Fantasy football takes no skill (1 Viewer)

[xander756]

Article:

A major theme on this fantasy sports column this year is how much fantasy football relies on luck. No I am not talking about Colts quarterback Andrew Luck but the concept of chance.While all fantasy sports have some factor of luck to them, fantasy football is mostly luck and requires very little, if any, knowledge of the sport to win. I even have a continuing season-long series on the topic titled "fantasy football is all luck" . But why does football in particular involve so much dang luck?The reason that fantasy football is so heavily reliant on a luck factor is because players only play one game per week. Compare this to hockey where players have a game every other day or baseball where teams play every single day of the week. Luck decreases with more games played. When your team only plays one game per week, a single performance can literally make or break your entire matchup. One game from just one player could spell doom for your fantasy team.

Read full article: [link redacted by MT]What do you think of this article? Agree? Disagree? Is football more luck than other fantasy sports?

 

[flc735]

this is correct. more games means less variance and vice versa.

the only thing incorrect here is your thread title. just because ff has the most luck involved as compaired to other sports does not mean it is 100% luck.

 

[Time Kibitzer]

I don't think the author of that article is all that experienced with fantasy sports and he doesn't discuss the issue in a very rational manner either. For starters, real sports have a tonne of luck involved, so no fantasy league should be trying to completely get rid of luck's impact.

Secondly, his comparison to fantasy hockey is a very poor one, as fantasy hockey is very luck-based as well in H2H leagues despite the fact that they play more often, because of how scarce goals are. Sidney Crosby can score 10 points in 1 week and 0 points in the next just as easily as Jamaal Charles can run for 30 yards one week and 233 the next. Fantasy baseball is also very luck based if it's done in a H2H format for the same reasons I listed for fantasy hockey. The only fantasy sport that isn't very luck based in a H2H format is basketball since scoring in basketball happens so frequently, so guys like LeBron and Durant end up averaging over 20 points per game in every single week in the season. So, assuming the author is being consistent about H2H leagues across the board, the only sport that is significantly less luck based is fantasy basketball; and if we aren't to make that assumption, then he can simply make his fantasy football league a total points league instead of a H2H one, which completely gets rid of the issue of inconsistent scoring on a week to week basis.

And finally, his assertion that the only way for fantasy football to be more skill-dependent is to enforce rotisserie scoring is far from true. Turning your redraft league into a dynasty league with larger rosters, starting lineups, and including IDP is a simple way of greatly increasing the skill involved.

 

[wiscstlatlmia]

I actually think a great comparison is poker(which I used to play a lot of).

sure, on a specific hand(week) you can lose with a great hand or win with a horrible one. In the grand scheme of things though, one hand(week) is pretty irrelevant.

The object of the game is to put yourself in the best possible situation to win and then hope your cards(or players) hold up.

The best fantasy football players do not win every week, but they almost always make the playoffs, unless of course they are playing against equals in skill level.

people who don't play believe poker is a game of chance, but the people that play a lot know differently, same situation here.

 

[FUBAR]

I actually think a great comparison is poker(which I used to play a lot of).sure, on a specific hand(week) you can lose with a great hand or win with a horrible one. In the grand scheme of things though, one hand(week) is pretty irrelevant. The object of the game is to put yourself in the best possible situation to win and then hope your cards(or players) hold up. The best fantasy football players do not win every week, but they almost always make the playoffs, unless of course they are playing against equals in skill level. people who don't play believe poker is a game of chance, but the people that play a lot know differently, same situation here.

any given week and any given poker hand is determined a lot by luck. Over time skill makes more of a difference. If a league wanted to lessen the impact of luck, it would go to a total points format but that not as exciting as the matchups - because face it, we like that luck plays a big role.

 

[cstu]

Of course it's a lot of luck - it's a game based on predicting the future behavior of human beings. That doesn't mean there isn't skill involved.

 

[ponchsox]

The guy that wrote this must be 0-3.

 

[habsfan]

Hmmm. Article posted yesterday... new member yesterday starts a thread linking to it with first post?

I've only played in a hockey pool for a couple of years (Yahoo) and I feel like is it very dependent on volume rather than good choices. You can move players in and out of your line-up every day so a lot seems to depend on getting as many guys into as many games as you can. If this reduced the element of luck, I prefer to contend with the luck personally. In football, I need to make a decision on Denarius Moore or Jeremy Maclin in my flex and the decision makes a difference.

 

[Phenix]

Horrible article and if the writer/OP was so bent about starting 0-3, just stop playing if he does not have the skill.

OP you should make it more obvious that it is you who wrote the article, and since you ask, it is a horrible article.

It does have skill, a great deal of it. If you do not believe so from the draft, WW, or who you sit or start, then it is easy to see why you are 0-3.

 

[HurryUpSundays]

Horrible article and if the writer/OP was so bent about starting 0-3, just stop playing if he does not have the skill.OP you should make it more obvious that it is you who wrote the article, and since you ask, it is a horrible article.It does have skill, a great deal of it. If you do not believe so from the draft, WW, or who you sit or start, then it is easy to see why you are 0-3.

I'm a fanatic, get lost in FF, but I'll now be the first to admit that it does not include "a great deal of it (skill)". Reading skill maybe. Time? Yes. Time to read articles, do research, make educated guesses on line-ups, etc. In a very competitive, money league last year we had an owner whose wife went into labor hours before our online draft. His team was relegated to 'auto draft'. He set his line-up a half dozen times during the season, citing he was now too busy for FF. He didn't make ONE move or trade on the year and his team, not only made the playoffs, but went on to lose in the championship. As pissed as I was about his lack of activity, plain and simple, it shed a whole new light on this game that we play.

 

[matuski]

People taking offense to the obvious fact that FF is predominantly luck have issues. Some serious denial here. You are predicting the future, end of story.

I think craps is a MUCH better analogy than poker. Knowing the rules and how to improve your odds is half the battle... but that doesn't have much to do with skill. Paying attention and being proactive helps a bunch, again not skill. Increasing the amount of information (stats, injury info, depth charts, weather, other variables) you have helps, yet again not skill... just effort.

There are certainly ways to be "better" at FF, but it always simply involves the above.

In the end you are still just throwing guys on your roster each week and crossing your fingers that they perform as you hoped they would. No amount of "skill" can prevent a guy from only catching one ball, or leaving the game on a stretcher, or getting tackled at the 1 yard line instead of a touchdown.

You may have learned how to increase your odds, but you are still rolling the dice and hoping you don't crap out.

 

[Cunk]

I think skill as we think about it in FF should be categorized as perseverance or due-diligence with experience also being a factor. I'd say it's a 80% luck/20% skill split.

Our Boston-based league started just as the Pats were starting to become and offensive force. A certain player in our league was a Pats fan but aside from that she didn't know a whole lot about FF, especially in comparison to the rest of us who had been in other leagues for years. So, of course she wound up picking up a ton of Patriots just because she was a homer. Not surprising for someone just starting out. Well that year the Pats's offense explodes and she looks like a genius when it was really inexperience that lead her to draft all these guys. At the time Brady was more of a game manager so picking him in the first, for experienced FF players, would have been ridiculous. We'll that inexperience has got her a new HD TV amongst other things.

Most of use were when someone kept over Flacco in a 0-5 keeper league. That's not smart. He could have got him much later, especially since he was already keeping over Cam Newton. Well, so far that pick has turned out great for him. I consider that sort of thing as an idiot-savant pick. A pick that nobody can understand but somehow works out.

Anyone can pick up a cheat sheet and field a draft players who make sense. It's only the perseverance and due-diligence that can create a gap between those who don't do their research during the season and those who do.

Knowing how much luck there is in FF actually makes me enjoy the game more. It helps me put bad seasons in perspective rather than get all bent out of shape about it. It also allows me more flexiblity in how I run my team. It lets me trade more easily because I realize what a crap-shoot it really is. For example, last year, at the beginning of the season I traded Aaron Rodgers for Chris Johnson. Seems like an idiot trade now but at the time Rodgers wasn't the Rodgers we know now, Chris Johnson still had upside and my backup QBs would seem to fill in the gap just fine (i.e Johnson + Fitzpatrick would eventually score more that Rodgers and what I had). Well that turned out to be probably the worst trade I will ever make in my FF career. But hold on...was it? Because of that trade, this year I wound up drafting RGIII because I now needed a QB. So far he's been one of the top QBs in the league and Rodgers hasn't been nearly what he was last year. This is getting a little long winded and LOOK AT ME but the point I'm trying to make is that my "awful" trade last year may result in being the best move I ever made if things keep going the way they are. Total luck.

 

[pantagrapher]

Definitely a greater element of luck than fantasy baseball. But it's not all luck.

 

[Ghost Rider]

I actually think a great comparison is poker(which I used to play a lot of).sure, on a specific hand(week) you can lose with a great hand or win with a horrible one. In the grand scheme of things though, one hand(week) is pretty irrelevant. The object of the game is to put yourself in the best possible situation to win and then hope your cards(or players) hold up. The best fantasy football players do not win every week, but they almost always make the playoffs, unless of course they are playing against equals in skill level. people who don't play believe poker is a game of chance, but the people that play a lot know differently, same situation here.

Sure, anyone can get lucky and win a league once or whatever, but the best FF owners are usually the ones whose teams are almost always good and in contention year in and year out. Same how there are often teams that are almost never in contention. There is nothing lucky about that.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Enter twenty leagues stacked with really good players and get back to us about the role of luck.

 

[matuski]

Enter twenty leagues stacked with really good players and get back to us about the role of luck.

What effect would the number of leagues you join have on the fact FF is largely luck?

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

No, it eliminates the luck. Just like playing million poker hands. Play in one league and maybe you get lucky or suffer a bunch of bad luck. Play in twenty and your average results tell you a lot.

 

[cvnpoka]

I actually think a great comparison is poker(which I used to play a lot of).sure, on a specific hand(week) you can lose with a great hand or win with a horrible one. In the grand scheme of things though, one hand(week) is pretty irrelevant. The object of the game is to put yourself in the best possible situation to win and then hope your cards(or players) hold up. The best fantasy football players do not win every week, but they almost always make the playoffs, unless of course they are playing against equals in skill level. people who don't play believe poker is a game of chance, but the people that play a lot know differently, same situation here.

fantasy football is a ton more luck than poker in my experience. or maybe i just suck at fantasy.

 

[cvnpoka]

No, it eliminates the luck. Just like playing million poker hands. Play in one league and maybe you get lucky or suffer a bunch of bad luck. Play in twenty and your average results tell you a lot.

disagree for the most part. in a single season, you will have certain preferences of players and if those dont pan out, then that entire year will be disappointing. its more that you should play for 20+ years to smooth out the long run.

 

[Ilov80s]

Enter twenty leagues stacked with really good players and get back to us about the role of luck.

What effect would the number of leagues you join have on the fact FF is largely luck?

If I had a 3 point shooting contest against Ray Allen and we only took 1 shot. I might be able to tie him or beat him. If we shot 20 times, he would end up making twice as many shots as me.

 

[SSOG]

Better idea: write down a list of every offensive player in the NFL. Throw darts at it. Draft who the dart lands on. If FF was all luck, you should be competitive. You'd better hope you're right, though, because you'll need a whole lot of luck after spending your first 7 picks on Nick Foles, Jeremiah Johnson, Devin Hester, Michael Floyd, Blaine Gabbart, Kyle Orton, and Randy Moss.

I think it's Calbear who is always saying that FF takes a lot of skill, it's just that most owners piggyback off of someone else's skill (I.e. draft from a cheatsheet). I don't have to have any skill in picking stocks if I just give Warren Buffet my money and let him invest it for me: this does not mean that picking stocks doesn't take skill.

 

[cvnpoka]

Better idea: write down a list of every offensive player in the NFL. Throw darts at it. Draft who the dart lands on. If FF was all luck, you should be competitive. You'd better hope you're right, though, because you'll need a whole lot of luck after spending your first 7 picks on Nick Foles, Jeremiah Johnson, Devin Hester, Michael Floyd, Blaine Gabbart, Kyle Orton, and Randy Moss. I think it's Calbear who is always saying that FF takes a lot of skill, it's just that most owners piggyback off of someone else's skill (I.e. draft from a cheatsheet). I don't have to have any skill in picking stocks if I just give Warren Buffet my money and let him invest it for me: this does not mean that picking stocks doesn't take skill.

even if applicable, this is pretty irrelevant to the spirit of the discussion.

 

[DoubleG]

this is correct. more games means less variance and vice versa.the only thing incorrect here is your thread title. just because ff has the most luck involved as compaired to other sports does not mean it is 100% luck.

As I have said for years, FF takes more skill than losers think it does and more luck than winners care to admit.The catch 22 is when you play in a league that has players all of similar skill levels, the luck obviously decided more. In other words, for the sake of discussion, let's just say the skill/luck breakdown is 60/40. If all of the owners are somewhere between 45-55 on the skill 60% - that means the actual diiference is 10% skill (the highest difference) and 40% luck (that variable always stays the same). That means the outcome of a game (or season) is 4 times more likely to be decided by luck than skill.And honestly, I think 60/40 is pretty close.

 

[ponchsox]

If you draft well and make good waiver moves, you are going to win more often than not. One season may be a small sample size due to bad luck but over the course of several years skill plays a large role. There is a reason why certain teams in my leagues suck year after year.

 

[LittlePhatty]

Fantasy football takes no skill

Not true.Fantasy football takes very little skill.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

No, it eliminates the luck. Just like playing million poker hands. Play in one league and maybe you get lucky or suffer a bunch of bad luck. Play in twenty and your average results tell you a lot.

disagree for the most part. in a single season, you will have certain preferences of players and if those dont pan out, then that entire year will be disappointing. its more that you should play for 20+ years to smooth out the long run.

Sure... 20 teams over 20 years is even better. I think dynasty takes some of the luck out of it as well -- there are some players I've been in four or five leagues with for the last 5+ years and they have good or great teams in all of them.Likewise, there are many things you can do in terms of league setup to reward skill and diminish the role of luck.

 

[SSOG]

Better idea: write down a list of every offensive player in the NFL. Throw darts at it. Draft who the dart lands on. If FF was all luck, you should be competitive. You'd better hope you're right, though, because you'll need a whole lot of luck after spending your first 7 picks on Nick Foles, Jeremiah Johnson, Devin Hester, Michael Floyd, Blaine Gabbart, Kyle Orton, and Randy Moss. I think it's Calbear who is always saying that FF takes a lot of skill, it's just that most owners piggyback off of someone else's skill (I.e. draft from a cheatsheet). I don't have to have any skill in picking stocks if I just give Warren Buffet my money and let him invest it for me: this does not mean that picking stocks doesn't take skill.

even if applicable, this is pretty irrelevant to the spirit of the discussion.

I don't think so. Nobody would seriously suggest 10-20 years ago that fantasy took no skill. That's because, back then, most people had not yet begun outsourcing their skill-based decisions. Now people make all their decisions from a cheatsheet and think fantasy takes no skill, but that cheatsheet was not created by chance. Owners without skill can now borrow someone else's, but they still need skill (and a whole lot of it) to be competitive.

 

[DoubleG]

No, it eliminates the luck. Just like playing million poker hands. Play in one league and maybe you get lucky or suffer a bunch of bad luck. Play in twenty and your average results tell you a lot.

No - it doesn't eliminate the luck. Poker is always used as analogy for FF - and in some ways it makes sense to do so. But not in this case. In poker, half way through a hand, the ace in your ATs doesn't suddenly become useless due to injury - and remain useless to you the rest of the night. In poker, your opponents pocket TT doesn't suddenly turn into QQ because the cards higher then them got hurt. In poker your KK pre flop, doesn't suddenly get demoted to KQ because the team drafted another RB to replace the presumed starter. Your pocket rockets don't suddenly become useless because they're playing in a blizzard during FF playoffs (Brady/Moss owners froma few years ago?) There are WAY more variables in fantasy football than in poker - and many of them can't be accounted for, let alone controlled.You cannot eliminate luck in FF. You can mitigate variance in poker. But the two are NOT the same. In poker you are dealing with a constant - the deck. In FF there is no constant, therefore, you can only hope to maximize your skill, thus limiting the amount luck plays into the results - but you cannot eliminate it from FF.

As such, no matter what % you think luck is involved..10%, 20% or 40% - that will be the only contstant. Whether you are in 1 league or 100.

 

[Funkley]

Most of the guys on this board consider themselves skilled. About everythread contains arguments and discussion over value, strategy, etc. Generally, it breaksdown to right or wrong. If you are wrong most of the time you arent skilled and have no luck. Half the time then you are simply average like most. If however you are right most of the time you are skilled and have excellent luck. Luck is a major factor in this even if your ego wont allow it.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Yeah... 'elimnates' was the wrong word there. Reduces the overall variance was the idea I was getting at.

 

[DoubleG]

What do you think of this article?

I think its crap, but its not near as bad as writing an article and then spamming message boards looking to promote your own article. Weak.

- nice catch. Joined: Yesterday (i.e. right after the artcile was posted).

 

[HurryUpSundays]

Most of the guys on this board consider themselves skilled. About everythread contains arguments and discussion over value, strategy, etc. Generally, it breaksdown to right or wrong. If you are wrong most of the time you arent skilled and have no luck. Half the time then you are simply average like most. If however you are right most of the time you are skilled and have excellent luck. Luck is a major factor in this even if your ego wont allow it.

 

[ldizzle]

 

[Underachievers]

Most of the guys on this board consider themselves skilled. About everythread contains arguments and discussion over value, strategy, etc. Generally, it breaksdown to right or wrong. If you are wrong most of the time you arent skilled and have no luck. Half the time then you are simply average like most. If however you are right most of the time you are skilled and have excellent luck. Luck is a major factor in this even if your ego wont allow it.

 

[gethugefast1]

 

[squistion]

I am in two 12 team Dynasty leagues that have been in existence since 2003. If no skill was involved then all teams would make the playoffs roughly 40%-60% of the time. Except, that has not been the case, there are certain teams over a decade that almost always make the playoffs, while other teams consistently fall short.

Luck can explain a poor team catching all the breaks one year, but it doesn't explain those owners who year-in-and-year out always seem to fall at one end of the spectrum or another. That is explained by skill.

 

[xander756]

I don't think the author of that article is all that experienced with fantasy sports and he doesn't discuss the issue in a very rational manner either. For starters, real sports have a tonne of luck involved, so no fantasy league should be trying to completely get rid of luck's impact.Secondly, his comparison to fantasy hockey is a very poor one, as fantasy hockey is very luck-based as well in H2H leagues despite the fact that they play more often, because of how scarce goals are. Sidney Crosby can score 10 points in 1 week and 0 points in the next just as easily as Jamaal Charles can run for 30 yards one week and 233 the next. Fantasy baseball is also very luck based if it's done in a H2H format for the same reasons I listed for fantasy hockey. The only fantasy sport that isn't very luck based in a H2H format is basketball since scoring in basketball happens so frequently, so guys like LeBron and Durant end up averaging over 20 points per game in every single week in the season. So, assuming the author is being consistent about H2H leagues across the board, the only sport that is significantly less luck based is fantasy basketball; and if we aren't to make that assumption, then he can simply make his fantasy football league a total points league instead of a H2H one, which completely gets rid of the issue of inconsistent scoring on a week to week basis. And finally, his assertion that the only way for fantasy football to be more skill-dependent is to enforce rotisserie scoring is far from true. Turning your redraft league into a dynasty league with larger rosters, starting lineups, and including IDP is a simple way of greatly increasing the skill involved.

I actually wrote that article, which was why I posted it. I should tell you that I make a living as a fantasy sports expert (which should have been made clear in my bio on the site there).I don't think that the comparison to hockey is incorrect, there is not anywhere near as much luck involved. You say Crosby could score 10 points in one week and 0 the next. That is speaking to consistency of performing. Setting aside the fact that this would actually be very rare (unlike in football where it happens almost every week), it doesn't matter. Crosby scoring 10 points isn't going to make your team win the matchup. It might make you win the points category (and perhaps goals or assists depending on where his points came from) but that's it. It won't make you win saves, or penalty minutes, or shutouts, etc. The entire match doesn't hinge on Crosby, like it would have Jamaal Charles last week.

 

[RCon]

Horrible article and if the writer/OP was so bent about starting 0-3, just stop playing if he does not have the skill.OP you should make it more obvious that it is you who wrote the article, and since you ask, it is a horrible article.It does have skill, a great deal of it. If you do not believe so from the draft, WW, or who you sit or start, then it is easy to see why you are 0-3.

I'm a fanatic, get lost in FF, but I'll now be the first to admit that it does not include "a great deal of it (skill)". Reading skill maybe. Time? Yes. Time to read articles, do research, make educated guesses on line-ups, etc. In a very competitive, money league last year we had an owner whose wife went into labor hours before our online draft. His team was relegated to 'auto draft'. He set his line-up a half dozen times during the season, citing he was now too busy for FF. He didn't make ONE move or trade on the year and his team, not only made the playoffs, but went on to lose in the championship. As pissed as I was about his lack of activity, plain and simple, it shed a whole new light on this game that we play.

If fantasy football was 100% luck, then drafting a team by randomly choosing names of all active players, and randomly choosing starting lineups from your roster, would result in a .500 record. I think we all know that randomly choosing names and randomly choosing starters from among those names would be a disaster. Fantasy football isn't 100% skill, but it certainly isn't 100% luck either.In your example, there was some skill inserted by the auto-draft process, which is basically a ranking of players by Yahoo's (or whatever site) "experts" at a certain point in time.EDIT: D'oh, should have kept reading. SSOG already made this exact point quite well.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

Please don't spam the board with links to an article you wrote on another site.

 

[xander756]

The guy that wrote this must be 0-3.

See I knew people would say this which is why I also have a series on that column tracking how my fantasy team is doing this year (which you would have seen if you took any time to bother looking at the column).I am actually 3-0, not 0-3. Here is my latest matchup:[link redacted — MT]Attempting to argue the point made in the article by falsely claiming I am 0-3 is just silly, especially when the complete opposite is true.

 

[RCon]

How about if we just make the argument that the article to which the OP links is both poorly written and wrong?

 

[footballnerd]

requires very little, if any, knowledge of the sport to win

Take away the rankings list from this guy and see how lucky he gets. Its only lucky because professionals are making it easy.

 

[habsfan]

How about if we just make the argument that the article to which the OP links is both poorly written and wrong?

I stopped at "is because". My English teacher would be mortified...

 

[xander756]

requires very little, if any, knowledge of the sport to win

Take away the rankings list from this guy and see how lucky he gets. Its only lucky because professionals are making it easy.

Since it seems you glossed over one of my previous replies in this thread, I feel I should repeat myself and inform you that I am one of those so-called "professionals." I make a living as a fantasy sports expert.

 

[duaneok66]

Article:

A major theme on this fantasy sports column this year is how much fantasy football relies on luck. No I am not talking about Colts quarterback Andrew Luck but the concept of chance.While all fantasy sports have some factor of luck to them, fantasy football is mostly luck and requires very little, if any, knowledge of the sport to win. I even have a continuing season-long series on the topic titled "fantasy football is all luck" . But why does football in particular involve so much dang luck?The reason that fantasy football is so heavily reliant on a luck factor is because players only play one game per week. Compare this to hockey where players have a game every other day or baseball where teams play every single day of the week. Luck decreases with more games played. When your team only plays one game per week, a single performance can literally make or break your entire matchup. One game from just one player could spell doom for your fantasy team.

Read full article: [link redacted — MT]What do you think of this article? Agree? Disagree? Is football more luck than other fantasy sports?

you register yesterday, ask a question this morning, and now you are defensive?nice work.

 

[xander756]

Article:

A major theme on this fantasy sports column this year is how much fantasy football relies on luck. No I am not talking about Colts quarterback Andrew Luck but the concept of chance.While all fantasy sports have some factor of luck to them, fantasy football is mostly luck and requires very little, if any, knowledge of the sport to win. I even have a continuing season-long series on the topic titled "fantasy football is all luck" . But why does football in particular involve so much dang luck?The reason that fantasy football is so heavily reliant on a luck factor is because players only play one game per week. Compare this to hockey where players have a game every other day or baseball where teams play every single day of the week. Luck decreases with more games played. When your team only plays one game per week, a single performance can literally make or break your entire matchup. One game from just one player could spell doom for your fantasy team.

Read full article: [link redacted — MT]What do you think of this article? Agree? Disagree? Is football more luck than other fantasy sports?

you register yesterday, ask a question this morning, and now you are defensive?nice work.

Defensive? Not at all. Just trying to correct people who are saying incorrect things. If you disagree with the argument put forth in the article, I am all for hearing your opinion but trying to claim I am 0-3 (which I am not) or that I only am good because of listening to experts (when I am an expert myself) have nothing to do with the article at hand.

 

[habsfan]

I actually think a great comparison is poker(which I used to play a lot of).sure, on a specific hand(week) you can lose with a great hand or win with a horrible one. In the grand scheme of things though, one hand(week) is pretty irrelevant. The object of the game is to put yourself in the best possible situation to win and then hope your cards(or players) hold up. The best fantasy football players do not win every week, but they almost always make the playoffs, unless of course they are playing against equals in skill level. people who don't play believe poker is a game of chance, but the people that play a lot know differently, same situation here.

fantasy football is a ton more luck than poker in my experience. or maybe i just suck at fantasy.

I don't play poker but one difference is that your hand "resets" constantly in poker. In FF you draft a team and whatever you did right or wrong, you deal with the impact of that all year.

 

[footballnerd]

requires very little, if any, knowledge of the sport to win

Take away the rankings list from this guy and see how lucky he gets. Its only lucky because professionals are making it easy.

Since it seems you glossed over one of my previous replies in this thread, I feel I should repeat myself and inform you that I am one of those so-called "professionals." I make a living as a fantasy sports expert.

So you admit that fantasy football "requires very little, if any, knowledge of the sport to win" is an incorrect statement since you obviously found a profession in providing "little knowledge" fans advice on how to draft and run their teams.By the way, starting Jamaal Charles after a 3 & 19 game where he was pulled due to worries about his recovering knee, finding out it was only due to a bruise when everyone is freaking out about his ACL surgery, and then starting him because he's facing a horrendous NO rushing defense....is skill.an article with the headliner claiming people with little knowledge can win since the hobby is "All luck" sounds like an 0-3 self proclaimed fantasty football professional validating himself.

 

[DoubleG]

Article:

A major theme on this fantasy sports column this year is how much fantasy football relies on luck. No I am not talking about Colts quarterback Andrew Luck but the concept of chance.

While all fantasy sports have some factor of luck to them, fantasy football is mostly luck and requires very little, if any, knowledge of the sport to win. I even have a continuing season-long series on the topic titled "fantasy football is all luck" . But why does football in particular involve so much dang luck?

The reason that fantasy football is so heavily reliant on a luck factor is because players only play one game per week. Compare this to hockey where players have a game every other day or baseball where teams play every single day of the week. Luck decreases with more games played. When your team only plays one game per week, a single performance can literally make or break your entire matchup. One game from just one player could spell doom for your fantasy team.

Read full article: http://www.examiner.com/article/fantasy-football-takes-no-skillWhat do you think of this article? Agree? Disagree? Is football more luck than other fantasy sports?

you register yesterday, ask a question this morning, and now you are defensive?

nice work.

He should fit right in. Oh - and you left out "posts a link to an article he wrote".

 

[duaneok66]

Article:

A major theme on this fantasy sports column this year is how much fantasy football relies on luck. No I am not talking about Colts quarterback Andrew Luck but the concept of chance.While all fantasy sports have some factor of luck to them, fantasy football is mostly luck and requires very little, if any, knowledge of the sport to win. I even have a continuing season-long series on the topic titled "fantasy football is all luck" . But why does football in particular involve so much dang luck?The reason that fantasy football is so heavily reliant on a luck factor is because players only play one game per week. Compare this to hockey where players have a game every other day or baseball where teams play every single day of the week. Luck decreases with more games played. When your team only plays one game per week, a single performance can literally make or break your entire matchup. One game from just one player could spell doom for your fantasy team.

Read full article: [link redacted — MT]What do you think of this article? Agree? Disagree? Is football more luck than other fantasy sports?

you register yesterday, ask a question this morning, and now you are defensive?nice work.

He should fit right in. Oh - and you left out "posts a link to an article he wrote".

my bad. I don't know what I was thinking.