INDUSTRY FORUM

Comments

  • Ryazan

    • x3

      2015 FanDuel WFFC Finalist

    • x2

      2015 FanDuel WFBC Finalist

    I want to begin this by pointing out that these 4 main issues, which some DFS players had problems with, are the reason the government got involved so suddenly and seemingly out of nowhere. However, it is very easy to ignore each and every one of these and still be a successful DFS player. Had people just kept focusing on themselves, their own teams, their own strategies, and their own research, then NONE of this would have happened. I can easily say that these issues did not affect me one bit, not when I was losing, not when I was winning.

    SCRIPTING – Scripting itself is just a time saving tool. Any of the pro’s that use scripts, they are using them after doing hours of analysis and research. It is not like people who use scripts just get on their computer, click a button, and BOOM they win all of your money. These people, I am sure, put in alot of hard work to come up with whatever it is they tell their script to do – the script does not do the thinking for them, it is just a time saver in the end when all is said and done. Whatever misunderstanding there was between the DFS sites and the scripts people used, believe me, is a completely minor issue that did not affect anyone’s winnings. People made a huge deal about it because they thought it was unfair unfair unfair!!! But a script can’t put together a lineup that wins. It is just a time saving tool. I do not know how to use scripts or any of that, but for 2 years of my DFS career, I couldn’t care less about scripts and who uses them – every single one of my losses, I chalk up to me making mistakes with my lineups, and that is the ONLY reason i lose. And when I won, and won alot, all the people using scripts to save them time, were losing to me. There is no cheating or BIG MAJOR issue when it comes to scripts – just a slightly confusing rule in the TOS.

    OWNERSHIP PERCENTAGES – The media has pounced on this, referring to it EVERYWHERE as “insider trading”. It is literally the reason why the FBI (for some reason) is involved in a full out investigation of DFS, as if people were actually making money off of insider information, which at this point, is not only just speculation (since DK cleared up their error, info was not known before 1pm), but it is being treated specifically as the MAIN REASON that some people win more money than other people. This is DFS – we may do all of your research, hell it can even be illegal research, but at the end of the day, it’s still all up to those millionaire athletes to play well. We players have no control over the outcome – none. So whatever mostly useless information that employees of websites may know, all it truly is, is JUST information. In the case of ownership percentages, no one has any kind of edge knowing that a player is EXACTLY 5.5% owned vs someone like me guessing that player will be 9% owned. It does not make me any more likely to take him if I knew his exact percentage. The media is treating the possibility of this as “knowing a player’s ownership percentage is stealing money from players that don’t know this and the DFS employees are cheating to win”. Completely awful logic. There is no actual insider trading going on, whether DFS employees have this information or not (and they said they do not).

    GAMBLING – If I walk into a casino every day and play slots for an hour, where I have no mental control at all over how much I lose or win, I am gambling. When I follow MLB and have a great feel for players, trends, streaks, and I put money on these players, I am INVESTING my money in SMART DECISIONS in order to MAKE MONEY. That is more like the stock market than it is gambling, because at least I have creative control over what I am doing with my money. A scratch ticket, you have no control at all for example. Let me make this very clear – putting money into players from different teams under a salary cap format is “investing into a portfolio of stocks for that one day” that if you are smart enough, will earn you some money. You cannot have a strategy in actual gambling – you just blindly throw your money into it, and hope for the best. How most others can’t see this logic is beyond me.

    MULTI-ENTRY (and the curious case of MaxDalury):

    Let me state a fact – MaxDalury does not have any more success than an average winning player. Let’s say an average winning player plays every day for a month, and overall puts in $1000 and turns that into $1200. I don’t know anyone’s true ROI so just bear with me. MaxDalury has the same exact success, except over a month, he probably puts in $1,000,000 and turns that into $1,200,000. So he may be a DFS millionaire, but the reason for that is because he puts in a crazy amount of money investing in his skills. The average player is comfortable putting in $1000 per month. The fact that Max uses scripts and multi-enters like crazy, he actually takes on a TON of risk, and you may see him win huge sometimes, but he plays every day, and I am sure he loses huge just as often. It is not like he is cheating somehow, putting in $1000, and coming out of it with $1,000,000. YOU GET OUT WHAT YOU PUT IN. Multi-entering a ton of lineups is alot of hard work, even with a script, and I could personally care less if someone like Max puts in 500, because on some nights, my 20 handmade 1 by 1 lineups will beat ALL of his 500 and I come out on top. This isn’t limited to me – anyone who is good at fantasy sports can take down good money in tournaments/cash games if they just invest properly. Max is not taking advantage of anyone with what he does. You can put in 1 lineup every day for $5, and after a month, you might turn those $150 into $175. Max will be putting in 1000 lineups every day at $5000 per day, and after a month, he’ll turn $150,000 into $175,000. No one who is multi entering has some kind of financial edge over their ROI compared to yours, they are just risking more – YOU are risk averse, and Max is risk loving (just like me, just on a smaller scale) – but no one has some edge because of this based on what I just said here.

    The government has attacked our DFS industry because they are highly uninformed, highly sloppy, the media is quite literally an embarrassment in their reporting, and because so many people on here brought on attention to MINOR problems, sources picked it up, and in this internet age, it’s game over.

    This is similar to going to McDonalds and ordering a cheeseburger – a 4 oz patty is the norm for a cheeseburger, but you order one and notice that the patty is kind of small. You take it out, go home, weigh it, and it’s actually 3.7 oz. You post about it online and you find that hundreds of others have had a similar issue. Next thing you know, a week later, McDonalds is being banned across various states for deception, illegal sales, and conspiracy. You could have just eaten that delicious (but unhealthy lol) cheeseburger, enjoyed it, and moved on with life. But you chose to complain, and this is what your complaint got you. You were so worried about McDonald’s serving you properly sized patties, that you forgot how much you enjoy McDonalds – but now you can’t have McDonald’s anymore. By the way, the patties ended up being 3.7 oz and not 4 oz because the cooking method in some of their restaurants shrunk them by accident. But the government saw it differently without considering the logical facts.

  • hbbomaha

    @Ryazan said...

    More people need to realize this.

    Hell, i will not argue anymore that percentages owned don’t matter 1 bit in a large tournament. That argument for me is over. This is now my new argument that ive been saying over and over – knowing the EXACT % vs making an estimated guess doesn’t actually make a difference.

    We all realize this. The point is, without fail someone will be lower owned than they should every week and your guestimate is off and useless but the actual data would be useful. Always knowing this without question every week would allow for more consistent top end ROI.

  • tonytone1908

    @hbbomaha said...

    You are missing the big picture.

    You know ownership of all players.
    You think qb 1 and qb 2 are equal.
    Qb1 and qb2 have a 10 percent variance in ownership.
    The lower owned one will score points for you and less other people.
    This means I get more value from the lower owned one because less other people get it.
    Based on this data I can maximize my upside, effectively increasing my ROI, an advantage.

    But now you have changed your receivers to possibly higher owned or less scoring ones than you would have with QB1. Your defense is now differently and higher owned. Your running backs are different and more higher owned possibly.

    Knowing the ownership of 1 position could DRASTICALLY change the rest of your LU. Is it worth it for a perceived smaller ownership % of 1 player? That’s just stupid. If you’re basing your LU own ownership % then maybe that’s the problem.

    It’s not hard to estimate ownership %‘s on your own.

  • hbbomaha

    @tonytone1908 said...

    But now you have changed your receivers to possibly higher owned or less scoring ones than you would have with QB1. Your defense is now differently and higher owned. Your running backs are different and more higher owned possibly.

    Knowing the ownership of 1 position could DRASTICALLY change the rest of your LU. Is it worth it for a perceived smaller ownership % of 1 player? That’s just stupid. If you’re basing your LU own ownership % then maybe that’s the problem.

    It’s not hard to estimate ownership %‘s on your own.

    No you haven’t. Your lineup is static except the one position. That’s it. That’s the entire point. If equal lower owned wins. When they exceed value you raise higher into top heavy payouts. Increased ROI.

  • tonytone1908

    @hbbomaha said...

    No you haven’t. Your lineup is static except the one position. That’s it. That’s the entire point. If equal lower owned wins. When they exceed value you raise higher into top heavy payouts. Increased ROI.

    So you’re not going to stack with your WR1 anymore? You’re going to possibly use a QB against your DEF?

    Sorry, I’m not going to change my QB and not adjust the rest of my lineup. That would be asinine to do so. Value is what counts not %. Prices being equal I want who’s going to give me higher value not who’s lower owned.

  • Ryazan

    • x3

      2015 FanDuel WFFC Finalist

    • x2

      2015 FanDuel WFBC Finalist

    @tonytone1908 said...

    So you’re not going to stack with your WR1 anymore? You’re going to possibly use a QB against your DEF?

    Sorry, I’m not going to change my QB and not adjust the rest of my lineup. That would be asinine to do so. Value is what counts not %. Prices being equal I want who’s going to give me higher value not who’s lower owned.

    im not gonna lie, im having a hard time following the discussion you and hbbomaha are having. But why is there even a discussion? Always go with value and who you think will score the most points. Sure, you might see me place high in a GPP with low owned players, but the only reason for that is because when one sets many lineups, one will end up with some really low owned players in some, but it’s never by design, its never “oh he is sooo low owned, i am going to use him!”

  • hbbomaha

    @tonytone1908 said...

    So you’re not going to stack with your WR1 anymore? You’re going to possibly use a QB against your DEF?

    Sorry, I’m not going to change my QB and not adjust the rest of my lineup. That would be asinine to do so. Value is what counts not %. Prices being equal I want who’s going to give me higher value not who’s lower owned.

    You’re adding conditions that don’t matter and aren’t my argument. Boil it down. Expected Value is the same. Lower owned wins that’s it plain and simple.

    You’re argument is build the best lineup and it will win. My argument is constantly maximizing your upside will increase ROI.

  • hbbomaha

    @Ryazan said...

    im not gonna lie, im having a hard time following the discussion you and hbbomaha are having. But why is there even a discussion? Always go with value and who you think will score the most points. Sure, you might see me place high in a GPP with low owned players, but the only reason for that is because when one sets many lineups, one will end up with some really low owned players in some, but it’s never by design, its never “oh he is sooo low owned, i am going to use him!”

    That’s not the point anyone is making. No one is saying use them because they are low owned, but rather I like two players equally but can only play one. Everything else is equal 100%, why would anyone not take the lower owned one?

    Now extrapolate that up to the top end. So let’s say it’s a great week for Brady Rodgers and Luck, you’re going to have exposure to all three. However, if you knew that Rodgers was to be way less owned you would then increase your exposure to Rodgers, because while still a play you like, is more likely to vault you into the top of a GPP. Since the structure of payouts is top heavy, the more often you get there the better the ROI.

  • Ryazan

    • x3

      2015 FanDuel WFFC Finalist

    • x2

      2015 FanDuel WFBC Finalist

    @hbbomaha said...

    That’s not the point anyone is making. No one is saying use them because they are low owned, but rather I like two players equally but can only play one. Everything else is equal 100%, why would anyone not take the lower owned one?

    Now extrapolate that up to the top end. So let’s say it’s a great week for Brady Rodgers and Luck, you’re going to have exposure to all three. However, if you knew that Rodgers was to be way less owned you would then increase your exposure to Rodgers, because while still a play you like, is more likely to vault you into the top of a GPP. Since the structure of payouts is top heavy, the more often you get there the better the ROI.

    absolutely not. Rodgers, Luck, Brady – the player i am using the most is the one who I think will go off the most. I quite literally never view two players as equal.

    A better example would be Forte and Foster this week. I do think they are close to equal in what I expect them to do. I actually am not sure which one will be lower owned. But i think it’s a win/win with these 2 guys, I will be using them both all over the place, and if i knew 1 of them was going to be significantly lower owned, I would still use them as I planned, because performance is what matters to me, not ownership.

  • hbbomaha

    @Ryazan said...

    absolutely not. Rodgers, Luck, Brady – the player i am using the most is the one who I think will go off the most. I quite literally never view two players as equal.

    A better example would be Forte and Foster this week. I do think they are close to equal in what I expect them to do. I actually am not sure which one will be lower owned. But i think it’s a win/win with these 2 guys, I will be using them both all over the place, and if i knew 1 of them was going to be significantly lower owned, I would still use them as I planned, because performance is what matters to me, not ownership.

    I know you’re a gut feeling lineup builder so it doesn’t necessarily apply to you and how you build lineups, but I’ll try to make the point with your example.

    If Foster were to be 2% owned why in the world wouldn’t you increase your exposure? You expect performance to be equal, but why not build every single good lineup you can with Foster, knowing that if his performance hits what you expect you’ll be one of the few people to benefit from it, and so not only will almost all of your lineups move into cashing position, but when all of your other plays hit you become very likely to win the whole thing, plus have several other high cashing lineups.

    If you wouldn’t increase exposure it’s because you are either A. Max invested. B. Stubborn/naive C. Dumb.

    B and C lose you money. A does too, but in an acceptable and responsible manner.

    Side note I’m not trying to say you’re dumb with that, so please don’t infer that.

  • nitewark49

    The fact is that they did this to themselves. The lack of transparency allowed the media, politicians and the like to speculate and paint a poor picture of the entire industry. Just because They don’t know how the games are played doesn’t mean they won’t try to criticize them any change they get. The industry should have tried to eliminate as many of these scenarios as possible.

  • eatmorebacon

    @Ryazan said...

    GAMBLING – If I walk into a casino every day and play slots for an hour, where I have no mental control at all over how much I lose or win, I am gambling. When I follow MLB and have a great feel for players, trends, streaks, and I put money on these players, I am INVESTING my money in SMART DECISIONS in order to MAKE MONEY. That is more like the stock market than it is gambling, because at least I have creative control over what I am doing with my money. A scratch ticket, you have no control at all for example. Let me make this very clear – putting money into players from different teams under a salary cap format is “investing into a portfolio of stocks for that one day” that if you are smart enough, will earn you some money. You cannot have a strategy in actual gambling – you just blindly throw your money into it, and hope for the best. How most others can’t see this logic is beyond me.

    Nice discussion. Just a couple random observations: I’m not really on-board with the stock market analogy. DFS is a zero-sum game (except for the rake) in a given day; the stock market isn’t. I would argue the stock market analogy is more apt for season-long fantasy; more of a ‘long-run’ period. Regarding casinos, I often think about games like 3-card poker where there is skill involved in that one’s outcome will be far better if the ‘optimal’ play decision are made each time. Other than table poker, these seem like the most analogous games to DFS, although the difference is that one can win in DFS.

    As for multi-entry, I think the advantage in entering dozens or hundreds of times comes from the reduction in variance but it is mostly due to the heavily graduated payout scale. I’m a terrible poker player, but it seems to me that the analogy is joining a tournament with a short stack. You can win, but structurally you probably won’t.

  • tonytone1908

    I find it awesome the amount of entries in the squeeze that have Austin Jackson and Chris Coghlan plus some other random schmuck. All 3 are not in the lineup at all and some of them are not minimum salary guys by any means. Without scripts we wouldn’t have these dumbass lineups in there to add to the pool. There is no way I would ever enter those lineups myself. Ever.

  • kantiger77

    Time saving is an advantage, period. Scripting should be banned. Massive multi entry should be banned. Employees should have never been able to play DFS once they were hired.

    Stop defending this nonsense.

  • poonwhipped1

    @kantiger77 said...

    Time saving is an advantage, period. Scripting should be banned. Massive multi entry should be banned. Employees should have never been able to play DFS once they were hired.

    Stop defending this nonsense.

    You have a better chance at convincing a brick wall than trying to get these two to understand.

  • Unico10

    • 707

      RG Overall Ranking

    Maybe Maxdalury himself will convince him?

    “The first step is scraping data from various public resources online and plugging the numbers into his custom-built predictive models, which generate hundreds of lineups based on his forecasts. There are publicly available tools that do some of this work for daily fantasy players, but Sud created bespoke software to make sure no one else can access his data. He also has a technique for identifying athletes who aren’t going to end up on a lot of other team’s rosters, which is important, because there’s a particular advantage in choosing players no one else has noticed.”

    Source: Bloomberg

  • iSplashRollz

    @Unico10 said...

    Maybe Maxdalury himself will convince him?

    “The first step is scraping data from various public resources online and plugging the numbers into his custom-built predictive models, which generate hundreds of lineups based on his forecasts. There are publicly available tools that do some of this work for daily fantasy players, but Sud created bespoke software to make sure no one else can access his data. He also has a technique for identifying athletes who aren’t going to end up on a lot of other team’s rosters, which is important, because there’s a particular advantage in choosing players no one else has noticed.”

    Source: Bloomberg

    No, the Troll Brothers heads are thick with the cement

  • Driven2ThEdge

    Hey Ryazan, thanks for the post, here are some of my thoughts.

    SCRIPTING:
    Right on.

    OWNERSHIP PERCENTAGES:
    I’m really glad you have moved your goalposts from “ownership percentage is absolutely useless information,” to “knowing the EXACT percentage is useless, e.g., 5.5% vs. 9%.” But even though the information isn’t that useful, it would still make things a lot cleaner if no one had information about each others lineups that wasn’t public information.

    At some point in this thread you said that knowing someone’s specific lineup in a H2H is useless because everyone changes their lineups until lock. I think you are severely overestimating the number of players who are tinkering in the final minutes (due to school, work, etc.). This is an extreme example, but let’s say you can see someone’s lineup; you can copy 7 of their players and for their weakest player you can swap in a better player. This takes away a lot of the randomness and guarantees you a victory if you know that player is injured or likely won’t play.

    GAMBLING:
    Non-issue, it’s all just legal semantics. No different than poker, but somehow poker isn’t a game of skill.

    MULTI-ENTRY:
    You’re right on the money with this one, exactly right. But there could be a problem one level deeper, and that is with the public perception of multi-entry. Even though we understand that large multi-entries are the reason that such large GPPs can exist, and that often times you actually beat all 500 of their lineups if their core players tank, it is hard to educate the masses about this concept. So even though multi-entry in itself isn’t a problem, the perception being a problem might lead to a real problem.

  • yzerman19

    DFS is absolutely gambling. Stocks aren’t really a great argument against that. Buying individual stocks is a huge gamble. Just because there is potential to make decisions with a positive expectation in your gambling, doesn’t make it not gambling.

  • fishcakeking

    FCK

    @Ryazan said...

    I started as an average player and no one had empathy for me. But that didnt bother me. What does your post have anything to do with my original thread….care to comment on that instead?

    Your conclusions are all based on your point of view.

    Scripting is not a humongous thing. Some are blunt others are sophisticated. Certain ones are quite harmful to ecosystem.

    Multi entry is a disaster from a pr perspective and also it’s impact greatly depends on the sport. Just because someone can use it to their benefit does not make it a necessity to the growth or health of the game.

    Ownership percentages – just like the skill in dfs if you had this over time it should offer you a reqsonable edge.mas matter of fact they are interrelated. Additionally standard deviation from norm ownership is most important not gross ownership.

    Gambling – I have spent my entire life in and around regulated legalized gambling. There are a significant number of games of skill that are considered gambling. They aren’t mutually exclusive. No matter how you want to stomp your feet, this is a fact that has been proven over and over again. A significant amount of what you consider skill is based on self observation and likely something that is fluid based on a significant number of factors.

    Mic drop.

  • madmanjayWV

    So you are saying ^^^^^^^^^^ ?????
    DFS is gambling and thus should be shutdown totally or obviously regulated heavily with a keen eye?

  • Ryazan

    • x3

      2015 FanDuel WFFC Finalist

    • x2

      2015 FanDuel WFBC Finalist

    @Unico10 said...

    Maybe Maxdalury himself will convince him?

    “The first step is scraping data from various public resources online and plugging the numbers into his custom-built predictive models, which generate hundreds of lineups based on his forecasts. There are publicly available tools that do some of this work for daily fantasy players, but Sud created bespoke software to make sure no one else can access his data. He also has a technique for identifying athletes who aren’t going to end up on a lot of other team’s rosters, which is important, because there’s a particular advantage in choosing players no one else has noticed.”

    Source: Bloomberg

    There is nothing wrong with that. There was no mention of having a mass-edit script, and there is no proof max used anything other than global player replace when late breaking scratches happen before lineup lock. If there is no proof of him or anyone using mass-edit scripts, then everyone needs to calm down about that.

  • Ryazan

    • x3

      2015 FanDuel WFFC Finalist

    • x2

      2015 FanDuel WFBC Finalist

    @yzerman19 said...

    DFS is absolutely gambling. Stocks aren’t really a great argument against that. Buying individual stocks is a huge gamble. Just because there is potential to make decisions with a positive expectation in your gambling, doesn’t make it not gambling.

    you don’t want DFS to be around? YOU GOT IT! You won the argument….are you happy now?

    No but seriously, DFS is not gambling by law in most states. I have always detailed how it is not gambling in this thread. You people need to stop throwing the gambling word around so much because this is a public forum that can be read by anyone if you know what I mean. Take the hint people, whether you THINK it is gambling or not, trust me, and it is by law right now in most places, DFS is skill, and more like investing. Run with it and say that more, or else you won’t be playing DFS in the future. Don’t be stupid with this one.

  • Putz

    @Ryazan said...

    There is nothing wrong with that. There was no mention of having a mass-edit script, and there is no proof max used anything other than global player replace when late breaking scratches happen before lineup lock. If there is no proof of him or anyone using mass-edit scripts, then everyone needs to calm down about that.

    You missed what this quote was in reference to. Read the last sentence again. Jeeez, why did I even read this thread.

  • hotpants

    @Ryazan said...

    There was no mention of having a mass-edit script,

    Why wouldn’t he have a mass-edit script? DK allows it. Not just quick player replace, but creating new “optimal” lineups in reaction to late-breaking news (see NBA 5 minutes before lock)

    Just opening themselves and the industry up to more bogus/inflammatory reporting

  • Ryazan

    • x3

      2015 FanDuel WFFC Finalist

    • x2

      2015 FanDuel WFBC Finalist

    @Putz said...

    You missed what this quote was in reference to. Read the last sentence again. Jeeez, why did I even read this thread.

    Max thinks that players ownership %‘s matter. Thats fine. But remember, I have changed my stance a few days ago about that.

  • 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).