INDUSTRY FORUM

Comments

  • Riley

    RG Co-Founder

    Hey guys,

    We are making some changes to data collection and criteria for our Rankings as an interim solution to our rankings feeds being temporarily disabled on Fanduel and DraftKings as outlined by this post.

    Whereas before we were getting data feeds from our partners, we are now collecting publicly available data from the lobbies of the big two sites using a dedicated team of employees/interns. We are making sure to collect this data without violating the terms of service of either site (i.e. using a manual process instead of using scripts to collect data).

    Because this is a labor-intensive process and because we are only working with Tournaments in the lobbies, we are now only counting Tournaments and Satellites with $10,000 prize pools and a minimum of 10 players. 50/50s, multipliers, and Heads Up games will not be included in the Rankings going forward. We will be moving to these criteria on all sites, not just Fanduel and DraftKings.

    We started this process several weeks ago when our data feeds were pulled and now have a process of importing this data into our database, so over the next several days, you will start to see recent results for FD and DK added to your profile!

    We still consider this a temporary/interim change. Fanduel and DraftKings have both told us they want to support the RotoGrinders rankings once they have more clarity and more time to review their policies. We will continue to work with them and may return to a more comprehensive rankings system in the future.

    With this change in data collection, we also have plans to introduce several new Ranking lists broken down by average buy-in level, so that smaller-level players can rank themselves against players that play at similar levels. Keep an eye out for these. We think they will be a big hit!

  • eforsty

    10,000 cut off works well for NFL,NBA, MLB decently for NHL,PGA,CFB, but really hurts smaller sports like Soccer and CBB as well as pretty much all of the sports on smaller sites. I completely understand that the sites not giving feeds makes it unfeasible to do everything so hopefully that comes back eventually.

  • marineroptimist

    Is there a place to see a summary of what sites contribute to rankings, and what contests? With Cal taking down $100K (and me a few thousand) in Yahoo this week, will we see Yahoo included in rankings anytime soon? Thanks for all the work you do!

  • Riley

    RG Co-Founder

    Congrats on your big win!

    We currently track:

    • Fanduel
    • DraftKings
    • DraftDay
    • FantasyFeud
    • FantasyAces
    • StarsDraft
    • Draftpot

    We have been in discussions with Yahoo to get a results feed from them, but now that we have implemented a separate solution for Fanduel and DraftKings, we will likely replicate that system for Yahoo as well. We still have to discuss this a bit internally, however, because if we get the FD and DK feeds back and go back to including 50/50’s and DoubleUps in our rankings, we will want to do the same for Yahoo.

  • chronoxiong

    Not including 50/50s sucks because guess where most of my action is at? It’s 50/50s. :(

  • cctravis

    Extremely happy to see the rankings back as they really motivate many players and I personally love them. I love that there will be tiered rankings as this is much more logical. Thanks rotogrinders team… Eagerly refreshing my profile waiting for the update ;)

    I think GPP and H2H should not be ranked together and separating the rankings is the best and only way to really judge 2 completely different skill sets when building lineups. That would be like if there was a MTT ranking in Poker that mixed in cash game results….. that would not make any sense so why does it make sense in DFS? It does not IMO. If you play cash/50/50 etc. the money in your bankroll is your ranking…. that is not the case in GPPs where the prizes are so top heavy. I hope the rankings stay this way and if the data exists in the future to have a separate cash game 50/50 ranking then let it happen but so happy to see things being separated in a more logical and fair way.

    Also I would love Yahoo to be included in the rankings but see a challenge as there does not appear to be unique user names for Yahoo contests. I have been profitable on yahoo over the last few weeks but my results just use my first name which is very common and not unique at all as my username. I tried to find a way to change this to my normal dfs screen name of winccwin but could find no way of doing this. I assume if you are entering the results manually and not from data provided from yahoo this would be a big issue. I am not even sure what name to enter in my rotogrinders profile to make sure yahoo tracking works correct if it ever does? I would assume it is the email account from yahoo we signed up with as this is the only unique account identifier I can see.

  • JEFFRAMBO

    In addition to the measures put into place as outlined in the original post… would it perhaps also be useful to have a submission page where users can submit contest links that can then be reviewed, vetted, and included by RG Staff? This would assist in getting the most relevant results included since the main crowd being catered to are RG users. So assuming users who care about rankings are proactive in ensuring that they submit links for contests that haven’t been included… this might be beneficial to consider.

  • jonconnington

    Is there a timeframe for when this will be completed? Thanks!

  • dannyboy7932

    Not sure I like the $10,000 pool cut off. So someone who wins a $7,000 GPP prize pool with a top prize of $1,000 will not get credit in the rankings when someone who finishes 100,000th in a NFL $3 gpp and wins $6 and will receive ranking points? RG should rethink the cut off in my opinion. Thoughts?

    I do really like the idea of the tiered ranking system. Looking forward to when this all comes out. Thanks RG!

  • shockermandan

    • Moderator

    @dannyboy7932 said...

    Not sure I like the $10,000 pool cut off.

    I would suspect the RG team doesn’t like it either. It’s just a matter of having to draw a line in the sand somewhere since the sites aren’t giving them a feed anymore.

  • Olhausen

    @dannyboy7932 said...

    Not sure I like the $10,000 pool cut off. So someone who wins a $7,000 GPP prize pool with a top prize of $1,000 will not get credit in the rankings when someone who finishes 100,000th in a NFL $3 gpp and wins $6 and will receive ranking points? RG should rethink the cut off in my opinion. Thoughts?

    I do really like the idea of the tiered ranking system. Looking forward to when this all comes out. Thanks RG!

    I was bummed out about this also. But I completely understand it’s time consuming and I’m happy we are at least getting some rankings rather then none for the time being.

  • FunkyColdModella

    Thanks for the info.

    Will it include their number of winning (placing in $$) entries too?

  • dude_abides7

    I suspect there will be a good deal of changes over time with this as the sites level out what can and can not be permitted in as far as contest data sharing. Although I agree that the 10,000 cut-off and not including league play (GPP player) and 50/50’s (cash player) doesn’t give an accurate representation of the grinder’s true rank. That said, this is better than nothing. And that is what we had before this positive change in events.

    What I want to know is: Assuming the sites once again allow RG to access the game data directly, will RG go back to “OCT 8th” and fill in the gaps? Also, if we as RG users OPT IN and allow (ask) RG to source this data, why would it be a problem? They only pull winning entries that were publicly available.

    Looking forward to seeing how the tiered rankings play out.

  • hendry

    personally i dont understand the point in having rankings that only include a subset of contests. just have the TPOY. nevertheless, thanks for the hard work you guys are doing even though its gonna drop us cash game guys off the rankings.

  • JEFFRAMBO

    One other idea- could a status page be placed just showing a brief update along the lines of:

    “All results for FanDuel NFL GPPs as of 10/18 — 90% complete” etc.

    Might help with cutting down the nagging inquiries along the lines of “Hey, I entered a contest that I placed in and don’t see the results yet but others have results showing from that same contest, what gives?”

  • Cameron

    RG Co-Founder

    • 2014 FanDuel NFL Survivor Champion

    • 2016 RG Season Long Champion: NFL

    @hendry said...

    personally i dont understand the point in having rankings that only include a subset of contests. just have the TPOY. nevertheless, thanks for the hard work you guys are doing even though its gonna drop us cash game guys off the rankings.

    For now, you can view them as Tournament Rankings, with different levels of tiers, based on users average buy-in. – Hopefully not having 50/50, H2H is just temporary, as well.

  • Cal

    RG CoFounder & Admin

    • 266

      RG Overall Ranking

    • $1M Prize Winner

    • x4

      2015 DraftKings FFWC Finalist

    @dude_abides7 said...

    I suspect there will be a good deal of changes over time with this as the sites level out what can and can not be permitted in as far as contest data sharing. Although I agree that the 10,000 cut-off and not including league play (GPP player) and 50/50’s (cash player) doesn’t give an accurate representation of the grinder’s true rank. That said, this is better than nothing. And that is what we had before this positive change in events.

    What I want to know is: Assuming the sites once again allow RG to access the game data directly, will RG go back to “OCT 8th” and fill in the gaps? Also, if we as RG users OPT IN and allow (ask) RG to source this data, why would it be a problem? They only pull winning entries that were publicly available.

    Looking forward to seeing how the tiered rankings play out.

    Re: Going back to October 8th, I’d lean towards doing that, but it won’t be simple. We’ve had numerous problems with these feeds over the years as the amount of data multiplied. While the sites support the Rankings it’s very difficult for them to prioritize spending time on the feeds.

    We may end up with a different import system on each site (an issue we’ve always had) and be forced to make compromises. For example, in the previous rankings system our data limitations forced us to count large field 50/50s as tournaments, which was far from ideal.

  • ActionJunkie

    Awesome stuff, greatly appreciated.

    Rankings was one of the things that first got me hooked on this site so I’m sure there’s plenty out there drawn to this extra feature which will help Grinders grow.

  • joshschreder

    Can you make it so we can manually enter our own top 20% finishes.

  • Riley

    RG Co-Founder

    @joshschreder said...

    Can you make it so we can manually enter our own top 20% finishes.

    There’s a trust issue there. Since we take pride in our rankings and have in the past (and plan in the future) to reward prizes for reaching different ranking levels, we have to ensure the data we collect is authentic.

  • imjustjoshinya

    if this a labor thing.. thats alot of things to process… you hiring?

  • nickrock23

    I don’t see why the DK $6000 CFB Tourns w/ ~1400 people wouldn’t count, these are really popular. Even something like the 4k prize pools with 400 entries. Don’t see how these results wouldn’t exemplify skill levels.

  • dude_abides7

    @Riley said...

    There’s a trust issue there. Since we take pride in our rankings and have in the past (and plan in the future) to reward prizes for reaching different ranking levels, we have to ensure the data we collect is authentic.

    Riley,

    I don’t think we’re suggesting a ‘take our word for it’ method for this. Simply stated, you have a database form that allows us to cut and paste the URL links to contests for winning entries (Top 20%, etc). Inherent in the shared link from the user is a unique URL string that highlights the submitting user’s LU and placement. The only requirement is that the manual database employee needs to have an open site account so their browser will allow them to see the contest.

    This kinda goes along the same path of when, in the past, we send support notices of contests that were missed but should have been included.

    Of course there are probably efficiency steps that could be put in place to make this easier on your team. In the end, why not accept your user’s help if it can be assured that the information being submitted is accurate and eligible?

  • Riley

    RG Co-Founder

    @dude_abides7 – We’ve had a form like that for the last year or so. It won’t be going away. We just can’t blindly include ALL results that are submitted, and the verification process is complicated (as you hinted at). Often times we can’t get to the contests submitted because our support team doesn’t have access or because the contest is no longer available on the partner site.

    I believe some members are suggesting submitting their own results as an alternative way to count cash games and large-field 50/50’s, and since all those submitted results must be manually verified, we don’t want people using the missing results form for that purpose. The volume is just more than we’re ready to take on with the manual process.

    I am confident we will procure all results we intend to count using the new process we have set up. However, you can still submit missing large-field GPP results for investigation at https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1WjiEnia7f9rO3xCozET3nDmqCRO_EXcQNrRKBWcjcmk/viewform?c=0&w=1

  • dude_abides7

    I had no idea that form existed. Thanks for sharing. There are many factors to this and of course the “time sink” is the biggest hurdle to why this will never be ideal until the sites allow some level of data share that does not require RG go full manual mode.

    I think if someone takes down a Single Entry GPP that is less than 10K (think pretty much every NHL single entry) then it’s sad that this would not count as per your 10K cap. I contend that is more impressive then a guy with 200 unique LU’s taking down a 80,000K entry GPP.

    Furthermore, if a player is placing 1-3 in 100 player leagues, every night, then that too should be able to be documented when determining a players ranking.

    Basically, all I am saying is that if there is a way to allow your user base to “work for free” on your behalf in a manner that assures the accuracy and legitimacy of the rankings then hey….why not take advantage of that?

  • bluestooges

    @Riley said...

    This is specifically against the terms of service of both DK and FD. We will not be doing anything like this as long as their terms are clearly against it.

    if you had all the results in your own database and then did this would it not be ok? I am not a computer guy so I could and am probably wrong but if you took all the results and copied and pasted them in your own database and then scraped them from there would this just add the one extra step and be with in the rules?

  • X Unread Thread
  • X Thread with New Replies*
  • *Jumps to your first unread reply

Sites mentioned in this thread

Use our links to sign up and deposit on sites listed in this thread to get these bonuses:

  • FanDuel

    Get 1-month of RotoGrinders Premium for FREE (a ~$40value) by signing up through one of our links!

    Learn More
  • DraftKings

    Sign up for DraftKings using a RotoGrinders link & receive our DraftKings Premium content FREE for 1 month. That’s a ~$40 value! No DraftKings promo code necessary!

    Learn More
  • FantasyDraft

    FantasyDraft strives to put players first, with a mission to “provide a fun and fair experience for all.” To this end, the site has a well-built, easy-to-use interface and a the first of its kind in offering “Rake-Free” fantasy contests.

    Learn More

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. Our goal is to help all of our members make more money playing daily fantasy sports!

Bet with your head, not over it!
Gambling Problem? Call 1-800-Gambler