they protect the players or enforce their rules.

    People look at this the wrong way. IMO. The right to play on DK is fully in the power of DK. This is isnt a court of law. If DK wanted to shut someone down, they just push a button.

    The reactive mentaltity of DFS is what has hurt it in the last year. It likely wont change.

    FCK

    So how are the regulators going to ask the questions if no one speaks up about and just lets it happen.

  • yogaflame

    @Yeoman said...

    They aren’t “exponentially increasing their odds.” With 150 entries their odds of winning the tournament are increased by some factor that’s less than 150 (or, conceivably, equal to 150, if all those various entries had exactly the same expected return).

    And to increase their odds of winning the tournament by let’s say 140, they had to pay 150 times as much. Their return per dollar would be better if they just played the one optimal entry.

    I don’t see how that’s different from the lottery example, except that (1) in the lottery, unlike (we like to think) DFS, there’s no skill involved that could ever create a positive expected return and (2) in DFS, unlike the lottery, those tickets had different expected returns and one of them was optimal, so playing more tickets reduces your ROI instead of leaving it the same.

    Right but no one is playing solely to increase their ROI unless they live in a mental prison. People are trying to win the most money, and as quickly as possible since it’s almost certain that (profitable) dfs play has a limited time horizon.

  • Zieg30

    @Yeoman said...

    If you buy twice as many lottery tickets as I do, you have twice the chance to win. You also lose your money twice as fast, in the long run. I don’t see how that’s to your advantage in any way.

    What I don’t see is how 300 lineups instead of 150 improves the ROI. At best the ROI is the same but you get to double the investment you’re putting in. As long as you’re consistently turning a positive return, that’s good for you…but it doesn’t strike me as fundamentally unfair, at least to the degree that it deserves the ire it seems to get.

    Yeoman,

    In a vacuum it’s not unfair for players to enter unlimited entries, but, here, sites have enacted policies/rules limiting the number of entries each player can put into each tournament. They have also enacted policies/rules forbidding players from circumventing those limitations by banding together and sharing profits. It is, accordingly, unfair for players to purposefully circumvent each sites’ rules, which should apply equally to every player.

    With respect to your original comment, you would have a point if every entry had the same chance of winning. That isn’t the case, here, where profitable “PROs” have much stronger entries, on average.

  • Mphst18

    @SportsFront said...

    This just isn’t true. I make a lot of money doing this and would never knock someone’s hustle that was operating within the rules/guidelines. That isn’t the case here.

    I know CA and PG are brothers. I know they work together. I know they settle on stacks they like and build off each other to double the entry amount and diversify the lineup cores they like. I don’t think, I know. Ask Daut, ask anyone who’s playing higher volume than you and I or just go check Martin’s (PG) twitter account. Mphst18 highlighted it perfectly and he doesn’t even know the behind the scenes stuff. This isn’t the court of law. If you need more proof than that, my guess is you walked the earth to make sure it wasn’t flat as well.

    You’re reply is just pretentious crap a lot of good players spew cause they’re likely to see each other at a live final or because someone is trying to keep their touting options open and don’t want to ruffle any feathers.

    I’d love to hear the behind the scenes stuff.

  • Yeoman

    @Zieg30 said...

    Yeoman,

    In a vacuum it’s not unfair for players to enter unlimited entries, but, here, sites have enacted policies/rules limiting the number of entries each player can put into each tournament. They have also enacted policies/rules forbidding players from circumventing those limitations by banding together and sharing profits. It is, accordingly, unfair for players to purposefully circumvent each sites’ rules, which should apply equally to every player.

    With respect to your original comment, you would have a point if every entry had the same chance of winning. That isn’t the case, here, where profitable “PROs” have much stronger entries, on average.

    That does make sense to me: the point of entry limits is so that the small buy-in games won’t be dominated by a small number of professional players.

    I’ve always been skeptical of the idea that this sort of thing was costing small amateur players a lot of money, mostly because the score to cash is usually higher in limited-entry GPPs than in the analogous multi-entry game (right now in the biggest $3 games it’s 85 in the moonshot but 93 in the 3-entry slider, for example, and I can’t remember the last time that wasn’t the case). Maybe there are a fair number of mass multi-entry players that aren’t really at pro level?

    But I can see why you wouldn’t want sharks buying up half the entries in a dollar game. And I certainly want equal enforcement of whatever rules are adopted. That’s not negotiable. I’m not sure the rules we’ve got do what they’re supposed to do, but they still need to be applied to everyone without favoritism of any kind.

  • bolu

    @Mphst18 said...

    Just go to his Twitter I can’t give you more proof than out of the mans own mouth.

    bigpapagates has only 14 tweets and tweeted that they’ve never intentionally joined the same 3man.

  • cutter2225

    @bolu said...

    and tweeted that they’ve never intentionally joined the same 3man.

    And we should believe it was unintentional why? Guy robs a bank, gets arrested and tells the police I never intended to rob the bank but when I walked in and saw the vault door open I thought what the hell lets do this. I’m sure that’s believable

  • Bighouse55

    @tgowen said...

    I’ve questioned what those two do do for quite some time. I’ve seen numerous examples where they run the same lineup in cash games and have spoken about it to DK at length.

    The reality is that DK either doesn’t care, or can’t legally prove anything so nothing ever comes of any of this.

    I have spoken to DK about their questionable practices as well. I get the impression that they are in bed with Or paying off DK in some way to continue to have this advantage. We wonder why the government is getting involved!

  • papagates

    • 5

      RG Overall Ranking

    • Ranked #5

      RG Tiered Ranking

    • 2016 $1M Prize Winner

    • x5

      2019 DraftKings FFWC Finalist

    There is a ton of misinformation on this thread so let me just clean it up as best I can.

    1: Yes we are brothers. We have never hidden this from anyone. HOWEVER these allegations that we are colluding are completely untrue. We do have a similar general strategy, and utilize a similar system for picking players, but every day we make our teams 100% on our own. There will be some weeks that we don’t discuss any strategy, and we never go into specifics on who we’re picking on any given day. We have several big disagreements in what we think is optimal in general tournament strategy, and every day this plays out differently. Some days, we do have overlap, other days we do not. Just like other pros. Feel free to check through all of our games for the past several years and come to your own conclusion. I’m sure you would find a small and natural overlap of teams. I just checked through yesterday’s referenced payoff pitch, and we had at least 4 of the same teams from what I looked through.

    2: We have never intentionally joined the same 3 man together. It did happen one day this year that we joined at the same time and it was an accident. I immediately unregistered when someone pointed out the mistake had been made. As some of you have pointed out, it would make absolutely no sense to do so intentionally.

    I realize that because we are brothers, and both ranked high, that we can become a lightning rod for criticism, but the same general strategy and discussion and work on systems to becoming the best fantasy players we can be is not disallowed. It is being done at every level of fantasy, from the lowest stakes, to the highest stakes. Every single person is working on bettering themselves.

    If any of you have any questions, feel free to PM me. I am not going to comb through pages of text every day on this thread. I’m really busy with MLB and NFL right now, but I’ll do my best to respond to any pms from anyone with honest questions or issue’s with how I play.

  • fishcakeking

    FCK

    @Mphst18 said...

    So how are the regulators going to ask the questions if no one speaks up about and just lets it happen.

    You need to go to the regulators or the press. DK or RG are not the answer. The question here isnt about any specifc people, but the actual process the sites would use for uncovering and enforcing rules. IMO

    FCK

  • Shipmymoney

    • 60

      RG Overall Ranking

    • Ranked #11

      RG Tiered Ranking

    • x3

      2016 DraftKings FBWC Finalist

    • 2016 FanDuel MLB Playboy Mansion Finalist

    @SportsFront said...

    This just isn’t true. I make a lot of money doing this and would never knock someone’s hustle that was operating within the rules/guidelines. That isn’t the case here.

    I know CA and PG are brothers. I know they work together. I know they settle on stacks they like and build off each other to double the entry amount and diversify the lineup cores they like. I don’t think, I know. Ask Daut, ask anyone who’s playing higher volume than you and I or just go check Martin’s (PG) twitter account. Mphst18 highlighted it perfectly and he doesn’t even know the behind the scenes stuff. This isn’t the court of law. If you need more proof than that, my guess is you walked the earth to make sure it wasn’t flat as well.

    You’re reply is just pretentious crap a lot of good players spew cause they’re likely to see each other at a live final or because someone is trying to keep their touting options open and don’t want to ruffle any feathers.

    So you wouldn’t agree that, for the general DFS population, there is a correlation between whether a person is a losing player in the current environment and how likely they are to scream fire at anything that they perceive to be wrong? All I was saying was that there is a correlation. Not that everyone who questions things is a losing player. My post was in response to someone saying that it is only the average and below average players who are “willing to admit there is collusion.”

  • Mphst18

    20 min 40 second mark. My brother is kinda my partner in all this.

    2 hour and 15 min mark to 2 hour and 22 mark with both brothers lots of we and us language as well as

    we also have a lineup in 30th

    we should have switched to the lions d.

    To be transparent they also state the same unconvincing claim referenced above in pg post.

    https://playbook.draftkings.com/nfl/the-sweat-show-week-4/

    The statistical probability of having the same cash lineup night in and night out but not duplicating lineups amongst your partner while max entering gpp tournaments with max entries below 150 is off the charts.

  • Shipmymoney

    • 60

      RG Overall Ranking

    • Ranked #11

      RG Tiered Ranking

    • x3

      2016 DraftKings FBWC Finalist

    • 2016 FanDuel MLB Playboy Mansion Finalist

    @SportsFront said...

    This isn’t the court of law.

    And if you are talking about banning people from their profession (I don’t know if that is your solution or not, but it has certainly been suggested by others) then, yes, it is basically the court of law.

  • donkshow

    • 885

      RG Overall Ranking

    Here we go again…

  • 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), 1-800-9-WITH-IT (IN), 1-800-522-4700 (CO) or 1-800-BETS OFF (IA). 21+. NJ/PA/WV/IN/IA/CO/IL only.