MAIN FORUM

Comments

  • BurrTheBaddestB

    I know that I am undoubtedly beating a dead horse here with the creation of this new thread, but I gotta get something off of this massive chest ‘o mine that is beginning to grind at my inner “bitch”.

    This season – more so than ever before – pros, so-called “gurus”, and yes, even some decent-sized “sharks” seem to be flooding the “$250 NBA Mini Swat” GPP’s over on FanDuel. Some of them are very recognizable names in the DFS game (as well as being members of this site to boot). With such large amounts of money already won over time and seemingly limitless bankrolls at their disposal, this is as unsettling to me as it is humorous.

    Why are they even wasting their time (and mine) and why do they also seem to be seeking out each and every empty or unfilled “novice” and/or “small fish” opportunity that is possible nowadays?

    Is it an ego thing?

    Is it some kind of power play to remind everyone that you’re going to have to go through them no matter where you may try to play and no matter what amount that you’re willing to wager?

    There has got to be some underlying reason(s) as to how and why this is more prevalent now than during any other season/sport that I’ve noticed to date. If not for any of the aforementioned ones that I just questioned above, though, certainly for a different one…right?

    Any further thoughts and comments on this new(ish) (and absolutely pathetic) trend that I’ve noticed is welcomed and encouraged, gang. Thanks!

  • elementasrat

    I’ve said it a hundred times and I’ll say it again.

    Stop asking people to limit their own action. This game is about making money. For some people this is their source of income, their livelihood.

  • Ryazan

    • 136

      RG Overall Ranking

      RG Overall Ranking
    • Ranked #86

      RG Tiered Ranking

      RG Tiered Ranking
    • x3

      2015 FanDuel WFFC Finalist

      FanDuel WFFC Finalist
    • x2

      2015 FanDuel WFBC Finalist

      FanDuel WFBC Finalist

    How bout someone who recently won the millionaire maker, entering a 40 dollar satellite to win a seat for a contest that to him, would be 0.2% of his bankroll to buy in directly?

  • RangerC

    One thing that I find fascinating is that DK/FD treat high stakes players like table games whales rather than treating them like high-volume winning bettors or advantage players. Yes, the pros generate massive amounts of rake BUT they also pull out 90% of withdraws from the DFS ecosystem. If a mid-tier or small stakes player wins a 10K prize from a $3 buyin, they might use it to move up a level in play while a pro will just add it to their monthly withdraw. I think most of the problems with the industry stem from the fact that most of the employees on DK/FD either 1) were high stakes players on other sites and/or 2) saw high stakes players as the most important element of the industry. It seems like DKs dream for the industry is 10 teams of pros max entering everything with a minimal ROI (profiting on volume) while casuals/fish play a few $3/$20 -EV lotto tix GPP entries a week – that’s the fastest way to get to these levels of profit but I doubt it is sustainable OR optimal in the long run.

  • KillaChap

    I think the point here is really more of “why the hell can’t these guys just let us little guys play and make our buck back? “ I think most everyone understands they’re not breaking any rules and they’re just trying to make as much money as they can they just don’t understand why they bother. It’s sort of like the varsity basketball team scrimmaging the 6th grade team and then rejecting every shot they take. No one can really say they’re breaking the rules and the 6th graders didn’t have to participate but do the big kids reallllly need to swat the ball back in their face?

  • jhorst52

    • 22

      RG Overall Ranking

      RG Overall Ranking
    • Ranked #18

      RG Tiered Ranking

      RG Tiered Ranking
    • x2

      2016 FanDuel WFFC Finalist

      FanDuel WFFC Finalist
    • x2

      2016 DraftKings FFWC Finalist

      DraftKings FFWC Finalist
    @Ryazan said...

    How bout someone who recently won the millionaire maker, entering a 40 dollar satellite to win a seat for a contest that to him, would be 0.2% of his bankroll to buy in directly?

    King Ryazan lives! When are you going to put the smackdown on Saahil again?

  • Cal

    RG CoFounder & Admin

    • 171

      RG Overall Ranking

      RG Overall Ranking
    • 2014 FanDuel WFFC Finalist

      FanDuel WFFC Finalist
    • 2010 FanDuel WFFC Finalist

      FanDuel WFFC Finalist
    @Bigo1 said...

    Wrong target. The sites, not the players, are responsible for the DFS ecosystem.

    It literally takes no more than 10 seconds for a pro (or any other player) to enter all the low stake GPPs. After spending 8 to 10h building up LUs every day, why would he not do it??

    Agree with this. The onus is on the sites to regulate the ecosystem/impact of top pros. Top players taking money out of the ecosystem too quickly is bad for everyone except for those top players (who are simply acting in self interest). I know this is becoming more apparent/more important to management at both sites. I think we’ll see a lot more attention put towards the long term health and sustainability of the ecosystem once they are a combined entity.

  • dude_abides7

    @Cal said...

    I know this is becoming more apparent/more important to management at both sites. I think we’ll see a lot more attention put towards the long term health and sustainability of the ecosystem once they are a combined entity.

    Do you have any evidence to share that this is becoming “more important” to management of these sites?? From where we sit it appears to be the exact opposite. Even if that was true, actions speak louder than words. Also it’s not like this is a new issue and they were caught off guard. They have had 2-3 years to address this and haven’t. Sorry Cal, I support the job you do here, but I don’t buy this one bit.

    Also, if you are betting that a merger (which by no means is a certainty) will be the catalyst in things getting better than I got a bridge to sell you. Most times, when 2 large companies combine to create a even larger one, it is the consumers that end up getting the shaft.

    Nothing in FD/DK’s operating paradigm gives me any confidence that things will change if they get more of a strangle hold over the market share. I know your business depends on DFS staying relevant, but I just don’t see where you are drawling this optimism from?

  • elementasrat

    @dude_abides7 said...

    Do you have any evidence to share that this is becoming “more important” to management of these sites?? From where we sit it appears to be the exact opposite. Even if that was true, actions speak louder than words. Also it’s not like this is a new issue and they were caught off guard. They have had 2-3 years to address this and haven’t. Sorry Cal, I support the job you do here, but I don’t buy this one bit.

    Also, if you are betting that a merger (which by no means is a certainty) will be the catalyst in things getting better than I got a bridge to sell you. Most times, when 2 large companies combine to create a even larger one, it is the consumers that end up getting the shaft.

    Nothing in FD/DK’s operating paradigm gives me any confidence that things will change if they get more of a strangle hold over the market share. I know your business depends on DFS staying relevant, but I just don’t see where you are drawling this optimism from?

    Yea I definitely agree. I’m not buying Cal’s reasoning AT ALL. A merger is the WORST case scenario for industry.

  • guey10

    its getting choppy in the waters it seems like

  • Cal

    RG CoFounder & Admin

    • 171

      RG Overall Ranking

      RG Overall Ranking
    • 2014 FanDuel WFFC Finalist

      FanDuel WFFC Finalist
    • 2010 FanDuel WFFC Finalist

      FanDuel WFFC Finalist
    @dude_abides7 said...

    Also, if you are betting that a merger (which by no means is a certainty) will be the catalyst in things getting better than I got a bridge to sell you. Most times, when 2 large companies combine to create a even larger one, it is the consumers that end up getting the shaft.

    When I said top players taking money out of the ecosystem too quickly is good for no one but the top players, I mean it is bad for the sites as well.

    I’m not saying the sites are going to make moves out of altruism. I’m saying they are going to act in their own self interest to improve the ecosystem. There will always be winners and losers in this game, but the sites get more revenue out of churning/raking the deposits instead of sending them too quickly to top players via cashouts. If they sense that is happening it makes sense for them to limit how much action a top player can get. I’m not saying they are going to lower rake, but I am saying now that they have years of data and aren’t racing against each other the table is set for them to put a lot more thought into the long term ecosystem. I’m pushing these points in conversations with both companies and can tell from those conversations they are having ongoing internal discussions on the same topics.

    Does that make sense?

  • jjwd

    @Cal said...

    I’m pushing these points in conversations with both companies and can tell from those conversations they are having ongoing internal discussions on the same topics.

    Thanks Cal, this kind of info is very valuable. I would like to see more frequent reports about what the Big 2 are thinking about or working on… this would help tamp down various hysterical conversations in the forums, and general misinfo spreading among DFS players. Anything more you (or they) could do in this regard would be great.

  • dude_abides7

    @Cal said...

    I’m not saying the sites are going to make moves out of altruism. I’m saying they are going to act in their own self interest to improve the ecosystem. There will always be winners and losers in this game, but the sites get more revenue out of churning/raking the deposits instead of sending them too quickly to top players via cashouts. If they sense that is happening it makes sense for them to limit how much action a top player can get. I’m not saying they are going to lower rake, but I am saying now that they have years of data and aren’t racing against each other the table is set for them to put a lot more thought into the long term ecosystem. I’m pushing these points in conversations with both companies and can tell from those conversations they are having ongoing internal discussions on the same topics.

    Does that make sense?

    Sure…it makes sense. Problem is, everything you just explained mirrors what a well run company would do.

    What evidence do we have to date that indicates they can and have done anything right that wasn’t forced on them by regulation?

    What evidence do we have to date that shows them being proactive to industry issues as suppose to reactive, when it is already too late?

    These “founders” can take credit for fostering a great idea and creating DFS. They also can and should take credit for its demise. You can’t run a company like a frat house. These “conversations” you speak of are coming too late. The time for discussing is over. It is past time for action.

    By the way, if any of these “mutual concerns” you state were true, doesn’t it make sense that either company would make an official statement on the subject? Maybe some acknowledgement of the problems and their willingness to fix things?

    You know what I hear? Crickets……You know why I hear them? Because they don’t care. You know what I see? Stock answer emails. You know why? Because they don’t care.

    I really want to believe otherwise! But I am not going to lie to myself to remain optimistic. There is zero evidence that supports the idea that the sites are doing anything or will do anything substantial to protect the ecosystem or any other claims you are stating on their behalf to be “important” to them.

    The bottom line is the only thing that’s important to them. And if that means letting a high volume guy rape and pillage every contest from $1000 to .25 cents. Then that is what they will do and will allow to be done. Show me how and where I am wrong thus far and I will gladly alter my tune.

  • jjwd

    @dude_abides7 said...

    These “founders” can take credit for fostering a great idea and creating DFS. They also can and should take credit for its demise. You can’t run a company like a frat house. These “conversations” you speak of are coming too late. The time for discussing is over. It is past time for action.

    You’re starting to jump the shark Dude. Sure there have been a lot of dumb mistakes made in this industry, outright criminality, etc. But when you say “it is past time for action”, you’re not making sense anymore. And you repeatedly say that there is no evidence of any thoughtfulness on the part of the Big 2, even though Cal is specifically stating otherwise. Therefore you’re implying that Cal is lying, exaggerating, or being lied to. Maybe step back and think about that.

  • dude_abides7

    @jjwd said...

    You’re starting to jump the shark Dude. Sure there have been a lot of dumb mistakes made in this industry, outright criminality, etc. But when you say “it is past time for action”, you’re not making sense anymore. And you repeatedly say that there is no evidence of any thoughtfulness on the part of the Big 2, even though Cal is specifically stating otherwise. Therefore you’re implying that Cal is lying, exaggerating, or being lied to. Maybe step back and think about that.

    Past time = it’s been needed for 2 years and hasn’t come.

    I am not calling anyone a liar. I’m saying back room conversations with industry insiders does not equate to evidence that something is actively being done.

    It is not Cal’s job to tell us what the FD/DK are up to. It’s FD/DK’s responsibility to tell us what they are up to. They are radio silent. That is damning.

    We’ve been down this road before. We’ve been told everything is fine when it wasn’t. I respect Team RG, but it’s possible they are just getting lip service from these sites that “change is coming”. I understand RG needs to remain optimistic. Their literal existence depends on these sites staying alive. Just like they remained optimistic that the “check was in the mail” from Fantasy Aces when it wasn’t.

    In all due respect to RG, they are not necessarily a neutral party here. I totally think they have us players’ back on some things, but in the end the sites pay their bills. Player advocacy has to be independent.

  • monaco712

    According to a chart posted on DK only 14% of players in the last month have made a profit. I
    believe that is probably the general average over longer periods. That;s pretty abysmal but it is
    the reality in this industry. Play for entertainment and enjoyment with reasonable bankroll for
    your situation and have reasonable expectations. However the minuscule amount of profitable
    players do show there is a big problem with the industry that needs to be addressed for long
    term success.

  • Lathum

    @monaco712 said...

    According to a chart posted on DK only 14% of players in the last month have made a profit. I
    believe that is probably the general average over longer periods. That;s pretty abysmal but it is
    the reality in this industry. Play for entertainment and enjoyment with reasonable bankroll for
    your situation and have reasonable expectations. However the minuscule amount of profitable
    players do show there is a big problem with the industry that needs to be addressed for long
    term success.

    That number isn’t at all surprising, as I think most players expect to lose. People just want to be entertained and have the perception that they have a chance.

    Instead of looking at % of players who were profitable the sites need to start analyzing how long a player stretches their initial deposit, how likely someone is to redeposit, Correlations between the two, that sort of data.

    I’ve no doubt there are floods of people TRYING DFS, the key is those players sticking around, even if they need to redeposit at some point because they feel they at least got bang for their buck.

    The reality is this is a bubble right now as the industry is very young relatively speaking, but if they don’t start looking at some retention numbers, and maybe they are, the bubble will burst as there is a finite number of players.

  • madmanjayWV

    @BurrTheBaddestB said...

    I know that I am undoubtedly beating a dead horse here with the creation of this new thread, but I gotta get something off of this massive chest ‘o mine that is beginning to grind at my inner “bitch”.

    This season – more so than ever before – pros, so-called “gurus”, and yes, even some decent-sized “sharks” seem to be flooding the “$250 NBA Mini Swat” GPP’s over on FanDuel. Some of them are very recognizable names in the DFS game (as well as being members of this site to boot). With such large amounts of money already won over time and seemingly limitless bankrolls at their disposal, this is as unsettling to me as it is humorous.

    Why are they even wasting their time (and mine) and why do they also seem to be seeking out each and every empty or unfilled “novice” and/or “small fish” opportunity that is possible nowadays?

    Is it an ego thing?

    Is it some kind of power play to remind everyone that you’re going to have to go through them no matter where you may try to play and no matter what amount that you’re willing to wager?

    There has got to be some underlying reason(s) as to how and why this is more prevalent now than during any other season/sport that I’ve noticed to date. If not for any of the aforementioned ones that I just questioned above, though, certainly for a different one…right?

    Any further thoughts and comments on this new(ish) (and absolutely pathetic) trend that I’ve noticed is welcomed and encouraged, gang. Thanks!

    The better ? you really should be asking yourself is this:

    Why does FANDUEL continually cater to the ELITE MAX ENTRY players by having the $4 clutch shot on horrid 3 and 4 game slates, but yet, one never sees a CLUTCH SHOT for a 10-11, 14-game slate……

  • depalma13

    @Cal said...

    I think we’ll see a lot more attention put towards the long term health and sustainability of the ecosystem once they are a combined entity.

    You can’t be serious. Creating a monopoly is only going to make it worse. Much worse.

  • Cal

    RG CoFounder & Admin

    • 171

      RG Overall Ranking

      RG Overall Ranking
    • 2014 FanDuel WFFC Finalist

      FanDuel WFFC Finalist
    • 2010 FanDuel WFFC Finalist

      FanDuel WFFC Finalist
    @dude_abides7 said...

    The bottom line is the only thing that’s important to them.

    You’re saying the sites will act in self interest and that the sites believe that top players taking money out of the ecosystem at the current rate is in their self interest (or that they are just not savvy enough to consider the long term implications). I’m saying the sites will act in self interest and they are growing more concerned that the rate at which top players are taking money out of the ecosystem is bad for their bottom line. I know that the latter is true for at least some decision makers at both sites. FD and DK are both large companies with lots of decision makers, so consensus and movement don’t always come easy.

    I get called a shill often by a certain group of players, but I’m surprised to hear it in an instance where I’m saying that the sites are going to act in their own self interest.

  • KillaChap

    Wow… I’m trying to enter some $1 3 mans on FD for the smaller slates tonight and Hoop is literally in the only ones I see out there right now. Dude must be pinching pennies.

  • KillaChap

    @Cal said...

    I get called a shill often by a certain group of players, but I’m surprised to hear it in an instance where I’m saying that the sites are going to act in their own self interest.

    Odd, I think you tend to play it straight and even reach out to sites for clarity. Who the eff calls you a shill?

  • TheTruthIsALie

    @Cal said...

    Top players taking money out of the ecosystem too quickly is bad for everyone except for those top players (who are simply acting in self interest).

    As I have argued elsewhere, I think it’s also bad for the top players themselves. Long term, it will hurt their profitability, too, insofar as they will have no one left to play (other than themselves). It would be helpful if such pros had the foresight to appreciate this (and, to be fair, it seems that some do, as they refrain from entering every low-dollar contest available).

    I do understand the argument that some, like elementastrat, have voiced elsewhere: with no guarantee of tomorrow, pros are trying to grab whatever they can while they can. But, has it really come to this? Is everyone ready to throw in the towel and give up on the future of DFS altogether? In my opinion, that’s the upshot of such an argument…

  • filmcritic

    @whateverworks_187 said...

    #1 – I think its a little silly for the really high rollers to enter anything under $3. MANY of them don’t (SaahilSud for example).

    FYI – Had Saahil in my $1 double during baseball last year – so don’t let him off the hook. (Beat him tho…so that was nice .. but we both cashed that time)

  • dude_abides7

    @Cal said...

    You’re saying the sites will act in self interest and that the sites believe that top players taking money out of the ecosystem at the current rate is in their self interest (or that they are just not savvy enough to consider the long term implications). I’m saying the sites will act in self interest and they are growing more concerned that the rate at which top players are taking money out of the ecosystem is bad for their bottom line. I know that the latter is true for at least some decision makers at both sites. FD and DK are both large companies with lots of decision makers, so consensus and movement don’t always come easy.

    I get called a shill often by a certain group of players, but I’m surprised to hear it in an instance where I’m saying that the sites are going to act in their own self interest.

    No, I understand what you are saying. What I am saying is that the site leadership is too inept to know what is in DFS’s best interest long term. They have proven this over and over. You are, once again, making an assessment based on a company knowing what to do in times of difficulty and crisis.

    I don’t think you are a shill. I do think you are emotionally and financially committed to the success of these 2 sites. Therefore, you may be more inclined to be optimistic when direct evidence would suggest against it. Hopefully that makes more sense.

  • Njsum1

    @monaco712 said...

    According to a chart posted on DK only 14% of players in the last month have made a profit. I
    believe that is probably the general average over longer periods. That;s pretty abysmal but it is
    the reality in this industry. Play for entertainment and enjoyment with reasonable bankroll for
    your situation and have reasonable expectations. However the minuscule amount of profitable
    players do show there is a big problem with the industry that needs to be addressed for long
    term success.

    I addressed this earlier in this thread and will address it again as there is a fundamental misconception with fantasy sports in general. DFS was derived from season long fantasy sports, right. I’ve been doing a season long 12 man fantasy league for a very long time. In that time Id estimate only 2 or 3 teams are actually profitable, everyone else is down. That’s roughly 17 to 25 percent over a large sample size of teams that are profitable. However, there’s no rake in most season long leagues. Factor in a 10 to 15 percent rake, and that 3rd team who may or may not be profitable is no longer profitable, and that drops the profitable player percentage to 17%. People forget, fantasy sports were not made for the majority of people to make money, they were made for the majority of people to have FUN. Only a lucky/skilled few will profit.

    So if 14% is the actual percentage of profitable players over the long term that’s very good, and directly in line with season long leagues, especially considering the quality of the competition in DFS.

  • 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:

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!

Disclosures: All RotoGrinders content contributors are active DFS players. Contributor screen names can be found on their respective RotoGrinders profile pages. Contributors reserve the right to use players or strategies not discussed in their content on RotoGrinders.