How long before dailies spell the end of traditional FF? (1 Viewer)

[Koya]

I have exactly zero interest in dailies. It's props. I love football and ff - but it's the head to head tying into a season, trades, pick ups, etc which draw me in

 

[Peyton Marino]

With Fanduel, Draftkings,and similar sites moving into the mainstream at a rapid pace, combined with the general perception by many that traditional fantasy football has become "too random" ( rules/injuries/rbbcs, etc),:

How long will it be before the daily sites push the traditional FF leagues we have been playing for the past few decades to the wayside?

Are dailies just the common sense format for today's players or are we just seeing a fad?

In most of the leagues I am in, the owners I consider to be the most knowledgeable and the types that really like to mine data and get an edge in fantasy are really starting to grumble and are openly talking about putting their money in the dailies and maybe just keeping a league or two in the traditional formats.

What are you guys seeing and doing?

Never.

Dailies are for people with gambling problems.

lol

 

[John 14:6]

I have exactly zero interest in dailies. It's props. I love football and ff - but it's the head to head tying into a season, trades, pick ups, etc which draw me in

Agreed. The UPS and downs and seeing how players and teams adjust throughout the season is my favorite part of the game.

 

[Plorfu]

The small-government state of Arizona has decided we are not responsible enough to participate in daily leagues.

 

[JimmyJabroni]

I'm more into FanDuel than my league at the moment. Last season I was first in my league, points leader, and had the misfortune of playing agaist the Charles owner where he scored like 8 TD's, and a whole season of hard work was for nothing. I still like the season long format, and will continue to play in them, but I really appreciate the immediacy of the daily sports with the chance to win every week.

I wonder if it's those types of scenarios (which we all have way too many of) that tip the scale?

Especially in dynasty leagues, if you can basically devote 10 months of your year to something only to watch it burn down on one given day of bad/good luck or quirkiness, why not just get straight to it and go the daily route? Same result except its in and out in a day and move on.

I can see both sides on this.

I'm okay with it, it's part of the charm of the season long format, there has always been some luck involved...you just have to put yourself in a situation where luck is on your side more often than not...and the skilled fantasy player can do that more often than not. The same handful of people are always at the top in a lot of leagues and that's not luck. I still enjoy the season long fantasy leagues. I like having my "guys" who I drafted or picked off the waivers and riding the ups and downs with them every week. But it does hurt a little when one unlucky variable destroys a whole season, and makes it feel a little more pointless sometimes. And there are weeks where the season long format is a bit boring.

But with daily, I like that I can put a lot of effort into doing research and picking players, and if some crazy random thing happens and ruins the week, I'm back at it next week. It makes every week more exciting, having something on the line each week, trying to craft the perfect lineup to get some winnings, to cash big in a tourney or whatever.

People have always been finding ways to make football more exciting. From gambling on the games with the spread and the over/under, to fantasy football leagues, now daily fantasy. At the moment the immeciacy of the daily games are making it more exciting.

 

[The Duff Man]

Before anyone starts spending too much cash in DFS, consider the competition. It is 2-5% sharks and the rest are fish. The sharks spend 40-100 hours a week on DFS. Many use algorithms, many use computer simulations, some are math geniuses...this is their full-time job. Those millions spent on marketing are not spent to attract the sharks, they are already there, waiting. They are spent to attract the fish.

Last point I will make. I was told in person at a fantasy sports trade conference by the former CEO of a DFS company that 8% of people that play DFS make money in the long run. Those aren't the type of odds I am into.

You made a lot of great points, first and foremost might be the dangers of daily games for those with no restraint. I see weekly fantasy as gambling very similar to poker and yes you could get in trouble quickly.

But to challenge your last two points: what percentage of "sharks" play in your format? I would assume it is a much higher percent, making the barrier to entry for a "fish" very high. Unless your game relies mostly on luck (making it even more like gambling) then you are going to have sharks and fish.

The volume and percentage of fish in the daily format will be higher due to the low level of committment required and low buy in levels.

Secondly, what is the winning percent of players in your format over the "long run". I suppose your long run is difficult to define, but does it vary much from the daily percentage?

There are many valid reasons to prefer a traditional format over daily, but I disagree with the validity of your last two points.

 

[General Tso]

Like others, I equate dailies with gambling. I do fantasy football for fun, mostly for the social aspect of it.

And if I wanted to gamble, I'd gamble the traditional way and pick teams rather than players.

 

[Sudoku_in_the_Bathtub]

Then start believing in handcuffing.

 

[SYMPHONY X]

Was the other thread not good enough?

I don't think it will, daily fantasy sports are the equivalent to online poker to me. Its fueled by fish and once the fish dry up no one will be left.

Alternatively, if we keep seeing a hundred injuries a week it might be by week 6.

You absolutely nailed it. The daily fantasy gold rush will not last forever.

 

[JimmyJabroni]

Like others, I equate dailies with gambling. I do fantasy football for fun, mostly for the social aspect of it.

And if I wanted to gamble, I'd gamble the traditional way and pick teams rather than players.

Really, why?

If you were going to gamble, why wouldn't you perfer to have a little more influence over your gamble, rather than just deciding which side of the line to fall on?

 

[SeniorVBDStudent]

Whats a daily?

 

[Da Guru]

One of my leagues folded because of Fan Duel and sites like that. We had 14 teams but in a 14 team league there is not much depth and many teams are stuck cheering for marginal players. Toss in a couple of injuries and your team could be toast after 3 weeks.

Some guys wanted to change their rosters week to week and started doing the weekly games. Some guys do not want to prepare and put the time in. We lost 2 teams two years ago, two teams last year and this year the league folded. So there will always be a market.

 

[Shawn]

Wot fully die off til they make it legal in all 50 states...

 

[Fariq]

I enjoy drafting/trading and building my roster. Plus, unlike most people these days, I have an attention span of more than 5 minutes.

So, for me, never.

Dynasty leagues are far superior, imho.

I am with you but now real life is getting in the way. My wife's work schedule has some overlap with mine and my son recently started school. Sunday mornings are rough. I had to drop down to only 1 league this year- the dynasty league where I am the commissioner.

 

[Hot Diggity Dog]

I think the only experience the dailies can't replicate is the dynasty. the commercial for FanDuel says it all, Johnson gets hurt you're done for the year. what are you going to do?

 

[Shawn]

I think the only experience the dailies can't replicate is the dynasty. the commercial for FanDuel says it all, Johnson gets hurt you're done for the year. what are you going to do?

thats the problem... they make it seem like one injury can ruin uour season... but if you are proactive and good at recognizing talent you can bounce back from an injury. Heck the team in my dynasty with A. Peterson is in first place so far this season.

 

[Alex - FFPC]

Before anyone starts spending too much cash in DFS, consider the competition. It is 2-5% sharks and the rest are fish. The sharks spend 40-100 hours a week on DFS. Many use algorithms, many use computer simulations, some are math geniuses...this is their full-time job. Those millions spent on marketing are not spent to attract the sharks, they are already there, waiting. They are spent to attract the fish.

Last point I will make. I was told in person at a fantasy sports trade conference by the former CEO of a DFS company that 8% of people that play DFS make money in the long run. Those aren't the type of odds I am into.

You made a lot of great points, first and foremost might be the dangers of daily games for those with no restraint. I see weekly fantasy as gambling very similar to poker and yes you could get in trouble quickly.But to challenge your last two points: what percentage of "sharks" play in your format? I would assume it is a much higher percent, making the barrier to entry for a "fish" very high. Unless your game relies mostly on luck (making it even more like gambling) then you are going to have sharks and fish.

The volume and percentage of fish in the daily format will be higher due to the low level of committment required and low buy in levels.

Secondly, what is the winning percent of players in your format over the "long run". I suppose your long run is difficult to define, but does it vary much from the daily percentage?

There are many valid reasons to prefer a traditional format over daily, but I disagree with the validity of your last two points.

I'm Dave's (Leroy's Aces) partner and co-owner of FFPC so I'll jump into this conversation if you don't mind.

Sure, there are a lot of "sharks" in the FFPC. But the difference between a shark in season long and a shark in DFS is vast. Anyone can become a season long shark. As a matter of fact, most of the people posting here are probably season long sharks. A casual season long owner can become pretty darn close to a season long shark with some basic dedication and reading the high stakes strategy articles on Footballguys.com.

Also, a season long fish can beat a season long shark during a course of a season or in a H2H matchup. Happens all the time. The season long shark will have the advantage over the long run but it's a very slight advantage.

The DFS sharks are a whole new animal entirely. These are professionals who, as my partner described, are completely dedicated to the business of DFS. DFS sharks don't lose to DFS fish. Not short term and not long term. The outcome has been decided and the proof is in the fact that 5-8% of DFS players will make a profit.

What is the winning percentage in season long? I will be completely honest and say I really do not know. My educated guess is that it's much, much highest than 8%. Maybe in the 20% range. But keep in mind that when you enter a FFPC season long league or contest, you are potentially getting 3-4 months of enjoyment of managing your team, in addition to whatever money you may win. Season long isn't about ROI for most people. Sure, ROI is important but it isn't the driving force in season long like it is in DFS.

I will also say this, nothing I say here is meant to attack the DFS format. I am simply stating facts. I personally think that the explosion of DFS is great for season long contests like ours because DFS seems to be introducing FF owners to the excitement of pay-to-play fantasy football. But unfortunately many of them - actually most of them - will eventually lose in DFS, as the numbers show, and will come back to the season long hobby they love.

 

[RCon]

I'm walking away from redraft after this year and going strictly to Daily FF. I can't justify playing high stakes when there's so many random factors that are impossible to predict. It's maddening. It'll be sad to walk away but I'm long overdue.

I keep reading this, but the weekly variance in daily ff is even higher. I won money at fan duel last year, but it took an ungodly winning percentage to overcome the 10% vig.

Agreed. I don't get how "I dislike the randomness" equates to "So I'm switching to daily FF." Seems like it should be the opposite.

Really? With season ending injuries and suspensions, you can't see how a weekly team would minimize that?

I'm not sure dailies minimize injury randomness at all. For instance, someone who has Jamaal Charles on their season long team can replace him in the lineup for all but that first game where he got injured. If the owner was prepared and also had Davis on the roster, the ultimate outcome is a single zero in a 13 week season. In a daily, you just took a zero in a one week season. What they do is allow you to start over more quickly (next week versus next year) when you do get hit by the injury bug.

More to the point, the colossal increase in single-game performance randomness more than outweighs any real or perceived reduced randomness due to injury/suspension. Think of the random events that occur in single weeks. Your kicker got shut out versus some other kicker had seven FGs. Stephen Hill grabbed two long TDs. Antonio Gates scored three TDs one week, to be followed by one catch the next. There's much more variance in a single week than over an entire season, especially when your season long team has bench slots to build depth that account for injuries or non-performance.

 

[Shutout]

I enjoy drafting/trading and building my roster. Plus, unlike most people these days, I have an attention span of more than 5 minutes.

So, for me, never.

Dynasty leagues are far superior, imho.

I am with you but now real life is getting in the way. My wife's work schedule has some overlap with mine and my son recently started school. Sunday mornings are rough. I had to drop down to only 1 league this year- the dynasty league where I am the commissioner.

That's an interesting point. Overall, we are a moving age range for fantasy sports (we once were 21 years old playing. Some day we will be 31 and playing). As time passes, there will be times when we are more or less available for the commitments of a season long game. That may influence us, also. FOr example, I might play 5 redraft leagues this season but next year might not at all because I'm in med school and need to study.

Overall, seems like with all the things that happen in life, a lot of people might gravitate towards the short-term games over the long. Its hard to say because, up until fairly recently, the long-term is all we have really had available to us. Maybe 5 years from now, people are playing "quarter" seasons that reset. Who knows?

 

[Chapelboy]

I enjoy drafting/trading and building my roster. Plus, unlike most people these days, I have an attention span of more than 5 minutes.

So, for me, never.

Dynasty leagues are far superior, imho.

I do this for fun, not to make money. I play in zero money leagues.

I would get bored with dailies real fast. I enjoy buidling a dynasty team and trying to win that championship.

same here. my 13-year dynasty league is all about the trophy and the bragging rights.

 

[davearm]

Before anyone starts spending too much cash in DFS, consider the competition. It is 2-5% sharks and the rest are fish. The sharks spend 40-100 hours a week on DFS. Many use algorithms, many use computer simulations, some are math geniuses...this is their full-time job. Those millions spent on marketing are not spent to attract the sharks, they are already there, waiting. They are spent to attract the fish.

Last point I will make. I was told in person at a fantasy sports trade conference by the former CEO of a DFS company that 8% of people that play DFS make money in the long run. Those aren't the type of odds I am into.

You made a lot of great points, first and foremost might be the dangers of daily games for those with no restraint. I see weekly fantasy as gambling very similar to poker and yes you could get in trouble quickly.But to challenge your last two points: what percentage of "sharks" play in your format? I would assume it is a much higher percent, making the barrier to entry for a "fish" very high. Unless your game relies mostly on luck (making it even more like gambling) then you are going to have sharks and fish.

The volume and percentage of fish in the daily format will be higher due to the low level of committment required and low buy in levels.

Secondly, what is the winning percent of players in your format over the "long run". I suppose your long run is difficult to define, but does it vary much from the daily percentage?

There are many valid reasons to prefer a traditional format over daily, but I disagree with the validity of your last two points.

I'm Dave's (Leroy's Aces) partner and co-owner of FFPC so I'll jump into this conversation if you don't mind.

Sure, there are a lot of "sharks" in the FFPC. But the difference between a shark in season long and a shark in DFS is vast. Anyone can become a season long shark. As a matter of fact, most of the people posting here are probably season long sharks. A casual season long owner can become pretty darn close to a season long shark with some basic dedication and reading the high stakes strategy articles on Footballguys.com.

Also, a season long fish can beat a season long shark during a course of a season or in a H2H matchup. Happens all the time. The season long shark will have the advantage over the long run but it's a very slight advantage.

The DFS sharks are a whole new animal entirely. These are professionals who, as my partner described, are completely dedicated to the business of DFS. DFS sharks don't lose to DFS fish. Not short term and not long term. The outcome has been decided and the proof is in the fact that 5-8% of DFS players will make a profit.

What is the winning percentage in season long? I will be completely honest and say I really do not know. My educated guess is that it's much, much highest than 8%. Maybe in the 20% range. But keep in mind that when you enter a FFPC season long league or contest, you are potentially getting 3-4 months of enjoyment of managing your team, in addition to whatever money you may win. Season long isn't about ROI for most people. Sure, ROI is important but it isn't the driving force in season long like it is in DFS.

I will also say this, nothing I say here is meant to attack the DFS format. I am simply stating facts. I personally think that the explosion of DFS is great for season long contests like ours because DFS seems to be introducing FF owners to the excitement of pay-to-play fantasy football. But unfortunately many of them - actually most of them - will eventually lose in DFS, as the numbers show, and will come back to the season long hobby they love.

Perhaps I don't know DFS well enough, but the notion that a fish can't beat a shark in the short term seems completely false. Sharks don't win 100% of their games, and when they lose, it's to fishes.

 

[meatwad1]

I think the only experience the dailies can't replicate is the dynasty. the commercial for FanDuel says it all, Johnson gets hurt you're done for the year. what are you going to do?

thats the problem... they make it seem like one injury can ruin uour season... but if you are proactive and good at recognizing talent you can bounce back from an injury. Heck the team in my dynasty with A. Peterson is in first place so far this season.

I do not agree with this....if one player being out for the year, no matter who it is, kills your team, then that is your fault. Starting in week one, winning owners are busy acquiring solid bench players that will stave off that disaster. Weekly games are really risky...there is no accountability for performance over time. I would stay away from that, and I consider myself a person who spends a lot of time on fantasy. I could definitely see people having major issues losing a lot of money doing this. Plus I think it is already bigger than online poker, or will be soon. Way more people play fantasy than play serious poker.

 

[Alex - FFPC]

Before anyone starts spending too much cash in DFS, consider the competition. It is 2-5% sharks and the rest are fish. The sharks spend 40-100 hours a week on DFS. Many use algorithms, many use computer simulations, some are math geniuses...this is their full-time job. Those millions spent on marketing are not spent to attract the sharks, they are already there, waiting. They are spent to attract the fish.

Last point I will make. I was told in person at a fantasy sports trade conference by the former CEO of a DFS company that 8% of people that play DFS make money in the long run. Those aren't the type of odds I am into.

You made a lot of great points, first and foremost might be the dangers of daily games for those with no restraint. I see weekly fantasy as gambling very similar to poker and yes you could get in trouble quickly.But to challenge your last two points: what percentage of "sharks" play in your format? I would assume it is a much higher percent, making the barrier to entry for a "fish" very high. Unless your game relies mostly on luck (making it even more like gambling) then you are going to have sharks and fish.

The volume and percentage of fish in the daily format will be higher due to the low level of committment required and low buy in levels.

Secondly, what is the winning percent of players in your format over the "long run". I suppose your long run is difficult to define, but does it vary much from the daily percentage?

There are many valid reasons to prefer a traditional format over daily, but I disagree with the validity of your last two points.

I'm Dave's (Leroy's Aces) partner and co-owner of FFPC so I'll jump into this conversation if you don't mind.

Sure, there are a lot of "sharks" in the FFPC. But the difference between a shark in season long and a shark in DFS is vast. Anyone can become a season long shark. As a matter of fact, most of the people posting here are probably season long sharks. A casual season long owner can become pretty darn close to a season long shark with some basic dedication and reading the high stakes strategy articles on Footballguys.com.

Also, a season long fish can beat a season long shark during a course of a season or in a H2H matchup. Happens all the time. The season long shark will have the advantage over the long run but it's a very slight advantage.

The DFS sharks are a whole new animal entirely. These are professionals who, as my partner described, are completely dedicated to the business of DFS. DFS sharks don't lose to DFS fish. Not short term and not long term. The outcome has been decided and the proof is in the fact that 5-8% of DFS players will make a profit.

What is the winning percentage in season long? I will be completely honest and say I really do not know. My educated guess is that it's much, much highest than 8%. Maybe in the 20% range. But keep in mind that when you enter a FFPC season long league or contest, you are potentially getting 3-4 months of enjoyment of managing your team, in addition to whatever money you may win. Season long isn't about ROI for most people. Sure, ROI is important but it isn't the driving force in season long like it is in DFS.

I will also say this, nothing I say here is meant to attack the DFS format. I am simply stating facts. I personally think that the explosion of DFS is great for season long contests like ours because DFS seems to be introducing FF owners to the excitement of pay-to-play fantasy football. But unfortunately many of them - actually most of them - will eventually lose in DFS, as the numbers show, and will come back to the season long hobby they love.

Perhaps I don't know DFS well enough, but the notion that a fish can't beat a shark in the short term seems completely false. Sharks don't win 100% of their games, and when they lose, it's to fishes.

You're right. It's probably not "all" the time. Quite frankly, it's hard to put a real number on this to begin with. But guess what, even if losing 60% of the time (and I know that number is higher), the fish have no chance.

 

[meatwad1]

I think the only experience the dailies can't replicate is the dynasty. the commercial for FanDuel says it all, Johnson gets hurt you're done for the year. what are you going to do?

thats the problem... they make it seem like one injury can ruin uour season... but if you are proactive and good at recognizing talent you can bounce back from an injury. Heck the team in my dynasty with A. Peterson is in first place so far this season.

I do not agree with this....if one player being out for the year, no matter who it is, kills your team, then that is your fault. Starting in week one, winning owners are busy acquiring solid bench players that will stave off that disaster. Weekly games are really risky...there is no accountability for performance over time. I would stay away from that, and I consider myself a person who spends a lot of time on fantasy. I could definitely see people having major issues losing a lot of money doing this. Plus I think it is already bigger than online poker, or will be soon. Way more people play fantasy than play serious poker.

Also I will add that there is way more variation in this versus a deck of cards you are playing from....when you say 8 - 10% of people win, I believe that. I would however like to know the winning formula to this...It has to be something simple like always pick guys with a high floor versus guys who fluctuate week to week.

 

[Pipes]

I think the only experience the dailies can't replicate is the dynasty. the commercial for FanDuel says it all, Johnson gets hurt you're done for the year. what are you going to do?

thats the problem... they make it seem like one injury can ruin uour season... but if you are proactive and good at recognizing talent you can bounce back from an injury. Heck the team in my dynasty with A. Peterson is in first place so far this season.

I do not agree with this....if one player being out for the year, no matter who it is, kills your team, then that is your fault. Starting in week one, winning owners are busy acquiring solid bench players that will stave off that disaster. Weekly games are really risky...there is no accountability for performance over time. I would stay away from that, and I consider myself a person who spends a lot of time on fantasy. I could definitely see people having major issues losing a lot of money doing this. Plus I think it is already bigger than online poker, or will be soon. Way more people play fantasy than play serious poker.

In 16 team leagues if you lose your top pick, while it's not over, is extremely difficult to come back from. Figure most teams roster 5 RB's that makes 80 RB's rostered so pick up someone for AP is tough. Guys like Asiata, Blue, Crowell, Rainey and Hill...just to name a few were all drafted. About the only RB that has done anything, that was available on our waiver wire has been Taliaferro and there were 6 claims put in for him so if you won week 1 you had no chance for him. It's not easy acquiring depth in a 16 team redraft league.

 

[BassNBrew]

I think the only experience the dailies can't replicate is the dynasty. the commercial for FanDuel says it all, Johnson gets hurt you're done for the year. what are you going to do?

thats the problem... they make it seem like one injury can ruin uour season... but if you are proactive and good at recognizing talent you can bounce back from an injury. Heck the team in my dynasty with A. Peterson is in first place so far this season.

I do not agree with this....if one player being out for the year, no matter who it is, kills your team, then that is your fault. Starting in week one, winning owners are busy acquiring solid bench players that will stave off that disaster. Weekly games are really risky...there is no accountability for performance over time. I would stay away from that, and I consider myself a person who spends a lot of time on fantasy. I could definitely see people having major issues losing a lot of money doing this. Plus I think it is already bigger than online poker, or will be soon. Way more people play fantasy than play serious poker.

Also I will add that there is way more variation in this versus a deck of cards you are playing from....when you say 8 - 10% of people win, I believe that. I would however like to know the winning formula to this...It has to be something simple like always pick guys with a high floor versus guys who fluctuate week to week.

Basically it involves projecting stats better than the masses or using someone's projections that are better then the masses. Then you run a program to optimize $ values to expected point production to spit out potential lineups. The sharks will roll out several optimized lineups to reduce variance.

For 50/50s you want to factor in low floor guys and for tourney's high ceiling guys.

 

[BassNBrew]

When thinking about this topic, don't get skewed by the number of people saying they are reducing there season long leagues. As people get older the will play in fewer leagues. There's a natural progression where we start playing one league and keeping ramping up to a peak number of leagues before downsizing. While you and you friends may be trending down as you age, there's a whole new group of people just entering the early stages of their fantasy career.

 

[Shutout]

When thinking about this topic, don't get skewed by the number of people saying they are reducing there season long leagues. As people get older the will play in fewer leagues. There's a natural progression where we start playing one league and keeping ramping up to a peak number of leagues before downsizing. While you and you friends may be trending down as you age, there's a whole new group of people just entering the early stages of their fantasy career.

YOu calling us old? LOL.

Good point. I think that is certainly true. I only know one guy who is past 35 or so and still increasing the numbers of leagues he plays.

 

[Pantherz]

I've personally never done a daily league, but have friends that live by them. I've helped them come up with weekly rosters a few times and while I really enjoyed it--I just would never be interested in investing my own money into doing dailies when the rake is in the neighborhood of 10%. If the rake was closer to 5 or even 7% I would definitely have a much easier time justifying messing with dailies.

Back in the day I used to occasionally gamble on sports through a bookie. Usually Superbowl, World Series, etc. If memory serves me correctly I would bet $100 and win $90 if I won. Basically you paid the rake if you won. I considered that a 10% vig. Now with these dailies if I play H2H I put up $1 and win $.80. Isn't this 20%?

I love playing at Fanduel but when is someone going to offer smaller rakes. They have basically no risk except on Guaranteed Prize Pools not filling, which is very rare.

 

[Long Ball Larry]

I think the only experience the dailies can't replicate is the dynasty. the commercial for FanDuel says it all, Johnson gets hurt you're done for the year. what are you going to do?

thats the problem... they make it seem like one injury can ruin uour season... but if you are proactive and good at recognizing talent you can bounce back from an injury. Heck the team in my dynasty with A. Peterson is in first place so far this season.

I do not agree with this....if one player being out for the year, no matter who it is, kills your team, then that is your fault. Starting in week one, winning owners are busy acquiring solid bench players that will stave off that disaster. Weekly games are really risky...there is no accountability for performance over time. I would stay away from that, and I consider myself a person who spends a lot of time on fantasy. I could definitely see people having major issues losing a lot of money doing this. Plus I think it is already bigger than online poker, or will be soon. Way more people play fantasy than play serious poker.

Also I will add that there is way more variation in this versus a deck of cards you are playing from....when you say 8 - 10% of people win, I believe that. I would however like to know the winning formula to this...It has to be something simple like always pick guys with a high floor versus guys who fluctuate week to week.

Basically it involves projecting stats better than the masses or using someone's projections that are better then the masses. Then you run a program to optimize $ values to expected point production to spit out potential lineups. The sharks will roll out several optimized lineups to reduce variance.

For 50/50s you want to factor in low floor guys and for tourney's high ceiling guys.

theoretically, if you take Dodds's or Paulsen's rankings and play them over the course of the season, wouldn't you come out ahead for the year? If they are right a little over 60% of the time (though I'm not 100% sure what those accuracy ratings measure), then you would come out ahead.

 

[Spike]

I enjoy drafting/trading and building my roster. Plus, unlike most people these days, I have an attention span of more than 5 minutes.

So, for me, never.

Dynasty leagues are far superior, imho.

I do this for fun, not to make money. I play in zero money leagues.

I would get bored with dailies real fast. I enjoy buidling a dynasty team and trying to win that championship.

+1

 

[Todem]

Dynasty leagues are my love.....redrafts? I do just one....and may finally let that go and try out Fandual next year.

 

[Shutout]

I enjoy drafting/trading and building my roster. Plus, unlike most people these days, I have an attention span of more than 5 minutes.

So, for me, never.

Dynasty leagues are far superior, imho.

I do this for fun, not to make money. I play in zero money leagues.

I would get bored with dailies real fast. I enjoy buidling a dynasty team and trying to win that championship.

+1

Do you get bored when it's week 5 and your team is in the gutter due to injuries and busts, etc, and you have 2 and 1/2 months left with nothing to do except spend your time grinding away at something you have no shot at?

I realize that sounds sarcastic but I don't mean it to be. It's a serious question. For people in large dynasties where waiver wire pickings are almost non-existent and you are running the risk of toppling your entire team for years due to a short-term crisis, what happens when you have the majority of the season left to play but your hands are tied on the particular year you are in?

 

[The Duff Man]

Thanks for the replies Alex.

I still think that fish will mostly lose to sharks over the long and short term regardless of format so I dont see this as a knock on either.

But as mentioned, I do agree it is easy to lose a LOT of money quickly with daily play chasing a big score.

 

[Warrior]

Dailies aren't even related to fantasy football in my mind. They're much closer to sports betting.

In fantasy, you own a team through a player's ups and downs, you test your negotiation skills, and you think hard about long (or medium) term outcomes of each decision.

Playing in dailies is like doing a calculus problem. All you care about is the value/dollar and you simply have to crunch the numbers and you'll win in the long term (probably less than the ridiculous 10% they shave off the top)

Playing real fantasy leagues is like being a mini GM. It's an art form and you take pride in the team you build over the season (or many seasons in dynasty).

Night and day. Math problem vs art form.

 

[RushHour]

As some have pointed out, DFS is nothing but sports gambling in another name. The whole reason these sites have popped up everywhere is to get around gambling restrictions in the US. You might say it's not gambling and that you have more control over the outcome but that's what high level sports bettors would say about sports betting vs something completely random - your knowledge gives you an edge. Someone said that there are sharks making a living out of this using algorithms and maths, which is exactly what happens in Vegas all the time, while Joe Average gets sucked into thinking they can win too.

I have nothing against gambling myself and used to do it quite a bit in the past, but I just think it's funny that most people equate DFS as primarily being about fantasy football, rather than about gambling. You setting a sharky daily lineup and losing because some random player went off or your expensive stud got injured isn't much different to handicapping a game in depth, then losing on the spread by half a point because the other team got a pick 6 with 30 secs left to cover.

 

[BassNBrew]

I think the only experience the dailies can't replicate is the dynasty. the commercial for FanDuel says it all, Johnson gets hurt you're done for the year. what are you going to do?

thats the problem... they make it seem like one injury can ruin uour season... but if you are proactive and good at recognizing talent you can bounce back from an injury. Heck the team in my dynasty with A. Peterson is in first place so far this season.

I do not agree with this....if one player being out for the year, no matter who it is, kills your team, then that is your fault. Starting in week one, winning owners are busy acquiring solid bench players that will stave off that disaster. Weekly games are really risky...there is no accountability for performance over time. I would stay away from that, and I consider myself a person who spends a lot of time on fantasy. I could definitely see people having major issues losing a lot of money doing this. Plus I think it is already bigger than online poker, or will be soon. Way more people play fantasy than play serious poker.

Also I will add that there is way more variation in this versus a deck of cards you are playing from....when you say 8 - 10% of people win, I believe that. I would however like to know the winning formula to this...It has to be something simple like always pick guys with a high floor versus guys who fluctuate week to week.

Basically it involves projecting stats better than the masses or using someone's projections that are better then the masses. Then you run a program to optimize $ values to expected point production to spit out potential lineups. The sharks will roll out several optimized lineups to reduce variance.

For 50/50s you want to factor in low floor guys and for tourney's high ceiling guys.

theoretically, if you take Dodds's or Paulsen's rankings and play them over the course of the season, wouldn't you come out ahead for the year? If they are right a little over 60% of the time (though I'm not 100% sure what those accuracy ratings measure), then you would come out ahead.

I came out ahead last year using Dodd's projections. I was only risking $30 to $50 a week on roughly 15-20 50/50s and one or two tourneys. The end result was grinding out roughly $5 a week profit on average for a lot of work. It was cool to follow the games, but I spent a lot of time for very a small return. I didn't have the capital or risk tolerance to play more. It was also a huge pain to monitor everything prior to kickoff on Sunday for late scratches. That said, making those changes when others didn't probably help me beat the rake. Usually I'd find one of two people per 50/50 that had selected players that weren't playing that week.

 

[Grimace59]

Tried the Daily's on Fanduel, but after two weeks I'm already bored with them. Still prefer dynasty with all the control we get over teams, also they don't do IDP. Team Def is no fun for me.

 

[meatwad1]

I think the only experience the dailies can't replicate is the dynasty. the commercial for FanDuel says it all, Johnson gets hurt you're done for the year. what are you going to do?

thats the problem... they make it seem like one injury can ruin uour season... but if you are proactive and good at recognizing talent you can bounce back from an injury. Heck the team in my dynasty with A. Peterson is in first place so far this season.

I do not agree with this....if one player being out for the year, no matter who it is, kills your team, then that is your fault. Starting in week one, winning owners are busy acquiring solid bench players that will stave off that disaster. Weekly games are really risky...there is no accountability for performance over time. I would stay away from that, and I consider myself a person who spends a lot of time on fantasy. I could definitely see people having major issues losing a lot of money doing this. Plus I think it is already bigger than online poker, or will be soon. Way more people play fantasy than play serious poker.

In 16 team leagues if you lose your top pick, while it's not over, is extremely difficult to come back from. Figure most teams roster 5 RB's that makes 80 RB's rostered so pick up someone for AP is tough. Guys like Asiata, Blue, Crowell, Rainey and Hill...just to name a few were all drafted. About the only RB that has done anything, that was available on our waiver wire has been Taliaferro and there were 6 claims put in for him so if you won week 1 you had no chance for him. It's not easy acquiring depth in a 16 team redraft league.

Yeah...most people play in 10 - 12 team leagues. I for certain concede that in a 16 team league it would stink. One of my leagues is a 14 teamer and it sucks when somebody goes down.

 

[menobrown]

Daily games are glorified WDIS decisions.

 

[Tool]

Nothing beats the satisfaction of winning the league title.

 

[leftcoastguy7]

Is there a reason The Audible has to be sponsored by FanDuel?

Doesn't FBGs make enough money they can sponsor the podcast on their own?

 

[thatguythere]

I came out ahead last year using Dodd's projections. I was only risking $30 to $50 a week on roughly 15-20 50/50s and one or two tourneys. The end result was grinding out roughly $5 a week profit on average for a lot of work. It was cool to follow the games, but I spent a lot of time for very a small return. I didn't have the capital or risk tolerance to play more. It was also a huge pain to monitor everything prior to kickoff on Sunday for late scratches. That said, making those changes when others didn't probably help me beat the rake. Usually I'd find one of two people per 50/50 that had selected players that weren't playing that week.

I used Tremblay's sheets last year and ended up ahead myself. Won 350 on a $1 bet and 750 on a $2 bet in the last week of play. Like you, I normally only play maybe 30ish a week.

I'm down to one redraft league, a 10 team league. I lost all four drafted RB's in week one. Tate, Martin, Ellington, and MJD. What are the odds of that. Pretty sickening. It's an okay league but lots of old school guys who pick their players and ride them all year no matter what. Hardly any trades, and changing the rules is like pulling teeth. I will stay in this one just because it has been so long with the same guys. I dropped another redraft and 2 FFPC teams for the daily's. I figure if I spend the 365 entry fee I should be able to make something.

 

[Marauder]

Thanks for the replies Alex.

I still think that fish will mostly lose to sharks over the long and short term regardless of format so I dont see this as a knock on either.

But as mentioned, I do agree it is easy to lose a LOT of money quickly with daily play chasing a big score.

Yes, the fish will always lose in the long run regardless of the format. The difference though, is the professional daily players each play thousands of contests every week. So, a relatively small number of professional players monopolize a large percentage of the action. This, along with the large rake, make it tough for even good players to make a profit over the long run in dailies.

 

[Peyton Marino]

do you guys have data to support the claims you're making in here?

 

[Shutout]

Nothing beats the satisfaction of winning the league title.

I don't know. If I won 10 grand on fanduel I'd probably be just as happy as I would be having won a crapshoot fantasy title.

 

[Bobby Guano]

Thanks for the replies Alex.

I still think that fish will mostly lose to sharks over the long and short term regardless of format so I dont see this as a knock on either.

But as mentioned, I do agree it is easy to lose a LOT of money quickly with daily play chasing a big score.

Yes, the fish will always lose in the long run regardless of the format. The difference though, is the professional daily players each play thousands of contests every week. So, a relatively small number of professional players monopolize a large percentage of the action. This, along with the large rake, make it tough for even good players to make a profit over the long run in dailies.

Also I noticed with the daily games it gets harder as the season progresses...the pond gets smaller and smaller each week. I plopped down 20 bucks on fanduel last year and played on that till week 12 or so and eventually got burnt out on the time/research investment it requires to be profitable.

Daily games are a whole different animal from your longstanding leagues with friends and family. It will never replace seasonal leagues for me they are two completely different things.

 

[ponchsox]

Traditional FF for me or nothing. Playing with a bunch of strangers does nothing for me. I love traditional playing fantasy football with friends every year.

 

[JimmyJabroni]

Traditional FF for me or nothing. Playing with a bunch of strangers does nothing for me. I love traditional playing fantasy football with friends every year.

I guess a lot of people aren't aware, but you can play with your friends in daily. You can create your own contest for friends only and design what kind of contest and amount you want to play for. You could take your whole league and play there.

 

[BassNBrew]

do you guys have data to support the claims you're making in here?

Which claims?