This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
But how does that matter if all those people got the guy that scored the most. If 99% of people pick Gronk and he scores 23, what does it matter that I take Olsen and get 6? I still lose, right? I've never played dfs. Always thought it looked a bit off the level so I may need it explained to me like a three year old
I think it depends on how you approach it. If you think you are gonna turn $100 into $300k by winning a contest with 100k runners, well you are fooling yourself. That type of thing lends itself well to people who can data mine and spit out hundreds of automated lineups. On the other hand, you can do single entry and small field events that minimize the impact of the "sharks" and that's probably the way to go if you're a casual looking to have fun and make some money.
I guess I see the concept but I'm thinking, in my real world, even if I know the numbers, I'd have a hard time laying down a thousand dollars and saying "well since all you guys went Gronk and AJ green, I'm going to beat you by going graham and keenan Allen. Just seems a little harder to do in reality. After all, there is a good reason why so many people pick the studs.
I wouldn't say either one is gambling. They're games of skill that involve a strong element of chance and variance.
In big tournaments, you are playing against thousands/tens of thousands of people. So the only chance you have at winning the top prizes is having a lineup that scores a lot and is, at least in some parts, uncommon relative to the field.
If 99% are on Gronk and 1% on Olsen if Olsen outscores Gronk 10% of the time you are going to end up ahead in the long run. Prime example would be having Keenan Allen this week rather than Julio.
You can't pick all studs - you have very limited salary resources to build a lineup. In order to place in big tournaments, you HAVE to include high risk players to differentiate yourself from the field. So knowing what players are more/less common is a big advantage.
No they're saying this employee leaked "ownership % of certain players " which is a major, major deal.
The big difference between poker and DFS though, is in DFS, the pros play thousands of games a week at all stakes. You can't get away from them by moving down in stakes. How would you like it if you walked into your local cardroom, sat down at a small stakes Hold em game and saw Phil Ivey and a few other top pros sitting there. You get up and move to another table and the same players are sitting there too. That's the way it is on Fan Duel and Draft Kings.
True but the stock market is regulated (how well that regulatory performs is certainly up for debate).
Sounds horrible
Sure, but DFS also involves a tad less money.
This.
This simply makes no sense. A lot of the games are 50/50 type runs.
This board contains the best info about the hobby already. Footballguys as paid content has always been for profit. Now is it for profit in an enjoyable industry, sure, but that doesn't excuse them from good ol' American capitalism.
not only that but how about the freaking NFL. Every advertisement has been Draftkings this, FanDuel that. Even on shows like NFL Fantasy Live.
Can u even fathom how many games are registered/played every week? It's an absurd #. To use your minuscule sample of a few contests won is pretty silly. Just saying..
As a percentage, I am up maybe 30-40% of what I invested in DFS. It's not a lot of dollars because I've been playing low stakes (usually games between $5-25). To me it's not a job or a gold mine. Just something fun to dabble in. I don't spend any significant time on research beyond what I was already spending on FF. I look through the prices each week and spend an hour or two assembling good lineups.
Didn't want this last bit to get lost. I don't agree with the first bit, obviously it should not be acceptable for those with any kind of insider knowledge to play. That said, a tool like FBGs would not fall into the same category, in my mind, as long as it is just a tool included in the membership cost. I would LOVE to see FBGs track lineups via the lineup maker, but not positive it would be an accurate representation of real ownership stats because so many people setup test lineups just playing around (at least, I know I do). Maybe a button to "save" a lineup, and it only counts ownership stats for "saved" lineups?
The big problem is all the multi-entry stuff. I would occasionally encounter pros in my tourneys on PokerStars back in the day, but it was a rare occurrence and each guy only had one life in each tourney. If you allowed them 300-400 entries per tourney, they would've won them all. So yea, allowing these data miners to enter the same contest 500 times is problematic in DFS. The issue is that FanDuel makes money off of all of those entries too, so they have no incentive to change it. That being said, they offer plenty of single entry competitions if you want to duck the pros.
It is like prohibition. You can make gambling illegal, but that doesn't remove the innate enjoyment that people get out of gambling. All of the desire to wager money is still out there. There is a huge market for it, just like there was for poker a decade ago. When you outlaw one form of gambling, another one pops up to take its place. They should just embrace it, regulate it, tax it, and try to implement controls for the degens who can't handle it without spewing themselves into financial problems.
Soulfly3 said:
