What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

DFS and Gambling - A Discussion (1 Viewer)

eoMMan

Footballguy
Good article (I think)on your chances of winning at the most advertised item of all time.

In fact, you have about as much chance of winning a weekly DraftKings jackpot as you do of winning your state's lottery, since the "game" is dominated by deep-pocketed "sharks" who enter hundreds, sometimes thousands, of lineups with a dizzying array of player combinations using statistical algorithms specifically built to tilt the odds in their favor.



Actually, you may be better served playing the Lotto because at least the people buying hundreds of tickets have no idea if 15, 23 and 36 are more likely to hit than 8, 32 and 41. This weekend, you probably thought you'd be in the money if you started Marcus Mariota, DeAngelo Williams and Antonio Brown. But the sharks not only had those three, they played a few dozen variations that enabled them to randomly hit on Lamar Miller, Sammy Watkins, Cole Beasley and Delanie Walker, too. You lose.
Well, keep in mind that they are risking a ton more money by having multiple lineups. Yes, they have different variations of a lineup but that's still no guarantee they make their money back. And GPPs should ALWAYS be looked at as high risk/high reward.

And if sharks with multiple lineups bother you, just go enter single entry tourneys.

 

MikeMan

Footballguy
Good article (I think)on your chances of winning at the most advertised item of all time.

In fact, you have about as much chance of winning a weekly DraftKings jackpot as you do of winning your state's lottery, since the "game" is dominated by deep-pocketed "sharks" who enter hundreds, sometimes thousands, of lineups with a dizzying array of player combinations using statistical algorithms specifically built to tilt the odds in their favor.

Actually, you may be better served playing the Lotto because at least the people buying hundreds of tickets have no idea if 15, 23 and 36 are more likely to hit than 8, 32 and 41. This weekend, you probably thought you'd be in the money if you started Marcus Mariota, DeAngelo Williams and Antonio Brown. But the sharks not only had those three, they played a few dozen variations that enabled them to randomly hit on Lamar Miller, Sammy Watkins, Cole Beasley and Delanie Walker, too. You lose.
This excerpt is why I'm forcing myself more and more to drop GPPs. I'm literally just throwing money away. Or having an outside shot at min cashing.
I see it differently. Whether one person is entering 1000 lineups or 1000 people are entering 1 lineup, you have the same odds of winning. If you enter one lineup in a 100,000 entry GPP, you have roughly a 1 in 100k chance of winning no matter how the other 99,999 are entered.

Like picking winners vs. point spreads, everyone thinks they are an expert but people don't consistently beat 56% vs. normal distribution of a bell curve. If you were in a pool of players picking games vs. the spread and one person ran a script to enter 400 combination of picks, they aren't going to have an advantage over the long haul. They will win more often and they will lose more often and the house rake keeps on coming.

 

Marauder

Footballguy
Good article (I think)on your chances of winning at the most advertised item of all time.

In fact, you have about as much chance of winning a weekly DraftKings jackpot as you do of winning your state's lottery, since the "game" is dominated by deep-pocketed "sharks" who enter hundreds, sometimes thousands, of lineups with a dizzying array of player combinations using statistical algorithms specifically built to tilt the odds in their favor.

Actually, you may be better served playing the Lotto because at least the people buying hundreds of tickets have no idea if 15, 23 and 36 are more likely to hit than 8, 32 and 41. This weekend, you probably thought you'd be in the money if you started Marcus Mariota, DeAngelo Williams and Antonio Brown. But the sharks not only had those three, they played a few dozen variations that enabled them to randomly hit on Lamar Miller, Sammy Watkins, Cole Beasley and Delanie Walker, too. You lose.
This excerpt is why I'm forcing myself more and more to drop GPPs. I'm literally just throwing money away. Or having an outside shot at min cashing.
I see it differently. Whether one person is entering 1000 lineups or 1000 people are entering 1 lineup, you have the same odds of winning. If you enter one lineup in a 100,000 entry GPP, you have roughly a 1 in 100k chance of winning no matter how the other 99,999 are entered.

Like picking winners vs. point spreads, everyone thinks they are an expert but people don't consistently beat 56% vs. normal distribution of a bell curve. If you were in a pool of players picking games vs. the spread and one person ran a script to enter 400 combination of picks, they aren't going to have an advantage over the long haul. They will win more often and they will lose more often and the house rake keeps on coming.
I disagree with this statement. This would only be true if everybody playing is of equal skill, or the contest is 100% luck. Neither of those is true. The problem is that the people entering the most lineups are the professional DFS players (who are going to tend to be the most skilled). What this effectively does is raise that percent of players you need to beat in order to turn a profit. To win in multi-entry GPP's long term, you might need to be better than 70% or 80% of the player pool. (I have no idea what the actual percent is, I'm just throwing those numbers out for illustration purposes.)

 

Tennessee_ATO

Footballguy
All I know is that if I post a 155 I'm not winning crap in any big GPP. If I post a 185 I'm winning something. It doesn't matter if it's multi-entry or not.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

MikeMan

Footballguy
Good article (I think)on your chances of winning at the most advertised item of all time.

In fact, you have about as much chance of winning a weekly DraftKings jackpot as you do of winning your state's lottery, since the "game" is dominated by deep-pocketed "sharks" who enter hundreds, sometimes thousands, of lineups with a dizzying array of player combinations using statistical algorithms specifically built to tilt the odds in their favor.

Actually, you may be better served playing the Lotto because at least the people buying hundreds of tickets have no idea if 15, 23 and 36 are more likely to hit than 8, 32 and 41. This weekend, you probably thought you'd be in the money if you started Marcus Mariota, DeAngelo Williams and Antonio Brown. But the sharks not only had those three, they played a few dozen variations that enabled them to randomly hit on Lamar Miller, Sammy Watkins, Cole Beasley and Delanie Walker, too. You lose.
This excerpt is why I'm forcing myself more and more to drop GPPs. I'm literally just throwing money away. Or having an outside shot at min cashing.
I see it differently. Whether one person is entering 1000 lineups or 1000 people are entering 1 lineup, you have the same odds of winning. If you enter one lineup in a 100,000 entry GPP, you have roughly a 1 in 100k chance of winning no matter how the other 99,999 are entered.

Like picking winners vs. point spreads, everyone thinks they are an expert but people don't consistently beat 56% vs. normal distribution of a bell curve. If you were in a pool of players picking games vs. the spread and one person ran a script to enter 400 combination of picks, they aren't going to have an advantage over the long haul. They will win more often and they will lose more often and the house rake keeps on coming.
I disagree with this statement. This would only be true if everybody playing is of equal skill, or the contest is 100% luck. Neither of those is true. The problem is that the people entering the most lineups are the professional DFS players (who are going to tend to be the most skilled). What this effectively does is raise that percent of players you need to beat in order to turn a profit. To win in multi-entry GPP's long term, you might need to be better than 70% or 80% of the player pool. (I have no idea what the actual percent is, I'm just throwing those numbers out for illustration purposes.)
I stand by my statement and agree with you as well!

If you believe you are not as expert as others, (myself included) I believe you should not be playing GPP where you have to get in top 20% to cash and almost no chance to win against better players. On my site, I've consistently advised that regular Joes should not play GPP partly for this reason. I do not play them at all. I feel I can win 50/50s at a 56% clip to stay ahead but if I throw away even a 10% of Cash bet in GPPs, you raise your winning needs to break even to 65% or more which is not attainable.

I often state that people need to tend to their betting strategy as much as their lineup building strategy. You just can't win long-term if your thought process is "I'm going to put this lineup in the GPP 'just in case it wins". If you're just throwing away Entertainment Budget, that's another story, but if you are in it to win, gotta be smart. IMHO

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Fantasysports1

Footballguy
I disagree. A pro player is probably better at identifying good GPP plays and has a better general sense of strategy. You can offer a high floor by going with cash plays that are under priced so that these cash plays can still go off. Look at last week, a lot of chalk plays were on the GPP winning teams. You can focus on optimal QB stacks.

Sure making more lineups is ev- but a pro can win enough of their cash games and hope to to not lose too much playing GPP. When a pro runs hot they will have numerous combinations that may yield a high GPP finish.

I would argue that it is very difficult to win a GPP without having multiple lineups because you have no margin of error even when your core GPP lineup runs hot. If one's core lineup runs hot and they have 10, 20 combinations there is more margin of error.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I would argue that it is very difficult to win a GPP without having multiple lineups because you have no margin of error even when your core GPP lineup runs hot. If one's core lineup runs hot and they have 10, 20 combinations there is more margin of error.
I think that if you have 10 times as many lineups, your odds of winning are 10X higher. Math is funny that way.

 

Tennessee_ATO

Footballguy
I would argue that it is very difficult to win a GPP without having multiple lineups because you have no margin of error even when your core GPP lineup runs hot. If one's core lineup runs hot and they have 10, 20 combinations there is more margin of error.
I think that if you have 10 times as many lineups, your odds of winning are 10X higher. Math is funny that way.
That assumes randomness in projections tho.

 

Tennessee_ATO

Footballguy
Yeah, but it is excellent work though. I'm certainly not about to do that kind of work with a 6-figure participant contest.

I think the better analysis would be in the GPPs that pay-out 20% or so instead of a really top-heavy play like that one. Also, I think you need to view the season as a whole for those. I think you can see the phenomenon that folks have alluded to in those weekly plays. Those guys figure-out a core of players they want to build around, then run-out 100+ permutations built around that core. When that core misses, they all miss. But when that core hits, many of those lineups will hit and the odds of one hitting big is high. If a high-volume guy really hits on one week, it will more than cover the outlay for the entire season on that particular GPP.

 

jon_mx

Footballguy
Who is playing these sites anymore. It is clear from court filings that there was massive cheating opportunities from employees, especially at fanduel. They knew which opponents sucked and what their lineup was. They knew which users had huge win rates and what lineup they submitted. It was so easy for the employees to cheat, it was ridiculous.

http://deadspin.com/fanduel-told-employees-not-to-win-too-much-money-on-dra-1743814536

 
Last edited by a moderator:

John Lee

Footballguy
Four weeks of data and all are -EV for mass multi-entry. How many weeks would make you believe that MME is not a long-term +EV strategy?

These guys are doing it because they have the BR to withstand the losses while maximizing their upside...every single person doing it would tell you that they know they're likely to lose, but it's that first place prize that keeps them coming back.

https://rotogrinders.com/threads/nfl-week-12-dk-milly-maker-results-1011345

 

Bri

Footballguy
Still sick of the multi-entries allowed and very very few single entry contests. They really need to stop letting the grownups sit at the children's table.

I'm not playing 10 teams in the $300 league nor am I going to eat at $100 plate restaurants.

They're not some new business that has to beg for $100 from one person rather than a dollar from one hundred people.

Have you ever been to a casino and seen people upset they can play in a high rollers room? Or expensive poker table?

How about- Have you ever seen one person take up 100 slots at once?

With the traffic they get, why can't they take a cue from the casino model?

Stop letting the high rollers play on 100 slot machines at once

 

Tennessee_ATO

Footballguy
Still sick of the multi-entries allowed and very very few single entry contests. They really need to stop letting the grownups sit at the children's table.

I'm not playing 10 teams in the $300 league nor am I going to eat at $100 plate restaurants.

They're not some new business that has to beg for $100 from one person rather than a dollar from one hundred people.

Have you ever been to a casino and seen people upset they can play in a high rollers room? Or expensive poker table?

How about- Have you ever seen one person take up 100 slots at once?

With the traffic they get, why can't they take a cue from the casino model?

Stop letting the high rollers play on 100 slot machines at once
These massive GPPs are not analogous to slot machines. They are analogous to a lottery.

The only thing that matters is the cutline. I haven't seen any data that indicates that single-entry plays have a lower cutline than multi-entries. Maybe that data is out there, but I haven't seen it and my anecdotal observations are that it doesn't exist.

 

Bri

Footballguy
Still sick of the multi-entries allowed and very very few single entry contests. They really need to stop letting the grownups sit at the children's table.

I'm not playing 10 teams in the $300 league nor am I going to eat at $100 plate restaurants.

They're not some new business that has to beg for $100 from one person rather than a dollar from one hundred people.

Have you ever been to a casino and seen people upset they can play in a high rollers room? Or expensive poker table?

How about- Have you ever seen one person take up 100 slots at once?

With the traffic they get, why can't they take a cue from the casino model?

Stop letting the high rollers play on 100 slot machines at once
These massive GPPs are not analogous to slot machines. They are analogous to a lottery.

The only thing that matters is the cutline. I haven't seen any data that indicates that single-entry plays have a lower cutline than multi-entries. Maybe that data is out there, but I haven't seen it and my anecdotal observations are that it doesn't exist.
I disagree. If 10k spots get some $ you might think so, but that doesn't change it for me. There's still these high rollers getting their dollar back on 100-500 spots each.

What I'm trying (and maybe failing) to say is it seems catered to the high rollers a bit too much and not to the little guy. It IS possible to cater to both.

You think a high roller at a DK GPP is analogous to a wealthy guy buying 1000 lottery tickets not a wealthy guy playing nickel slots? I don't but regardless, whether you see Bill Gates in a convenience store buying lottery tickets or at a casino playing nickel slots, don't you get the same "out of place" vibe?

Assani speaks of these events FD or DK takes the high rollers on- which is fine, so be it, probably deserve it. Let em' have their country club sort of better than others experience, but I don't think they should return from the trip to play with the peasants and pawns.

DK or FD could have some elite membership club, that business model is surely out there.

 

Tennessee_ATO

Footballguy
Still sick of the multi-entries allowed and very very few single entry contests. They really need to stop letting the grownups sit at the children's table.

I'm not playing 10 teams in the $300 league nor am I going to eat at $100 plate restaurants.

They're not some new business that has to beg for $100 from one person rather than a dollar from one hundred people.

Have you ever been to a casino and seen people upset they can play in a high rollers room? Or expensive poker table?

How about- Have you ever seen one person take up 100 slots at once?

With the traffic they get, why can't they take a cue from the casino model?

Stop letting the high rollers play on 100 slot machines at once
These massive GPPs are not analogous to slot machines. They are analogous to a lottery.

The only thing that matters is the cutline. I haven't seen any data that indicates that single-entry plays have a lower cutline than multi-entries. Maybe that data is out there, but I haven't seen it and my anecdotal observations are that it doesn't exist.
I disagree. If 10k spots get some $ you might think so, but that doesn't change it for me. There's still these high rollers getting their dollar back on 100-500 spots each.

What I'm trying (and maybe failing) to say is it seems catered to the high rollers a bit too much and not to the little guy. It IS possible to cater to both.

You think a high roller at a DK GPP is analogous to a wealthy guy buying 1000 lottery tickets not a wealthy guy playing nickel slots? I don't but regardless, whether you see Bill Gates in a convenience store buying lottery tickets or at a casino playing nickel slots, don't you get the same "out of place" vibe?

Assani speaks of these events FD or DK takes the high rollers on- which is fine, so be it, probably deserve it. Let em' have their country club sort of better than others experience, but I don't think they should return from the trip to play with the peasants and pawns.

DK or FD could have some elite membership club, that business model is surely out there.
Again, the only thing that matters is the cutline. Do you have any data that shows that the cutline is higher in a multi-entry GPP than a similarly sized single-entry GPP? If the cutline is higher in the former, then it is harder to cash in the multi-entry. If it isn't, then your concern isn't founded. Everything I've seen shows me that it's no tougher to cash in a mult-entry double-up than a single-entry double-up. If anything, my data shows that the multi-entries have a slightly lower cutline than the single-entries (but that may well be a function of the size of the contests since the multi-entries are much larger). I haven't made any real effort to compare it on the GPP front, but I suspect you haven't either. Without the data all you are doing is getting fired-up about something that might or might not be happening.

 

Bri

Footballguy
Tennessee_ATO said:
Bri said:
Still sick of the multi-entries allowed and very very few single entry contests. They really need to stop letting the grownups sit at the children's table.

I'm not playing 10 teams in the $300 league nor am I going to eat at $100 plate restaurants.

They're not some new business that has to beg for $100 from one person rather than a dollar from one hundred people.

Have you ever been to a casino and seen people upset they can play in a high rollers room? Or expensive poker table?

How about- Have you ever seen one person take up 100 slots at once?

With the traffic they get, why can't they take a cue from the casino model?

Stop letting the high rollers play on 100 slot machines at once
These massive GPPs are not analogous to slot machines. They are analogous to a lottery.

The only thing that matters is the cutline. I haven't seen any data that indicates that single-entry plays have a lower cutline than multi-entries. Maybe that data is out there, but I haven't seen it and my anecdotal observations are that it doesn't exist.
I disagree. If 10k spots get some $ you might think so, but that doesn't change it for me. There's still these high rollers getting their dollar back on 100-500 spots each.

What I'm trying (and maybe failing) to say is it seems catered to the high rollers a bit too much and not to the little guy. It IS possible to cater to both.

You think a high roller at a DK GPP is analogous to a wealthy guy buying 1000 lottery tickets not a wealthy guy playing nickel slots? I don't but regardless, whether you see Bill Gates in a convenience store buying lottery tickets or at a casino playing nickel slots, don't you get the same "out of place" vibe?

Assani speaks of these events FD or DK takes the high rollers on- which is fine, so be it, probably deserve it. Let em' have their country club sort of better than others experience, but I don't think they should return from the trip to play with the peasants and pawns.

DK or FD could have some elite membership club, that business model is surely out there.
Again, the only thing that matters is the cutline. Do you have any data that shows that the cutline is higher in a multi-entry GPP than a similarly sized single-entry GPP? If the cutline is higher in the former, then it is harder to cash in the multi-entry. If it isn't, then your concern isn't founded. Everything I've seen shows me that it's no tougher to cash in a mult-entry double-up than a single-entry double-up. If anything, my data shows that the multi-entries have a slightly lower cutline than the single-entries (but that may well be a function of the size of the contests since the multi-entries are much larger). I haven't made any real effort to compare it on the GPP front, but I suspect you haven't either. Without the data all you are doing is getting fired-up about something that might or might not be happening.
Amazing. You puff your chest like you're a judge and I have to produce evidence for you

 

Tennessee_ATO

Footballguy
Tennessee_ATO said:
Bri said:
Still sick of the multi-entries allowed and very very few single entry contests. They really need to stop letting the grownups sit at the children's table.

I'm not playing 10 teams in the $300 league nor am I going to eat at $100 plate restaurants.

They're not some new business that has to beg for $100 from one person rather than a dollar from one hundred people.

Have you ever been to a casino and seen people upset they can play in a high rollers room? Or expensive poker table?

How about- Have you ever seen one person take up 100 slots at once?

With the traffic they get, why can't they take a cue from the casino model?

Stop letting the high rollers play on 100 slot machines at once
These massive GPPs are not analogous to slot machines. They are analogous to a lottery.

The only thing that matters is the cutline. I haven't seen any data that indicates that single-entry plays have a lower cutline than multi-entries. Maybe that data is out there, but I haven't seen it and my anecdotal observations are that it doesn't exist.
I disagree. If 10k spots get some $ you might think so, but that doesn't change it for me. There's still these high rollers getting their dollar back on 100-500 spots each.

What I'm trying (and maybe failing) to say is it seems catered to the high rollers a bit too much and not to the little guy. It IS possible to cater to both.

You think a high roller at a DK GPP is analogous to a wealthy guy buying 1000 lottery tickets not a wealthy guy playing nickel slots? I don't but regardless, whether you see Bill Gates in a convenience store buying lottery tickets or at a casino playing nickel slots, don't you get the same "out of place" vibe?

Assani speaks of these events FD or DK takes the high rollers on- which is fine, so be it, probably deserve it. Let em' have their country club sort of better than others experience, but I don't think they should return from the trip to play with the peasants and pawns.

DK or FD could have some elite membership club, that business model is surely out there.
Again, the only thing that matters is the cutline. Do you have any data that shows that the cutline is higher in a multi-entry GPP than a similarly sized single-entry GPP? If the cutline is higher in the former, then it is harder to cash in the multi-entry. If it isn't, then your concern isn't founded. Everything I've seen shows me that it's no tougher to cash in a mult-entry double-up than a single-entry double-up. If anything, my data shows that the multi-entries have a slightly lower cutline than the single-entries (but that may well be a function of the size of the contests since the multi-entries are much larger). I haven't made any real effort to compare it on the GPP front, but I suspect you haven't either. Without the data all you are doing is getting fired-up about something that might or might not be happening.
Amazing. You puff your chest like you're a judge and I have to produce evidence for you
Please. You are ranting about a situation that may or may not even exist. Do the multi-entries have higher cut-lines than single-entries? That's the question that matters. You seem to be convinced that the multi-entry GPPs present some disadvantage to the "smaller" player. And that perceived disadvantage has you really, really fired up. Is it actually a disadvantage though? I don't think it is based upon my observations, and I've actually tracked it with respect to double-ups and triple-ups. Have you actually observed something different? No one has ever presented any actual data that I've seen that shows that it's tougher to cash in a multi-play GPP than a single-play GPP. Just because it "feels" like that's the case doesn't make it so.

There's a thread on here linking to articles that actually track the highest-volume players in the DK Millionaire Maker. They are losing money every single week. Those guys literally represent the rake in that contest most weeks.

 

BassNBrew

IBL Representative
Bri said:
Still sick of the multi-entries allowed and very very few single entry contests. They really need to stop letting the grownups sit at the children's table.

I'm not playing 10 teams in the $300 league nor am I going to eat at $100 plate restaurants.

They're not some new business that has to beg for $100 from one person rather than a dollar from one hundred people.

Have you ever been to a casino and seen people upset they can play in a high rollers room? Or expensive poker table?

How about- Have you ever seen one person take up 100 slots at once?

With the traffic they get, why can't they take a cue from the casino model?

Stop letting the high rollers play on 100 slot machines at once
These massive GPPs are not analogous to slot machines. They are analogous to a lottery.

The only thing that matters is the cutline. I haven't seen any data that indicates that single-entry plays have a lower cutline than multi-entries. Maybe that data is out there, but I haven't seen it and my anecdotal observations are that it doesn't exist.
I disagree. If 10k spots get some $ you might think so, but that doesn't change it for me. There's still these high rollers getting their dollar back on 100-500 spots each.

What I'm trying (and maybe failing) to say is it seems catered to the high rollers a bit too much and not to the little guy. It IS possible to cater to both.

You think a high roller at a DK GPP is analogous to a wealthy guy buying 1000 lottery tickets not a wealthy guy playing nickel slots? I don't but regardless, whether you see Bill Gates in a convenience store buying lottery tickets or at a casino playing nickel slots, don't you get the same "out of place" vibe?

Assani speaks of these events FD or DK takes the high rollers on- which is fine, so be it, probably deserve it. Let em' have their country club sort of better than others experience, but I don't think they should return from the trip to play with the peasants and pawns.

DK or FD could have some elite membership club, that business model is surely out there.
The pros are losing in gpps at a higher rate than the small rollers. Multi entries actually play to small guys favor.

 

Ramblin Wreck

Footballguy
BassNBrew said:
Bri said:
Still sick of the multi-entries allowed and very very few single entry contests. They really need to stop letting the grownups sit at the children's table.

I'm not playing 10 teams in the $300 league nor am I going to eat at $100 plate restaurants.

They're not some new business that has to beg for $100 from one person rather than a dollar from one hundred people.

Have you ever been to a casino and seen people upset they can play in a high rollers room? Or expensive poker table?

How about- Have you ever seen one person take up 100 slots at once?

With the traffic they get, why can't they take a cue from the casino model?

Stop letting the high rollers play on 100 slot machines at once
These massive GPPs are not analogous to slot machines. They are analogous to a lottery.

The only thing that matters is the cutline. I haven't seen any data that indicates that single-entry plays have a lower cutline than multi-entries. Maybe that data is out there, but I haven't seen it and my anecdotal observations are that it doesn't exist.
I disagree. If 10k spots get some $ you might think so, but that doesn't change it for me. There's still these high rollers getting their dollar back on 100-500 spots each.

What I'm trying (and maybe failing) to say is it seems catered to the high rollers a bit too much and not to the little guy. It IS possible to cater to both.

You think a high roller at a DK GPP is analogous to a wealthy guy buying 1000 lottery tickets not a wealthy guy playing nickel slots? I don't but regardless, whether you see Bill Gates in a convenience store buying lottery tickets or at a casino playing nickel slots, don't you get the same "out of place" vibe?

Assani speaks of these events FD or DK takes the high rollers on- which is fine, so be it, probably deserve it. Let em' have their country club sort of better than others experience, but I don't think they should return from the trip to play with the peasants and pawns.

DK or FD could have some elite membership club, that business model is surely out there.
The pros are losing in gpps at a higher rate than the small rollers. Multi entries actually play to small guys favor.
:lmao:

 

BassNBrew

IBL Representative
BassNBrew said:
Bri said:
Still sick of the multi-entries allowed and very very few single entry contests. They really need to stop letting the grownups sit at the children's table.

I'm not playing 10 teams in the $300 league nor am I going to eat at $100 plate restaurants.

They're not some new business that has to beg for $100 from one person rather than a dollar from one hundred people.

Have you ever been to a casino and seen people upset they can play in a high rollers room? Or expensive poker table?

How about- Have you ever seen one person take up 100 slots at once?

With the traffic they get, why can't they take a cue from the casino model?

Stop letting the high rollers play on 100 slot machines at once
These massive GPPs are not analogous to slot machines. They are analogous to a lottery.

The only thing that matters is the cutline. I haven't seen any data that indicates that single-entry plays have a lower cutline than multi-entries. Maybe that data is out there, but I haven't seen it and my anecdotal observations are that it doesn't exist.
I disagree. If 10k spots get some $ you might think so, but that doesn't change it for me. There's still these high rollers getting their dollar back on 100-500 spots each.

What I'm trying (and maybe failing) to say is it seems catered to the high rollers a bit too much and not to the little guy. It IS possible to cater to both.

You think a high roller at a DK GPP is analogous to a wealthy guy buying 1000 lottery tickets not a wealthy guy playing nickel slots? I don't but regardless, whether you see Bill Gates in a convenience store buying lottery tickets or at a casino playing nickel slots, don't you get the same "out of place" vibe?

Assani speaks of these events FD or DK takes the high rollers on- which is fine, so be it, probably deserve it. Let em' have their country club sort of better than others experience, but I don't think they should return from the trip to play with the peasants and pawns.

DK or FD could have some elite membership club, that business model is surely out there.
The pros are losing in gpps at a higher rate than the small rollers. Multi entries actually play to small guys favor.
:lmao:
Someone is tracking the "pros" (100+ entries in the milly maker). Here are the results from another

week 8 72 of 80 lost, - 31% ROI (all 80)

week 9 70 of 84 lost, -25%

week 10 87 of 93 lost, -51%

week 11 62 of 75 lost, -21%

week 12 72 of 84 lost, -31%

Based on this, the small entry players are at a huge advantage and are cleaning up on the pros.

Maybe the advertising should have a disclaimer warning the pros that the contest is rigged in favor of the Joes.
week 13 62 of 65 lost, -64%

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Tennessee_ATO

Footballguy
BassNBrew said:
Bri said:
Still sick of the multi-entries allowed and very very few single entry contests. They really need to stop letting the grownups sit at the children's table.

I'm not playing 10 teams in the $300 league nor am I going to eat at $100 plate restaurants.

They're not some new business that has to beg for $100 from one person rather than a dollar from one hundred people.

Have you ever been to a casino and seen people upset they can play in a high rollers room? Or expensive poker table?

How about- Have you ever seen one person take up 100 slots at once?

With the traffic they get, why can't they take a cue from the casino model?

Stop letting the high rollers play on 100 slot machines at once
These massive GPPs are not analogous to slot machines. They are analogous to a lottery.The only thing that matters is the cutline. I haven't seen any data that indicates that single-entry plays have a lower cutline than multi-entries. Maybe that data is out there, but I haven't seen it and my anecdotal observations are that it doesn't exist.
I disagree. If 10k spots get some $ you might think so, but that doesn't change it for me. There's still these high rollers getting their dollar back on 100-500 spots each.What I'm trying (and maybe failing) to say is it seems catered to the high rollers a bit too much and not to the little guy. It IS possible to cater to both.

You think a high roller at a DK GPP is analogous to a wealthy guy buying 1000 lottery tickets not a wealthy guy playing nickel slots? I don't but regardless, whether you see Bill Gates in a convenience store buying lottery tickets or at a casino playing nickel slots, don't you get the same "out of place" vibe?

Assani speaks of these events FD or DK takes the high rollers on- which is fine, so be it, probably deserve it. Let em' have their country club sort of better than others experience, but I don't think they should return from the trip to play with the peasants and pawns.

DK or FD could have some elite membership club, that business model is surely out there.
The pros are losing in gpps at a higher rate than the small rollers. Multi entries actually play to small guys favor.
:lmao:
Someone is tracking the "pros" (100+ entries in the milly maker). Here are the results from another

week 8 72 of 80 lost, - 31% ROI (all 80)

week 9 70 of 84 lost, -25%

week 10 87 of 93 lost, -51%

week 11 62 of 75 lost, -21%

week 12 72 of 84 lost, -31%

Based on this, the small entry players are at a huge advantage and are cleaning up on the pros.

Maybe the advertising should have a disclaimer warning the pros that the contest is rigged in favor of the Joes.

week 13 62 of 65 lost, -64%
Don't bring facts and data into the discussion.

 

Bri

Footballguy
BassNBrew said:
Bri said:
Still sick of the multi-entries allowed and very very few single entry contests. They really need to stop letting the grownups sit at the children's table.

I'm not playing 10 teams in the $300 league nor am I going to eat at $100 plate restaurants.

They're not some new business that has to beg for $100 from one person rather than a dollar from one hundred people.

Have you ever been to a casino and seen people upset they can play in a high rollers room? Or expensive poker table?

How about- Have you ever seen one person take up 100 slots at once?

With the traffic they get, why can't they take a cue from the casino model?

Stop letting the high rollers play on 100 slot machines at once
These massive GPPs are not analogous to slot machines. They are analogous to a lottery.

The only thing that matters is the cutline. I haven't seen any data that indicates that single-entry plays have a lower cutline than multi-entries. Maybe that data is out there, but I haven't seen it and my anecdotal observations are that it doesn't exist.
I disagree. If 10k spots get some $ you might think so, but that doesn't change it for me. There's still these high rollers getting their dollar back on 100-500 spots each.

What I'm trying (and maybe failing) to say is it seems catered to the high rollers a bit too much and not to the little guy. It IS possible to cater to both.

You think a high roller at a DK GPP is analogous to a wealthy guy buying 1000 lottery tickets not a wealthy guy playing nickel slots? I don't but regardless, whether you see Bill Gates in a convenience store buying lottery tickets or at a casino playing nickel slots, don't you get the same "out of place" vibe?

Assani speaks of these events FD or DK takes the high rollers on- which is fine, so be it, probably deserve it. Let em' have their country club sort of better than others experience, but I don't think they should return from the trip to play with the peasants and pawns.

DK or FD could have some elite membership club, that business model is surely out there.
The pros are losing in gpps at a higher rate than the small rollers. Multi entries actually play to small guys favor.
But that should be happening for them. If the plan is more like an investment where you play 1000 entries and only need to win (or place highly) one

Plus if you compare it that way you're looking at what 100 pros versus 30k joes. That's not reality, that's counter-productive here as one individual doesn't have the 30k Joes each week. It'd need to be something like 1 joe versus 1 pro with 100 entries or 10 joes versus 10 pros with 1000 entries

 

Bri

Footballguy
Tennessee_ATO said:
Tennessee_ATO said:
Bri said:
Still sick of the multi-entries allowed and very very few single entry contests. They really need to stop letting the grownups sit at the children's table.

I'm not playing 10 teams in the $300 league nor am I going to eat at $100 plate restaurants.

They're not some new business that has to beg for $100 from one person rather than a dollar from one hundred people.

Have you ever been to a casino and seen people upset they can play in a high rollers room? Or expensive poker table?

How about- Have you ever seen one person take up 100 slots at once?

With the traffic they get, why can't they take a cue from the casino model?

Stop letting the high rollers play on 100 slot machines at once
These massive GPPs are not analogous to slot machines. They are analogous to a lottery.

The only thing that matters is the cutline. I haven't seen any data that indicates that single-entry plays have a lower cutline than multi-entries. Maybe that data is out there, but I haven't seen it and my anecdotal observations are that it doesn't exist.
I disagree. If 10k spots get some $ you might think so, but that doesn't change it for me. There's still these high rollers getting their dollar back on 100-500 spots each.

What I'm trying (and maybe failing) to say is it seems catered to the high rollers a bit too much and not to the little guy. It IS possible to cater to both.

You think a high roller at a DK GPP is analogous to a wealthy guy buying 1000 lottery tickets not a wealthy guy playing nickel slots? I don't but regardless, whether you see Bill Gates in a convenience store buying lottery tickets or at a casino playing nickel slots, don't you get the same "out of place" vibe?

Assani speaks of these events FD or DK takes the high rollers on- which is fine, so be it, probably deserve it. Let em' have their country club sort of better than others experience, but I don't think they should return from the trip to play with the peasants and pawns.

DK or FD could have some elite membership club, that business model is surely out there.
Again, the only thing that matters is the cutline. Do you have any data that shows that the cutline is higher in a multi-entry GPP than a similarly sized single-entry GPP? If the cutline is higher in the former, then it is harder to cash in the multi-entry. If it isn't, then your concern isn't founded. Everything I've seen shows me that it's no tougher to cash in a mult-entry double-up than a single-entry double-up. If anything, my data shows that the multi-entries have a slightly lower cutline than the single-entries (but that may well be a function of the size of the contests since the multi-entries are much larger). I haven't made any real effort to compare it on the GPP front, but I suspect you haven't either. Without the data all you are doing is getting fired-up about something that might or might not be happening.
Amazing. You puff your chest like you're a judge and I have to produce evidence for you
Please. You are ranting about a situation that may or may not even exist. Do the multi-entries have higher cut-lines than single-entries? That's the question that matters. You seem to be convinced that the multi-entry GPPs present some disadvantage to the "smaller" player. And that perceived disadvantage has you really, really fired up. Is it actually a disadvantage though? I don't think it is based upon my observations, and I've actually tracked it with respect to double-ups and triple-ups. Have you actually observed something different? No one has ever presented any actual data that I've seen that shows that it's tougher to cash in a multi-play GPP than a single-play GPP. Just because it "feels" like that's the case doesn't make it so.

There's a thread on here linking to articles that actually track the highest-volume players in the DK Millionaire Maker. They are losing money every single week. Those guys literally represent the rake in that contest most weeks.
Your obsession with one single contest is a bit much here when there's many contests each week.

Your obsession with the cutline- Do you not scroll up to see winners? Or at least guys a little ahead of you and maybe the winner? I scroll and it looks like frames in an old timey movie with the same names repeated.

I'm fine with anybody beating me, nature of the beast here, but when some dude beats me 20-30 times in a single contest it has a different feel.

Earlier this year, I downloaded one of the csv files. After I saved it as an excel file, I scrubbed some macro off the web to delete duplicates in a column. Try this this week. After the download, you're looking at a five minute effort or less.

I didn't specify which contest or anything but please make it one with a considerable amount of entries.

Do that and see if you can report back that the pros with a zillion entries don't impact things

 

BassNBrew

IBL Representative
week 13 62 of 65 lost, -64%
I would be curious of the other weeks but feel I'd be asking for a ton of legwork.

What's the 3 wins here-how much $?
The total number of entries for players submitting 100+ lineups was 14,050. They grossed $102,455 overall on buy-ins totaling $281,000 for an overall net profit of -$178,545 (-64% ROI). The total number of players with 100+ lineups was 65, 62 of which had a negative net profit, leaving 3 in the positive.

​Here's the root thread tracking the last several weeks.

https://rotogrinders.com/threads/nfl-week-13-dk-milly-maker-results-1030500

I really think the pros are cleaning up in the cash games which are single entry for the most part. Although I have no facts to support this, I suspect they fare better in the single entry gpps. When you have to come up with 100+ lineups you have to be reaching for some junk players.

 

Bri

Footballguy
week 13 62 of 65 lost, -64%
I would be curious of the other weeks but feel I'd be asking for a ton of legwork.

What's the 3 wins here-how much $?
The total number of entries for players submitting 100+ lineups was 14,050. They grossed $102,455 overall on buy-ins totaling $281,000 for an overall net profit of -$178,545 (-64% ROI). The total number of players with 100+ lineups was 65, 62 of which had a negative net profit, leaving 3 in the positive.

​Here's the root thread tracking the last several weeks.

https://rotogrinders.com/threads/nfl-week-13-dk-milly-maker-results-1030500

I really think the pros are cleaning up in the cash games which are single entry for the most part. Although I have no facts to support this, I suspect they fare better in the single entry gpps. When you have to come up with 100+ lineups you have to be reaching for some junk players.
Thanks

Those guys stink or have bad luck or somesuch.

I don't recognize but a handful of names there.

None of the guys Tommy G mentions nor Assani mentions are there.

I'm not up to speed w Dodds' or Maurile's many entries. Guessing from Dodds' blog last year, he ought to be still doing it. They're not there.

John Lee and the other new FBG whose name I can't think of without coffee...they put in tons of lineups.

Other Scout.com guys besides Tommy G aren't there.

So my opinion would simply be that the millimaker isn't a good way to form a conclusion here. I appreciate you posting it. I wish I had some other data to present from other contests

When Assani mentioned that app he used to easily do multi-entries, I remember looking it up and being surprised how many users there were. That many people want an app (somewhat) randomly picking starters? I spent a Saturday messing around with math and probability and pretended I could try some things out in the quarter arcade. The articles I read and the comments from pros...now that I think of it, I don't see those names on there either.

When I did one of the verify who you are questionnaires, I think I saw in account settings that you could make your info private. Is this why?

Millimaker just not an appealing contest to them?

Is there some common thought amongst them to do 25 lineups per contest or somesuch where 100 isn't a good idea?

Something is up if that many are missing.

 

GreenNGold

Footballguy
Still sick of the multi-entries allowed and very very few single entry contests. They really need to stop letting the grownups sit at the children's table.

I'm not playing 10 teams in the $300 league nor am I going to eat at $100 plate restaurants.

They're not some new business that has to beg for $100 from one person rather than a dollar from one hundred people.

Have you ever been to a casino and seen people upset they can play in a high rollers room? Or expensive poker table?

How about- Have you ever seen one person take up 100 slots at once?

With the traffic they get, why can't they take a cue from the casino model?

Stop letting the high rollers play on 100 slot machines at once
These massive GPPs are not analogous to slot machines. They are analogous to a lottery.The only thing that matters is the cutline. I haven't seen any data that indicates that single-entry plays have a lower cutline than multi-entries. Maybe that data is out there, but I haven't seen it and my anecdotal observations are that it doesn't exist.
I disagree. If 10k spots get some $ you might think so, but that doesn't change it for me. There's still these high rollers getting their dollar back on 100-500 spots each.What I'm trying (and maybe failing) to say is it seems catered to the high rollers a bit too much and not to the little guy. It IS possible to cater to both.

You think a high roller at a DK GPP is analogous to a wealthy guy buying 1000 lottery tickets not a wealthy guy playing nickel slots? I don't but regardless, whether you see Bill Gates in a convenience store buying lottery tickets or at a casino playing nickel slots, don't you get the same "out of place" vibe?

Assani speaks of these events FD or DK takes the high rollers on- which is fine, so be it, probably deserve it. Let em' have their country club sort of better than others experience, but I don't think they should return from the trip to play with the peasants and pawns.

DK or FD could have some elite membership club, that business model is surely out there.
The pros are losing in gpps at a higher rate than the small rollers. Multi entries actually play to small guys favor.
:lmao:
Someone is tracking the "pros" (100+ entries in the milly maker). Here are the results from another

week 8 72 of 80 lost, - 31% ROI (all 80)

week 9 70 of 84 lost, -25%

week 10 87 of 93 lost, -51%

week 11 62 of 75 lost, -21%

week 12 72 of 84 lost, -31%

Based on this, the small entry players are at a huge advantage and are cleaning up on the pros.

Maybe the advertising should have a disclaimer warning the pros that the contest is rigged in favor of the Joes.


week 13 62 of 65 lost, -64%
Don't bring facts and data into the discussion.
The millionaire maker is so top-heavy in its payout structure, most people (even pros) are going to have a negative ROI on multiple entries unless they hit one of the top spots. I imagine you would see different results if tracking pros with multiple entries in a flatter payout structure, or tracking them long-term across seasons, although from tournament to tournament their results will vary drastically.

I'm not against multiple entries at all (but support reasonable limits), but there is no way stating their ROI from a single millionaire maker tourney is anywhere close to their actual ROI, or they wouldn't be entering that many contests to begin with.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Tennessee_ATO

Footballguy
Still sick of the multi-entries allowed and very very few single entry contests. They really need to stop letting the grownups sit at the children's table.

I'm not playing 10 teams in the $300 league nor am I going to eat at $100 plate restaurants.

They're not some new business that has to beg for $100 from one person rather than a dollar from one hundred people.

Have you ever been to a casino and seen people upset they can play in a high rollers room? Or expensive poker table?

How about- Have you ever seen one person take up 100 slots at once?

With the traffic they get, why can't they take a cue from the casino model?

Stop letting the high rollers play on 100 slot machines at once
These massive GPPs are not analogous to slot machines. They are analogous to a lottery.The only thing that matters is the cutline. I haven't seen any data that indicates that single-entry plays have a lower cutline than multi-entries. Maybe that data is out there, but I haven't seen it and my anecdotal observations are that it doesn't exist.
I disagree. If 10k spots get some $ you might think so, but that doesn't change it for me. There's still these high rollers getting their dollar back on 100-500 spots each.What I'm trying (and maybe failing) to say is it seems catered to the high rollers a bit too much and not to the little guy. It IS possible to cater to both.

You think a high roller at a DK GPP is analogous to a wealthy guy buying 1000 lottery tickets not a wealthy guy playing nickel slots? I don't but regardless, whether you see Bill Gates in a convenience store buying lottery tickets or at a casino playing nickel slots, don't you get the same "out of place" vibe?

Assani speaks of these events FD or DK takes the high rollers on- which is fine, so be it, probably deserve it. Let em' have their country club sort of better than others experience, but I don't think they should return from the trip to play with the peasants and pawns.

DK or FD could have some elite membership club, that business model is surely out there.
The pros are losing in gpps at a higher rate than the small rollers. Multi entries actually play to small guys favor.
:lmao:
Someone is tracking the "pros" (100+ entries in the milly maker). Here are the results from another

week 8 72 of 80 lost, - 31% ROI (all 80)

week 9 70 of 84 lost, -25%

week 10 87 of 93 lost, -51%

week 11 62 of 75 lost, -21%

week 12 72 of 84 lost, -31%

Based on this, the small entry players are at a huge advantage and are cleaning up on the pros.

Maybe the advertising should have a disclaimer warning the pros that the contest is rigged in favor of the Joes.


week 13 62 of 65 lost, -64%
Don't bring facts and data into the discussion.
The millionaire maker is so top-heavy in its payout structure, most people (even pros) are going to have a negative ROI on multiple entries unless they hit one of the top spots. I imagine you would see different results if tracking pros with multiple entries in a flatter payout structure, or tracking them long-term across seasons, although from tournament to tournament their results will vary drastically.

I'm not against multiple entries at all (but support reasonable limits), but there is no way stating their ROI from a single millionaire maker tourney is anywhere close to their actual ROI, or they wouldn't be entering that many contests to begin with.
Maybe that is right, I don't know. We can't just assume it's right though, which is what Bri is doing. That's been my biggest criticism of him -- he's complaining about something we don't even know is happening.

I've tracked multi-entry cash games all season. Going in, my theory was that the multi-entry double-ups would have a higher cutline than the single-entries. My theory was wrong. At most the multi-entry and single-entry cash contests have no difference in cutlines.

Now we have very good data on an admittedly top-heavy multi-entry GPP that shows that the multi-entry guys are losing at a significantly higher rate than the "average Joe" every single week.

I realize those things don't "prove" anything about multi-entry vs. single-entry flat GPPs, but there has been nothing that "proves" (or even implies) that the multi-entry flat GPPs are any more difficult to cash in than the single entries either.

As far as speculating why so many people are entering so many entries into the Millionaire Maker, there's an assumption that everyone who enters a ton of times is a good player. That's an assumption that is not borne out by any evidence whatsoever. Sure some of them may be really strong players, but a big chunk of them are dudes with more money than sense chasing the dream of a 7 figure payday. Just because someone has a lot of money and plays all of the seats at a blackjack table doesn't mean he's any good at playing blackjack.

 

Tennessee_ATO

Footballguy
Still sick of the multi-entries allowed and very very few single entry contests. They really need to stop letting the grownups sit at the children's table.

I'm not playing 10 teams in the $300 league nor am I going to eat at $100 plate restaurants.

They're not some new business that has to beg for $100 from one person rather than a dollar from one hundred people.

Have you ever been to a casino and seen people upset they can play in a high rollers room? Or expensive poker table?

How about- Have you ever seen one person take up 100 slots at once?

With the traffic they get, why can't they take a cue from the casino model?

Stop letting the high rollers play on 100 slot machines at once
These massive GPPs are not analogous to slot machines. They are analogous to a lottery.

The only thing that matters is the cutline. I haven't seen any data that indicates that single-entry plays have a lower cutline than multi-entries. Maybe that data is out there, but I haven't seen it and my anecdotal observations are that it doesn't exist.
I disagree. If 10k spots get some $ you might think so, but that doesn't change it for me. There's still these high rollers getting their dollar back on 100-500 spots each.

What I'm trying (and maybe failing) to say is it seems catered to the high rollers a bit too much and not to the little guy. It IS possible to cater to both.

You think a high roller at a DK GPP is analogous to a wealthy guy buying 1000 lottery tickets not a wealthy guy playing nickel slots? I don't but regardless, whether you see Bill Gates in a convenience store buying lottery tickets or at a casino playing nickel slots, don't you get the same "out of place" vibe?

Assani speaks of these events FD or DK takes the high rollers on- which is fine, so be it, probably deserve it. Let em' have their country club sort of better than others experience, but I don't think they should return from the trip to play with the peasants and pawns.

DK or FD could have some elite membership club, that business model is surely out there.
Again, the only thing that matters is the cutline. Do you have any data that shows that the cutline is higher in a multi-entry GPP than a similarly sized single-entry GPP? If the cutline is higher in the former, then it is harder to cash in the multi-entry. If it isn't, then your concern isn't founded. Everything I've seen shows me that it's no tougher to cash in a mult-entry double-up than a single-entry double-up. If anything, my data shows that the multi-entries have a slightly lower cutline than the single-entries (but that may well be a function of the size of the contests since the multi-entries are much larger). I haven't made any real effort to compare it on the GPP front, but I suspect you haven't either. Without the data all you are doing is getting fired-up about something that might or might not be happening.
Amazing. You puff your chest like you're a judge and I have to produce evidence for you
Please. You are ranting about a situation that may or may not even exist. Do the multi-entries have higher cut-lines than single-entries? That's the question that matters. You seem to be convinced that the multi-entry GPPs present some disadvantage to the "smaller" player. And that perceived disadvantage has you really, really fired up. Is it actually a disadvantage though? I don't think it is based upon my observations, and I've actually tracked it with respect to double-ups and triple-ups. Have you actually observed something different? No one has ever presented any actual data that I've seen that shows that it's tougher to cash in a multi-play GPP than a single-play GPP. Just because it "feels" like that's the case doesn't make it so.

There's a thread on here linking to articles that actually track the highest-volume players in the DK Millionaire Maker. They are losing money every single week. Those guys literally represent the rake in that contest most weeks.
Your obsession with one single contest is a bit much here when there's many contests each week.

Your obsession with the cutline- Do you not scroll up to see winners? Or at least guys a little ahead of you and maybe the winner? I scroll and it looks like frames in an old timey movie with the same names repeated.

I'm fine with anybody beating me, nature of the beast here, but when some dude beats me 20-30 times in a single contest it has a different feel.

Earlier this year, I downloaded one of the csv files. After I saved it as an excel file, I scrubbed some macro off the web to delete duplicates in a column. Try this this week. After the download, you're looking at a five minute effort or less.

I didn't specify which contest or anything but please make it one with a considerable amount of entries.

Do that and see if you can report back that the pros with a zillion entries don't impact things
What do you mean "obsession with one single contest"? I'm basing my position on tracking dozens upon dozens of contests every week. Someone has taken the time to crunch the numbers of the Millionaire Maker every week and provided hard data about that contest. That's nothing more than 14 data points, but it's 14 data points more than anyone has provided for the counter-argument.

If you've got that data you allude to, please share.

I don't know what you mean by saying the pros "impact things". All we can control is our team's score. If I build a team that scores 110 or 150 points, the only thing that matters is whether I win money. That's purely a function of the cut line: the lower the cutline the easier it is to win. If $5 GPP 1 pays $10 at 135, it's easier to win at than the $5 GPP that pays $10 at 141. It makes no difference whether one is multi-entry or single-entry. You are assuming that the multi-entries are "harder" to win at, when I've seen no data that demonstrates that. Indeed, all of the data I've seen is contrary to that. As mentioned above, "multiple entries" does not necessarily equal "good player" anyway.

If you are arguing that the multi-entry guys make it tougher to finish in the "big money" in GPPs, then there is really nothing to discuss. Doing that is by definition luck, regardless of whether it's single-entry or multi-entry.

 

Maurile Tremblay

Administrator
Staff member
Tennessee_ATO said:
Now we have very good data on an admittedly top-heavy multi-entry GPP that shows that the multi-entry guys are losing at a significantly higher rate than the "average Joe" every single week.
Well, not every week. rayofhope has taken down the million-dollar prize on two separate occasions, for example. A number of other pros have had very high finishes as well.

In a contest of that size, with that top-heavy a payout structure, even the best player will lose most weeks. But it only takes a single $100,000+ finish to pay for an awful lot of $20 buy-ins.

I have no doubt that most of the names on that list are playing with a positive expectation. But variance is extreme, so it may take most of them several lifetimes to reach the long run. In just their own particular lifetimes, many could end up net losers in that contest.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Tennessee_ATO

Footballguy
Here is an NBA one with 900 total entries, 185 paid, 25 max entries

http://footballhangout.com/NBA4KZone1215.csv

ETA I cut out a few columns that I didn't think mattered to discussion like team, entry#, and one other
But the issue isn't "do guys with lots of entries cash?" The issue is "is it harder to cash in multi-entry GPPs?" You have to compare multi-entries with single entries to get a comparison of what it takes to min-cash, win 5x entry, etc.

If 190 entries finish ahead of you, it doesn't matter if they come from 190 different people or 8 people.

There's a natural tendency to assune that if you just removed the multi-entries then (to use your information) wapus429 ties for first instead of 9th. But that's faulty logic because if we remove the multi-entries those slots will be filled by single entries. So we have to attempt to figure out if we would expect those single entries to be better, worse, or essentially the same as those removed multi-entries.

 

Tennessee_ATO

Footballguy
Tennessee_ATO said:
Now we have very good data on an admittedly top-heavy multi-entry GPP that shows that the multi-entry guys are losing at a significantly higher rate than the "average Joe" every single week.
Well, not every week. rayofhope has taken down the million-dollar prize on two separate occasions, for example. A number of other pros have had very high finishes as well.

In a contest of that size, with that top-heavy a payout structure, even the best player will lose most weeks. But it only takes a single $100,000+ finish to pay for an awful lot of $20 buy-ins.

I have no doubt that most of the names on that list are playing with a positive expectation. But variance is extreme, so it may take most of them several lifetimes to reach the long run. In just their own particular lifetimes, many could end up net losers in that contest.
Valid point. Missed those wins. But if you aggregate those high-volume players over tye season, they aren't skewing the results for the "average Joes".

On a broader scale, the published data for MLB showed that the highest volume guys were +6%. It was the best guys playing at that next level of volume who were winning a bunch. The bad players at that level were losing a ton of money. The low-volume players lost, but not much higher than the rake. And that's MLB, the sport that the number guys should expect the highest +EV from.

 

Bri

Footballguy
If 190 entries finish ahead of you, it doesn't matter if they come from 190 different people or 8 people.
What? Has there ever been a person in the history of sports or really anything that was pleased to be the 9th highest score in 191st place?

 

Tennessee_ATO

Footballguy
If 190 entries finish ahead of you, it doesn't matter if they come from 190 different people or 8 people.
What? Has there ever been a person in the history of sports or really anything that was pleased to be the 9th highest score in 191st place?
I don't even know what that means.

Regardless, I give up. Keep howling away about the evils of multi-entry GPPs without actually knowing if there's anything to be howling about. If it feels right it must be right.

 

Ramblin Wreck

Footballguy
If 190 entries finish ahead of you, it doesn't matter if they come from 190 different people or 8 people.
What? Has there ever been a person in the history of sports or really anything that was pleased to be the 9th highest score in 191st place?
I don't even know what that means. Regardless, I give up. Keep howling away about the evils of multi-entry GPPs without actually knowing if there's anything to be howling about. If it feels right it must be right.
LOL
 

Bri

Footballguy
Tennessee_ATO said:
Bri said:
Tennessee_ATO said:
If 190 entries finish ahead of you, it doesn't matter if they come from 190 different people or 8 people.
What? Has there ever been a person in the history of sports or really anything that was pleased to be the 9th highest score in 191st place?
I don't even know what that means.

Regardless, I give up. Keep howling away about the evils of multi-entry GPPs without actually knowing if there's anything to be howling about. If it feels right it must be right.
Seriously? First you whine there's no facts as if DK or FD publicly list everything. Then I post some data from one last night and this is how you reply

 

Tennessee_ATO

Footballguy
Tennessee_ATO said:
Bri said:
Tennessee_ATO said:
If 190 entries finish ahead of you, it doesn't matter if they come from 190 different people or 8 people.
What? Has there ever been a person in the history of sports or really anything that was pleased to be the 9th highest score in 191st place?
I don't even know what that means.

Regardless, I give up. Keep howling away about the evils of multi-entry GPPs without actually knowing if there's anything to be howling about. If it feels right it must be right.
Seriously? First you whine there's no facts as if DK or FD publicly list everything. Then I post some data from one last night and this is how you reply
No it isn't. This is how I responded:

Tennessee_ATO said:
Here is an NBA one with 900 total entries, 185 paid, 25 max entries

http://footballhangout.com/NBA4KZone1215.csv

ETA I cut out a few columns that I didn't think mattered to discussion like team, entry#, and one other
But the issue isn't "do guys with lots of entries cash?" The issue is "is it harder to cash in multi-entry GPPs?" You have to compare multi-entries with single entries to get a comparison of what it takes to min-cash, win 5x entry, etc.

If 190 entries finish ahead of you, it doesn't matter if they come from 190 different people or 8 people.

There's a natural tendency to assune that if you just removed the multi-entries then (to use your information) wapus429 ties for first instead of 9th. But that's faulty logic because if we remove the multi-entries those slots will be filled by single entries. So we have to attempt to figure out if we would expect those single entries to be better, worse, or essentially the same as those removed multi-entries.
You seem to be assuming that if you take out all of the multi-entries from a GPP that either (1) they won't be replaced with other single entries or (2) all of the single entries that replace them will suck.

In order to be able to know if the multi-entries are harder for the "average Joe" to win money at than the single-entries, you have to actually compare the multi-entries to the single-entries.

 

BassNBrew

IBL Representative
NFL multi entry snap cashed at 131.72 (230000 entries) 201.08 won it

Single entry squid cashed at 131.80 (115000 entries) 208.1 won it

 

Tennessee_ATO

Footballguy
NFL multi entry snap cashed at 131.72 (230000 entries) 201.08 won it

Single entry squid cashed at 131.80 (115000 entries) 208.1 won it
So despite twice as many entries and the pros being able to enter multiple times and screw the average Joes, it was easier to cash and win the multi-entry than the single entry?

Interesting. Who would have thought that possible?

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top