Shark pool DFS opinion poll (1 Viewer)

[Interseptopus]

DFS is one of the hotter topics in this forum that people seem to feel strongly about, or at least have an opinion one way or another

There's the amount of advirtising, scandals, and the amount professional DFS-ers has swayed some people's opinions, but not at all.

It's also one of the biggest frontiers of fantasy sports that a lot of people find very enjoyable and challenging. Not to mention profitable in some cases.

This question was posed by a football guy staffer in a different thread and I thought it was a very interesting question. What better way to answer it than to start a poll.

Feel free to comment on your selection or just discuss whatever you like about DFS

 

[renesauz]

It's bringing far too much negative attention and could make a significant and negative impact on the season long game we've all come to love.

I also see it as closer to traditional sports gambling, which is illegal in many places. I know not everyone agrees, but the season long game including numerous moves, trades, transactions, etc. might be gambling, but is not remotely similar to the single game bet that lawmakers (and wives) view as "gambling."

ETA: Plus... the advertising has been absolutely over the top obnoxious and annoying.

 

[Arodin]

I also see it as closer to traditional sports gambling, which is illegal in many places. I know not everyone agrees, but the season long game including numerous moves, trades, transactions, etc. might be gambling, but is not remotely similar to the single game bet that lawmakers (and wives) view as "gambling."

Agree with this. DFS feels more like prop betting than "fantasy sports." Fantasy sports has the whole "fantasy" element of simulating actual team management, roster construction, drafting, dealing, signing FAs, etc. Not a perfect sim, but as good or better than Strat-o-Matic (or Madden).

DFS is just "I think this guy will score more pts/$ than the other guys." Projections apply to both formats, but not much else. Is there strategy in DFS?

 

[Interseptopus]

I also see it as closer to traditional sports gambling, which is illegal in many places. I know not everyone agrees, but the season long game including numerous moves, trades, transactions, etc. might be gambling, but is not remotely similar to the single game bet that lawmakers (and wives) view as "gambling."

Agree with this. DFS feels more like prop betting than "fantasy sports." Fantasy sports has the whole "fantasy" element of simulating actual team management, roster construction, drafting, dealing, signing FAs, etc. Not a perfect sim, but as good or better than Strat-o-Matic (or Madden).

DFS is just "I think this guy will score more pts/$ than the other guys." Projections apply to both formats, but not much else. Is there strategy in DFS?

I'd argue yes. There was a story in the WSJ not long ago talking about an individual who makes a lot of money running algorhythms on his computer and updating his projections daily to pick the right players. There's a reason 2% of the players win 80% of the money (or whatever that ridiculous stat is, I may be wrong on exact numbers)

 

[renesauz]

I also see it as closer to traditional sports gambling, which is illegal in many places. I know not everyone agrees, but the season long game including numerous moves, trades, transactions, etc. might be gambling, but is not remotely similar to the single game bet that lawmakers (and wives) view as "gambling."

Agree with this. DFS feels more like prop betting than "fantasy sports." Fantasy sports has the whole "fantasy" element of simulating actual team management, roster construction, drafting, dealing, signing FAs, etc. Not a perfect sim, but as good or better than Strat-o-Matic (or Madden).

DFS is just "I think this guy will score more pts/$ than the other guys." Projections apply to both formats, but not much else. Is there strategy in DFS?

I'd argue yes. There was a story in the WSJ not long ago talking about an individual who makes a lot of money running algorhythms on his computer and updating his projections daily to pick the right players. There's a reason 2% of the players win 80% of the money (or whatever that ridiculous stat is, I may be wrong on exact numbers)

Isn't this just another great reason to be against DFS? It's certainly garnering a ton of negative attention and publicity, and could adversely affect the rest of us

 

[LawFitz]

The smaller scope of DFS makes it more prone to habitual, amplified and destructive betting patterns (i.e. addiction) by players.

The large scale of prizes and the idea that many weeks are likely determined by individual performances at the margins, particularly on Monday nights, makes it more prone to corrupting sportsmen or officials.

These two factors are what separate it from seasonal fantasy sports bets and why it should be legally treated exactly like traditional sports gambling, in each jurisdiction.

 

[Interseptopus]

I also see it as closer to traditional sports gambling, which is illegal in many places. I know not everyone agrees, but the season long game including numerous moves, trades, transactions, etc. might be gambling, but is not remotely similar to the single game bet that lawmakers (and wives) view as "gambling."

Agree with this. DFS feels more like prop betting than "fantasy sports." Fantasy sports has the whole "fantasy" element of simulating actual team management, roster construction, drafting, dealing, signing FAs, etc. Not a perfect sim, but as good or better than Strat-o-Matic (or Madden).

DFS is just "I think this guy will score more pts/$ than the other guys." Projections apply to both formats, but not much else. Is there strategy in DFS?

I'd argue yes. There was a story in the WSJ not long ago talking about an individual who makes a lot of money running algorhythms on his computer and updating his projections daily to pick the right players. There's a reason 2% of the players win 80% of the money (or whatever that ridiculous stat is, I may be wrong on exact numbers)

Isn't this just another great reason to be against DFS? It's certainly garnering a ton of negative attention and publicity, and could adversely affect the rest of us

If people openly know this information, or if it's readily available to people, and yet they still play, then is it really our concern what they do with their own money?

I'm not pro DFS, rather just trying to discuss the other side of the issue

 

[Kevrunner]

You can have algorithms but still every person playing in DFS gets to choose from the same player pool, with the same salary cap, almost like buying a lottery ticket. But you still need to be up to date on the latest player news. I'm sure there are a lot of DFS players who don't pay attention and start players who aren't active that day or are injured. The more lineups you play, the better chance you have to win. People love to gamble, nothing wrong with that. I think seasonal fantasy is totally different but the more knowledgeable you are in seasonal will be a big help if you play DFS.

 

[renesauz]

The smaller scope of DFS makes it more prone to habitual, amplified and destructive betting patterns (i.e. addiction) by players.

The large scale of prizes and the idea that many weeks are likely determined by individual performances at the margins, particularly on Monday nights, makes it more prone to corrupting sportsmen or officials.

These two factors are what separate it from seasonal fantasy sports bets and why it should be legally treated exactly like traditional sports gambling, in each jurisdiction.

Well stated

 

[renesauz]

I also see it as closer to traditional sports gambling, which is illegal in many places. I know not everyone agrees, but the season long game including numerous moves, trades, transactions, etc. might be gambling, but is not remotely similar to the single game bet that lawmakers (and wives) view as "gambling."

Agree with this. DFS feels more like prop betting than "fantasy sports." Fantasy sports has the whole "fantasy" element of simulating actual team management, roster construction, drafting, dealing, signing FAs, etc. Not a perfect sim, but as good or better than Strat-o-Matic (or Madden).

DFS is just "I think this guy will score more pts/$ than the other guys." Projections apply to both formats, but not much else. Is there strategy in DFS?

I'd argue yes. There was a story in the WSJ not long ago talking about an individual who makes a lot of money running algorhythms on his computer and updating his projections daily to pick the right players. There's a reason 2% of the players win 80% of the money (or whatever that ridiculous stat is, I may be wrong on exact numbers)

Isn't this just another great reason to be against DFS? It's certainly garnering a ton of negative attention and publicity, and could adversely affect the rest of us

If people openly know this information, or if it's readily available to people, and yet they still play, then is it really our concern what they do with their own money?

I'm not pro DFS, rather just trying to discuss the other side of the issue

That's the same argument people make for any other type of (legal AND illegal) gambling. It's not a terrible argument, but is better applied to gambling as a whole than to this specific discussion.

 

[3nOut]

I also see it as closer to traditional sports gambling, which is illegal in many places. I know not everyone agrees, but the season long game including numerous moves, trades, transactions, etc. might be gambling, but is not remotely similar to the single game bet that lawmakers (and wives) view as "gambling."

Agree with this. DFS feels more like prop betting than "fantasy sports." Fantasy sports has the whole "fantasy" element of simulating actual team management, roster construction, drafting, dealing, signing FAs, etc. Not a perfect sim, but as good or better than Strat-o-Matic (or Madden).

DFS is just "I think this guy will score more pts/$ than the other guys." Projections apply to both formats, but not much else. Is there strategy in DFS?

I'd argue yes. There was a story in the WSJ not long ago talking about an individual who makes a lot of money running algorhythms on his computer and updating his projections daily to pick the right players. There's a reason 2% of the players win 80% of the money (or whatever that ridiculous stat is, I may be wrong on exact numbers)

Maybe the reason is that some people spend a lot more money each week on DFS than others. They have numerous entries in a single contest. They play a lot to win a lot. That's professional gambling. It would be more fun and may be more fair if every game allowed only one entry per person. And not just the low stakes ones. I wonder what % of gamblers win 80% of the money on a given day in a casino.

 

[Interseptopus]

The smaller scope of DFS makes it more prone to habitual, amplified and destructive betting patterns (i.e. addiction) by players.

The large scale of prizes and the idea that many weeks are likely determined by individual performances at the margins, particularly on Monday nights, makes it more prone to corrupting sportsmen or officials.

These two factors are what separate it from seasonal fantasy sports bets and why it should be legally treated exactly like traditional sports gambling, in each jurisdiction.

Well stated

I'd agree, I think this is a pretty good statement

 

[Interseptopus]

I also see it as closer to traditional sports gambling, which is illegal in many places. I know not everyone agrees, but the season long game including numerous moves, trades, transactions, etc. might be gambling, but is not remotely similar to the single game bet that lawmakers (and wives) view as "gambling."

Agree with this. DFS feels more like prop betting than "fantasy sports." Fantasy sports has the whole "fantasy" element of simulating actual team management, roster construction, drafting, dealing, signing FAs, etc. Not a perfect sim, but as good or better than Strat-o-Matic (or Madden).

DFS is just "I think this guy will score more pts/$ than the other guys." Projections apply to both formats, but not much else. Is there strategy in DFS?

I'd argue yes. There was a story in the WSJ not long ago talking about an individual who makes a lot of money running algorhythms on his computer and updating his projections daily to pick the right players. There's a reason 2% of the players win 80% of the money (or whatever that ridiculous stat is, I may be wrong on exact numbers)

Maybe the reason is that some people spend a lot more money each week on DFS than others. They have numerous entries in a single contest. They play a lot to win a lot. That's professional gambling. It would be more fun and may be more fair if every game allowed only one entry per person. And not just the low stakes ones. I wonder what % of gamblers win 80% of the money on a given day in a casino.

How would that be possible? I like the idea and I think it would make the playing field much more fairMaybe a SSN per account? Idk

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Of course every account is linked to a SSN. The sites send out 1099s to the winners.

There are lots of contest that limit people to one entry. Those typically aren't the popular contests.

There's a weird thing that occurs a lot with DFS. Somebody will suggest that sites should lower the rake instead of spending so much money on advertising. Well, there are sites with zero rake that don't advertise -- but hardly anyone plays at them, invariably including the person making the suggestion. Or someone will say that sites should severely limit the number of entries a player can submit in a given contest. Well, there are many single-entry contests -- but again, they're not the ones the person making the suggestion plays in.

It's a little weird, I think, to say that a site should do this instead of that -- but then to go ahead and give all of your business to the sites that do that instead of this. But it seems very common.

 

[DoubleG]

I also see it as closer to traditional sports gambling, which is illegal in many places. I know not everyone agrees, but the season long game including numerous moves, trades, transactions, etc. might be gambling, but is not remotely similar to the single game bet that lawmakers (and wives) view as "gambling."

Agree with this. DFS feels more like prop betting than "fantasy sports." Fantasy sports has the whole "fantasy" element of simulating actual team management, roster construction, drafting, dealing, signing FAs, etc. Not a perfect sim, but as good or better than Strat-o-Matic (or Madden).

DFS is just "I think this guy will score more pts/$ than the other guys." Projections apply to both formats, but not much else. Is there strategy in DFS?

I'd argue yes. There was a story in the WSJ not long ago talking about an individual who makes a lot of money running algorhythms on his computer and updating his projections daily to pick the right players. There's a reason 2% of the players win 80% of the money (or whatever that ridiculous stat is, I may be wrong on exact numbers)

Isn't this just another great reason to be against DFS? It's certainly garnering a ton of negative attention and publicity, and could adversely affect the rest of us

Yes, it is.

 

[Steeler]

I get the need for another thread to post the poll - but so far this is just another circle jerk for people who don't like DFS.

 

[need2know]

I love it. I do it every week and win most of the time. It has replaced traditional fantasy for me and given me a lot more free time. Hope it stays around

 

[jandyt]

I enjoy it but can see a lot of negatives with it as well. I think it should be regulated but not eliminated. As for the ads, I think some of them are awful but I pretty much ignore ads so I really could care less.

 

[[icon]]

Hit them with the liquor penalty... Limit advertising tremendously so we don't have to swim in that ####

 

[eoMMan]

I don't understand your question. Opinion in what way? How I feel about playing DFS? How I feel about the way the DFS companies are operating or advertising?

 

[FUBAR]

I also see it as closer to traditional sports gambling, which is illegal in many places. I know not everyone agrees, but the season long game including numerous moves, trades, transactions, etc. might be gambling, but is not remotely similar to the single game bet that lawmakers (and wives) view as "gambling."

Agree with this. DFS feels more like prop betting than "fantasy sports." Fantasy sports has the whole "fantasy" element of simulating actual team management, roster construction, drafting, dealing, signing FAs, etc. Not a perfect sim, but as good or better than Strat-o-Matic (or Madden).

DFS is just "I think this guy will score more pts/$ than the other guys." Projections apply to both formats, but not much else. Is there strategy in DFS?

I'd argue yes. There was a story in the WSJ not long ago talking about an individual who makes a lot of money running algorhythms on his computer and updating his projections daily to pick the right players. There's a reason 2% of the players win 80% of the money (or whatever that ridiculous stat is, I may be wrong on exact numbers)

Isn't this just another great reason to be against DFS? It's certainly garnering a ton of negative attention and publicity, and could adversely affect the rest of us

If people openly know this information, or if it's readily available to people, and yet they still play, then is it really our concern what they do with their own money?

I'm not pro DFS, rather just trying to discuss the other side of the issue

That's the same argument people make for any other type of (legal AND illegal) gambling. It's not a terrible argument, but is better applied to gambling as a whole than to this specific discussion.

Right. I don't see much difference between poker and DFS. There is some skill involved but ultimately you're not in control of the cards you're dealt or what happens on the field.

 

[bagger]

Interesting 2/3 do not have a positive opinion of DFS on a fantasy football message board with the current results.

 

[Soulfly3]

neutral.

played it. enjoyed it for a short period.

but it's definitely scummy, and I clearly no longer trust the veracity of the sites.

 

[cheese]

Biggest problem is it really hurt season long. Not sure about you guys, but we struggle to get people to respond to trades now because they're busy submitting 200 cash game lineups. Kinda doubt some of these season long leagues fill next year. I am playing Dfs because that's all anyone is still interested in. Oh well, genie is out of the bottle. It's not going back to how it was before so might as well adapt.

 

[Interseptopus]

I enjoy it but can see a lot of negatives with it as well. I think it should be regulated but not eliminated. As for the ads, I think some of them are awful but I pretty much ignore ads so I really could care less.

Couldn'tSorry, pet peeve. Same as "for all intensive purposes" *shudder*

 

[Interseptopus]

33 positive

11 neutral

64 negative

As of now. Interesting. I would have thought more positives. Almost a 2:1 ratio for negative

 

[Mario Kart]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mq785nJ0FXQ

 

[beef]

dfs is a scam. the idea and game could be legit, but the companies running them are a total scam. to fbg for supporting the scam or being too stupid to realize that it is a scam. shame on you fbgs, shame on you.

 

[Adam Harstad]

I enjoy it but can see a lot of negatives with it as well. I think it should be regulated but not eliminated. As for the ads, I think some of them are awful but I pretty much ignore ads so I really could care less.

Couldn'tSorry, pet peeve. Same as "for all intensive purposes" *shudder*

"I could care less" works fine. The original formulation was almost certainly "couldn't", but "could" scans fine if you think of it in a sarcastic, almost Yiddish sense. Think: "I should be so lucky!"

The other way to read it would be with an implied ellipsis. For example, "I could care less... but it would be exceedingly difficult to do so". Think of it as an understated version of "I suppose it is theoretically within the realm of imagination for me to possibly care less than I do right now."

 

[Adam Harstad]

dfs is a scam. the idea and game could be legit, but the companies running them are a total scam. to fbg for supporting the scam or being too stupid to realize that it is a scam. shame on you fbgs, shame on you.

In what way is it a scam?

 

[jvdesigns2002]

dfs is a scam. the idea and game could be legit, but the companies running them are a total scam. to fbg for supporting the scam or being too stupid to realize that it is a scam. shame on you fbgs, shame on you.

In what way is it a scam?

Possibly spending billions of dollars falsely advertising that it's super easy for anybody to win at DFS --when the numbers show that something like the top 2% of players win 90+% percent of total prize pools. I think the thing that a lot of us in the Shark Pool seem to forget is who exactly the ads on TV are targeting. Generally speaking--I'd imagine that the vast majority of people that post on the Shark Pool are pretty solid/experienced fantasy players that understand the odds of winning at DFS--and understand the tools/efforts required to be successful at DFS. The ads probably aren't going to "trick" us-- as we generally know what we would be getting into. However--the real issue would be for the person who has zero experience in fantasy sports--that watches the ads/infomericals and thinks he/she has a great shot at winning--when the reality has proven to show that the odds of success for them is nominal at best. To many people-this would qualify as being a scam.

 

[cheese]

The top 2% win 90% of money is more misleading than any number DFS companies have ever given you.

 

[jvdesigns2002]

The top 2% win 90% of money is more misleading than any number DFS companies have ever given you.

Really? Maybe you should read the Bloomberg article about DFS. Here is a paragraph from it:

These limits seem almost laughably nonrestrictive until you understand how top players operate. Analysis from Rotogrinders conducted for Bloomberg shows that the top 100 ranked players enter 330 winning lineups per day, and the top 10 players combine to win an average of 873 times daily. The remaining field of approximately 20,000 players tracked by Rotogrinders wins just 13 times per day, on average.

 

[KellysHeroes]

I think FBG shouldn't bother with daily stuff, they should keep their focus on what made them popular... Dynasty and traditional Redraft style fantasy football. This is the premier site when I want information about Dynasty FF and future rookies. It also a fantastic site when it comes to traditional redraft format, giving me heads up about a part of a schedule or effects of an injury. Theres probably only 1 or 2 sites on the web that gives FBG competition when it comes to that material.

When it comes to DFS, Footballguys material is just a small fish in the big pond of people producing information and unfortunately the material that this site is so well known for is losing its touch.

 

[KellysHeroes]

dfs is a scam. the idea and game could be legit, but the companies running them are a total scam. to fbg for supporting the scam or being too stupid to realize that it is a scam. shame on you fbgs, shame on you.

In what way is it a scam?

Possibly spending billions of dollars falsely advertising that it's super easy for anybody to win at DFS --when the numbers show that something like the top 2% of players win 90+% percent of total prize pools. I think the thing that a lot of us in the Shark Pool seem to forget is who exactly the ads on TV are targeting. Generally speaking--I'd imagine that the vast majority of people that post on the Shark Pool are pretty solid/experienced fantasy players that understand the odds of winning at DFS--and understand the tools/efforts required to be successful at DFS. The ads probably aren't going to "trick" us-- as we generally know what we would be getting into. However--the real issue would be for the person who has zero experience in fantasy sports--that watches the ads/infomericals and thinks he/she has a great shot at winning--when the reality has proven to show that the odds of success for them is nominal at best. To many people-this would qualify as being a scam.

but all u need is a $1

 

[Arodin]

The top 2% win 90% of money is more misleading than any number DFS companies have ever given you.

Really? Maybe you should read the Bloomberg article about DFS. Here is a paragraph from it:

These limits seem almost laughably nonrestrictive until you understand how top players operate. Analysis from Rotogrinders conducted for Bloomberg shows that the top 100 ranked players enter 330 winning lineups per day, and the top 10 players combine to win an average of 873 times daily. The remaining field of approximately 20,000 players tracked by Rotogrinders wins just 13 times per day, on average.

They've changed reference frames here, and critical info has been omitted to bias the statement.

Top 100 enter 330 per day...but win how many?

top 10 win 873 times a day...but enter how many? (likely a lot more than 330...thousands?)

Rest of the field wins just 13 times a day...but out of how many entries? One each?

Also, is it surprising that a bunch of people who are least active lose? How many people join a traditional FF league and then fail to set lineups, start injured guys for weeks, and lose? I expect a lot of these people play DFS the same way...

Regardless, it's disingenuous of Bloomberg to give us three data points without a single common reference for valid comparison between them. Meaningless statistics out of context, designed to drive their narrative.

 

[cheese]

The top 2% win 90% of money is more misleading than any number DFS companies have ever given you.

Really? Maybe you should read the Bloomberg article about DFS. Here is a paragraph from it:These limits seem almost laughably nonrestrictive until you understand how top players operate. Analysis from Rotogrinders conducted for Bloomberg shows that the top 100 ranked players enter 330 winning lineups per day, and the top 10 players combine to win an average of 873 times daily. The remaining field of approximately 20,000 players tracked by Rotogrinders wins just 13 times per day, on average.

Means nothing without win rate. If the top players are entering 660 and winning 330 and common players are entering 10 and winning 5, those numbers you gave are still true.

 

[Bossman]

I don't understand your question. Opinion in what way? How I feel about playing DFS? How I feel about the way the DFS companies are operating or advertising?

yeah, I'd respond to the poll but the question needs to be more specific.

I like DFS.

I do believe it is gambling.

I like gambling but I don't buy lottery tickets / scratch tickets. I don't play slot machines.

When at a casino, I play Blackjack and Poker. I like some type of control over my fate.

I prefer the competitive aspect of playing against other people (or a dealer).

I'm glad that my state (MA) is working with DFS sites to allow them to continue to do buisness. I assume other states will follow suit.

 

[bagger]

The top 2% win 90% of money is more misleading than any number DFS companies have ever given you.

Really? Maybe you should read the Bloomberg article about DFS. Here is a paragraph from it:These limits seem almost laughably nonrestrictive until you understand how top players operate. Analysis from Rotogrinders conducted for Bloomberg shows that the top 100 ranked players enter 330 winning lineups per day, and the top 10 players combine to win an average of 873 times daily. The remaining field of approximately 20,000 players tracked by Rotogrinders wins just 13 times per day, on average.

They've changed reference frames here, and critical info has been omitted to bias the statement.Top 100 enter 330 per day...but win how many?

top 10 win 873 times a day...but enter how many? (likely a lot more than 330...thousands?)

Rest of the field wins just 13 times a day...but out of how many entries? One each?

Also, is it surprising that a bunch of people who are least active lose? How many people join a traditional FF league and then fail to set lineups, start injured guys for weeks, and lose? I expect a lot of these people play DFS the same way...

Regardless, it's disingenuous of Bloomberg to give us three data points without a single common reference for valid comparison between them. Meaningless statistics out of context, designed to drive their narrative.

the point still remains, you are not entering contests with people who are approaching it in a similar manner as you the average joe, you are playing against professionals. So it's not disingenuous at all, DFS false advertises to the average person who is chum to the professionals.

But carry on.

 

[Arodin]

The top 2% win 90% of money is more misleading than any number DFS companies have ever given you.

Really? Maybe you should read the Bloomberg article about DFS. Here is a paragraph from it:These limits seem almost laughably nonrestrictive until you understand how top players operate. Analysis from Rotogrinders conducted for Bloomberg shows that the top 100 ranked players enter 330 winning lineups per day, and the top 10 players combine to win an average of 873 times daily. The remaining field of approximately 20,000 players tracked by Rotogrinders wins just 13 times per day, on average.

They've changed reference frames here, and critical info has been omitted to bias the statement.Top 100 enter 330 per day...but win how many?

top 10 win 873 times a day...but enter how many? (likely a lot more than 330...thousands?)

Rest of the field wins just 13 times a day...but out of how many entries? One each?

Also, is it surprising that a bunch of people who are least active lose? How many people join a traditional FF league and then fail to set lineups, start injured guys for weeks, and lose? I expect a lot of these people play DFS the same way...

Regardless, it's disingenuous of Bloomberg to give us three data points without a single common reference for valid comparison between them. Meaningless statistics out of context, designed to drive their narrative.

the point still remains, you are not entering contests with people who are approaching it in a similar manner as you the average joe, you are playing against professionals.So it's not disingenuous at all, DFS false advertises to the average person who is chum to the professionals.

But carry on.

Disingenuous until they provide statistics that the "professionals" are actually winning at a significantly higher rate per entry than the amateurs. The provided stats do not allow us to reach such a conclusion, but imply it.

 

[jvdesigns2002]

The top 2% win 90% of money is more misleading than any number DFS companies have ever given you.

Really? Maybe you should read the Bloomberg article about DFS. Here is a paragraph from it:These limits seem almost laughably nonrestrictive until you understand how top players operate. Analysis from Rotogrinders conducted for Bloomberg shows that the top 100 ranked players enter 330 winning lineups per day, and the top 10 players combine to win an average of 873 times daily. The remaining field of approximately 20,000 players tracked by Rotogrinders wins just 13 times per day, on average.

They've changed reference frames here, and critical info has been omitted to bias the statement.Top 100 enter 330 per day...but win how many?

top 10 win 873 times a day...but enter how many? (likely a lot more than 330...thousands?)

Rest of the field wins just 13 times a day...but out of how many entries? One each?

Also, is it surprising that a bunch of people who are least active lose? How many people join a traditional FF league and then fail to set lineups, start injured guys for weeks, and lose? I expect a lot of these people play DFS the same way...

Regardless, it's disingenuous of Bloomberg to give us three data points without a single common reference for valid comparison between them. Meaningless statistics out of context, designed to drive their narrative.

the point still remains, you are not entering contests with people who are approaching it in a similar manner as you the average joe, you are playing against professionals.So it's not disingenuous at all, DFS false advertises to the average person who is chum to the professionals.

But carry on.

Disingenuous until they provide statistics that the "professionals" are actually winning at a significantly higher rate per entry than the amateurs. The provided stats do not allow us to reach such a conclusion, but imply it.

The statistics show that the vast majority of people that consistently win are DFS professionals that submit multiple lineups using lineup optimizing software. The numbers from Bloomberg prove that. The current framework of DFS gives a huge advantage to players with this lineup optimizing software that have big bankrolls--so that they can get as many "optimal" lineups/variations in play. The "winning rate" per entry would really mean something if the number of lineups per user was capped to far lower numbers than they are now. If you have an issue with the numbers from Bloomberg--and don't believe that the ads are misleading to the "average joe"--show me some statistics that show that the "average joe" has a solid chance of being financially successful playing a lineup per week in DFS. The reason I say these parameters is that many of the ads that DFS uses try to tempt potential players into joining because you can create a new lineup every week. Every bit of data out there supports that an average joe winning in DFS season long is a rarity.

 

[Bri]

Please stop putting DFS posts here when clearly there's another forum

 

[Kevrunner]

Please stop putting DFS posts here when clearly there's another forum

Why? In the DFS forum you will get 100% pro DFS, while in the Shark forum you will get a mixture of opinions. The poll is a good poll as long as it is a makeup of both seasonal and DFS players. I'm sure most of the negative votes are still for DFS surviving this tough road they have come across, but just wish it wasn't co-mingled together with our traditional fantasy football hobby. At least that's the way I feel.

 

[Deamon]

Still, only 1 in 4 people in here are for DFS.

 

[spudgusta]

Please stop putting DFS posts here when clearly there's another forum

Why? In the DFS forum you will get 100% pro DFS, while in the Shark forum you will get a mixture of opinions. The poll is a good poll as long as it is a makeup of both seasonal and DFS players. I'm sure most of the negative votes are still for DFS surviving this tough road they have come across, but just wish it wasn't co-mingled together with our traditional fantasy football hobby. At least that's the way I feel.

Because there are surely DFS players that don't read the Shark Pool. Makes it a poll that doesn't represent the actual player base of DFS very well. Just the player base that has the largest vocal opinion against it.

 

[Kevrunner]

Please stop putting DFS posts here when clearly there's another forum

Why? In the DFS forum you will get 100% pro DFS, while in the Shark forum you will get a mixture of opinions. The poll is a good poll as long as it is a makeup of both seasonal and DFS players. I'm sure most of the negative votes are still for DFS surviving this tough road they have come across, but just wish it wasn't co-mingled together with our traditional fantasy football hobby. At least that's the way I feel.

Because there are surely DFS players that don't read the Shark Pool. Makes it a poll that doesn't represent the actual player base of DFS very well. Just the player base that has the largest vocal opinion against it.

Fair enough, but I would think the Shark Pool is a place that all of the DFS players visit from time to time and it is a nice sample size. I don't think anybody subscribes to FBGs just for DFS, maybe a very small percentage. Seems to be the best place for a poll. The DFS forum would be the worst, wouldn't you agree?

 

[coo2ie]

The smaller scope of DFS makes it more prone to habitual, amplified and destructive betting patterns (i.e. addiction) by players.

The large scale of prizes and the idea that many weeks are likely determined by individual performances at the margins, particularly on Monday nights, makes it more prone to corrupting sportsmen or officials.

These two factors are what separate it from seasonal fantasy sports bets and why it should be legally treated exactly like traditional sports gambling, in each jurisdiction.

Well stated

. It's just another form of gambling squeaking into a legal loophole until lawmakers catch up. Could be a while...

 

[Bri]

Please stop putting DFS posts here when clearly there's another forum

Why? In the DFS forum you will get 100% pro DFS, while in the Shark forum you will get a mixture of opinions. The poll is a good poll as long as it is a makeup of both seasonal and DFS players. I'm sure most of the negative votes are still for DFS surviving this tough road they have come across, but just wish it wasn't co-mingled together with our traditional fantasy football hobby. At least that's the way I feel.

The Shark Pool is reserved for sharing NFL talk and fantasy football strategy discussion.

The forum where we talk about Daily Fantasy Sports (DFS)

 

[Kevrunner]

Still, only 1 in 4 people in here are for DFS.

The poll numbers will probably be skewed now, we know all the people playing DFS, would vote for it, it was interesting to see how everyone else felt in The Shark Pool. This tread was just started in the DFS forum:https://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?/topic/738296-go-vote/

 

[Joe Bryant]

Please stop putting DFS posts here when clearly there's another forum

Why? In the DFS forum you will get 100% pro DFS, while in the Shark forum you will get a mixture of opinions. The poll is a good poll as long as it is a makeup of both seasonal and DFS players. I'm sure most of the negative votes are still for DFS surviving this tough road they have come across, but just wish it wasn't co-mingled together with our traditional fantasy football hobby. At least that's the way I feel.

The Shark Pool is reserved for sharing NFL talk and fantasy football strategy discussion.

The forum where we talk about Daily Fantasy Sports (DFS)

This is fine here. It's a good way to get the pulse of how the Shark Pool guys feel about DFS. Because there is a separate DFS forum, I'd expect the Shark Pool to skew more anti DFS. But it's good to get a pulse. So this poll is fine.

J