Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

Fantasy Sports Discussion of Fantasy Football, Fantasy Baseball, Fantasy Basketball and Fantasy Hockey.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-21-2015, 08:39 PM   #1551
wazzu24
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
wazzu24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,391
Re: DFS Industry Discussion Thread

Yeah, I get it. But I will be supremely sad if they are forced to get rid of college DFS. The money is so free.
wazzu24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2015, 09:44 PM   #1552
BillyPhelan
grinder
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 630
Re: DFS Industry Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawnmower Man View Post
Like, IANAL, but the NBA commish coming out in full support of legalized betting in early 2015 seems more recent than something that happened in 2007.



Seems unlikely since every customer waived his/her right to join a class by agreeing to the ToS. But maybe it is more complicated than that?
These suits seem like deep pocket nuisance suits.Shysters get all the $$$$ pathetic loser (I should get my money back because I'm a clueless f**king imbecile) plaintiffs get pennies.Saul Goodman would be embarrassed to file some of the nonsense I've seen.
BillyPhelan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2015, 11:03 PM   #1553
BillyPhelan
grinder
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 630
Re: DFS Industry Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by wazzu24 View Post
You guys know sports betting has existed for decades right? I don't see why DFS is suddenly going to create rampant match fixing(or fantasy fixing).
They sound like all the conspiracy theorists on sports talk radio who think you can do all these machinations and no one will sniff it out.
BillyPhelan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2015, 01:33 PM   #1554
DefNotRsigley
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 11,266
Re: DFS Industry Discussion Thread

surprised the millionaire maker is gonna fill w/o NY

are people getting free entries and us grinders getting nothing as usual
DefNotRsigley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2015, 01:37 PM   #1555
nyc999
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
nyc999's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 18,526
Re: DFS Industry Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by DefNotRsigley View Post
surprised the millionaire maker is gonna fill w/o NY

are people getting free entries and us grinders getting nothing as usual
I received an email which offered free entry into the remaining $3 tourneys for the rest of the season (1M Play Action) with an MM entry today. Jumped on it.
nyc999 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2015, 01:40 PM   #1556
dkgojackets
DKGOAT
 
dkgojackets's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 86,095
Re: DFS Industry Discussion Thread

wtf, i never play the mm and still dont get those emails
dkgojackets is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2015, 01:45 PM   #1557
nyc999
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
nyc999's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 18,526
Re: DFS Industry Discussion Thread

I was surprised - I've also never played the MM
nyc999 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2015, 01:46 PM   #1558
wiper
still catching up
 
wiper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: USA#1
Posts: 42,649
Re: DFS Industry Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by DefNotRsigley View Post
surprised the millionaire maker is gonna fill w/o NY

are people getting free entries and us grinders getting nothing as usual

poor sigs
wiper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2015, 01:53 PM   #1559
Wooders0n
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Wooders0n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Party at the Moon Tower
Posts: 24,816
Re: DFS Industry Discussion Thread

I'm in NY and haven't been stopped from playing on DK yet.
Wooders0n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2015, 03:04 PM   #1560
Gzesh
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: UTG
Posts: 5,358
Re: DFS Industry Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by CanadaPete View Post
...

But I believe David Boies stated in a press conference that this will be one of their main arguments as the sites have predetermined prizes and the results of that week's games do not influence at all what is paid out. There actually is a New Jersey case where fantasy sports entry fees were determined not to be wagers.
When the laws support your side, pound on the law.

When the facts support your side, pound on the facts.

When neither the law nor the facts supportyour side, pound on the table.

Yeah, that IS an argument to make, but the applicable States law seemingly proscribes betting on future contingent events, the outcome of which are beyond the bettor's control. Unlike Mr. Boies, I am not a NY lawyer. I am just reading the language in the context of gaming laws generally. Look, I personally would support legalized sportsbetting, which we have here in Nevada.

Clearly, however, the outcome of a DFS entry is based upon the future contingent performances of selected athletes, which are clearly beyond the control of the bettors or entrants.

That DFS success or fantasy team performance is not based upon the final score of a REAL team game is irrelevant to a general categorization as "gambling", no matter what press conferences statements are issued. Even the Federal PASPA recognizes that staking something on the performance of one or more athletes, regardless of game outcomes, is the sort of sportsbetting that States are PROHIBITED from authorizing.

(The NJ DFS/qui tam Humphreys case decision turned on the fact that the DFS sites themselves were NOT winners and the Plaintiff failed to name anyone who was..... The discussion of "bets or wagers" while somewhat irrelevant to the outcome was designed to explain that the entries were not creating a prize pool, and therefore could not be bets or wagers which were "won" by the DFS sites. Stating its finding as a "matter of law" is impressive language, but is really limited to the qui tam law of New Jersey. (FWIW, a better precedent under NJ GAMING law was the determination in 2013 in a temporary regulation that Fantasy Sports were NOT gambling.)

Bottom line, I think the Third Circuit rehearing in NCAA v Governor of NJ (a sportsbetting/PASPA case on appeal) will be more relevant to the future of State authorization of DFS than anything likely to be argued in newspapers, press conferences or even NVG. Ultmately, if PASPA allows them to do so, each State would be able to authorize DFS. Currently, it seems likely they can prohibit it however.

Last edited by Gzesh; 11-22-2015 at 03:14 PM.
Gzesh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2015, 09:55 PM   #1561
CanadaPete
grinder
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 525
Re: DFS Industry Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gzesh View Post
When the laws support your side, pound on the law.

When the facts support your side, pound on the facts.

When neither the law nor the facts supportyour side, pound on the table.

Yeah, that IS an argument to make, but the applicable States law seemingly proscribes betting on future contingent events, the outcome of which are beyond the bettor's control. Unlike Mr. Boies, I am not a NY lawyer. I am just reading the language in the context of gaming laws generally. Look, I personally would support legalized sportsbetting, which we have here in Nevada.

Clearly, however, the outcome of a DFS entry is based upon the future contingent performances of selected athletes, which are clearly beyond the control of the bettors or entrants.

That DFS success or fantasy team performance is not based upon the final score of a REAL team game is irrelevant to a general categorization as "gambling", no matter what press conferences statements are issued. Even the Federal PASPA recognizes that staking something on the performance of one or more athletes, regardless of game outcomes, is the sort of sportsbetting that States are PROHIBITED from authorizing.

(The NJ DFS/qui tam Humphreys case decision turned on the fact that the DFS sites themselves were NOT winners and the Plaintiff failed to name anyone who was..... The discussion of "bets or wagers" while somewhat irrelevant to the outcome was designed to explain that the entries were not creating a prize pool, and therefore could not be bets or wagers which were "won" by the DFS sites. Stating its finding as a "matter of law" is impressive language, but is really limited to the qui tam law of New Jersey. (FWIW, a better precedent under NJ GAMING law was the determination in 2013 in a temporary regulation that Fantasy Sports were NOT gambling.)

Bottom line, I think the Third Circuit rehearing in NCAA v Governor of NJ (a sportsbetting/PASPA case on appeal) will be more relevant to the future of State authorization of DFS than anything likely to be argued in newspapers, press conferences or even NVG. Ultmately, if PASPA allows them to do so, each State would be able to authorize DFS. Currently, it seems likely they can prohibit it however.
Well one can make the argument that who your opponents selected that week is more important than the individual stats of the players. Thus making it a competition as opposed to a bet. For example Julio jones had 150 yards receiving however he was selected by 30 percent of entrants today in the millionaire make thus negating how significant that was. Meanwhile if you selected Thomas Rawls at a very low percent it has a very positive effect on your team's chances.

So I'm making the argument that the stats themselves are not the most important factor in DFS. It's more important who your opponents selected.

Although, what I'm saying may mean nothing legally, but I am pointing out that daily fantasy is nothing like prop betting. For example in Las Vegas you can bet an over/under on Julio jones yardage total and you would have won. In daily fantasy you can select Julio jones and he may or may not be a positive contributor to your team winning.

In summary daily fantasy is not prop betting by any stretch.

The other thing is these sites should have offered season long also. Since season long is so widely played I think the AG would take some backlash from the general public. But with Draftkings and fanduel's names being tarnished they are easy targets.

You can also see I'm not a lawyer just someone who plays daily fantasy for fun. So just throwing my opinions out there.
CanadaPete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2015, 10:56 AM   #1562
Onlydo2days
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 16,056
Re: DFS Industry Discussion Thread

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap300...-daily-fantasy

Goodell speaking on DFS. Not great but not awful....
Onlydo2days is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2015, 11:33 AM   #1563
Wooders0n
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Wooders0n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Party at the Moon Tower
Posts: 24,816
Re: DFS Industry Discussion Thread

Much closer to awful than good. He's spineless.
Wooders0n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2015, 12:25 PM   #1564
Gzesh
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: UTG
Posts: 5,358
Re: DFS Industry Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by CanadaPete View Post
Well one can make the argument that who your opponents selected that week is more important than the individual stats of the players. Thus making it a competition as opposed to a bet. For example Julio jones had 150 yards receiving however he was selected by 30 percent of entrants today in the millionaire make thus negating how significant that was. Meanwhile if you selected Thomas Rawls at a very low percent it has a very positive effect on your team's chances.

So I'm making the argument that the stats themselves are not the most important factor in DFS. It's more important who your opponents selected. ...

.
You have hit upon a distinction between "bookmaking", where the house offers to take the other side of a bet/assumes the opposing outcome risk, and matchbook sportsbetting, where the house takes no outcome risk but merely charges a fee, and your success or failure "depends upon .... your opponent" taking the opposite side. Both however are sports-betting models.

As a general proposition however, I would not think that pooling together X number of entries into a "contest" to determine the payout for a winning entry changes the underlying nature of each entry: a stake of $X on the proposition that my picks will perform well, or to your point sufficiently better than someone else's picks, to get a successful outcome for my stake of $Y.

If your guys do not perform better than their guys, however weighted by % owned, your outcome will never be positive. Sure, % ownership is factor not present in HU sportsbetting or in DFS contests; but the underlying performance of your guys, even in a multiple entrant contest pool structure,will always be the foundation of your stake's outcome.

Your point is well-taken, but not sufficient in my view to distinguish DFS formats from traditional sports gambling or even "gambling". Sure, picking DFS teams to maximize correlative aspects of their performances for example is a skill, but not distinguishable from handicapping sports moneyball style. Similarly, picking among differently "% owned" prospective draftees is little different than traditional figuring the price in determining whether or not Miguel Cotto at 3-1 was sufficiently priced to overcome the age difference against Canelo Alverez and deciding whether to bet or pass on "drafting" Cotto and entering the betting pool.

As a final matter consider the extent to which your analysis actually MAKES the point that your draft of your team leaves the outcome even more dependent upon others than a traditional sportsbet; not only does your team need to perform, but your opponents' picks affect the outcome of your stake ..... (I think an interesting stat, which I am sure someone has compiled, is how many teams do winning DFS players enter in the same contest. It is interesting in this instance because the NYAG seems to be convinced that winning players just buy a whole bunch of lottery tickets.)
Gzesh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2015, 01:16 PM   #1565
CanadaPete
grinder
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 525
Re: DFS Industry Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gzesh View Post
You have hit upon a distinction between "bookmaking", where the house offers to take the other side of a bet/assumes the opposing outcome risk, and matchbook sportsbetting, where the house takes no outcome risk but merely charges a fee, and your success or failure "depends upon .... your opponent" taking the opposite side. Both however are sports-betting models.

As a general proposition however, I would not think that pooling together X number of entries into a "contest" to determine the payout for a winning entry changes the underlying nature of each entry: a stake of $X on the proposition that my picks will perform well, or to your point sufficiently better than someone else's picks, to get a successful outcome for my stake of $Y.

If your guys do not perform better than their guys, however weighted by % owned, your outcome will never be positive. Sure, % ownership is factor not present in HU sportsbetting or in DFS contests; but the underlying performance of your guys, even in a multiple entrant contest pool structure,will always be the foundation of your stake's outcome.

Your point is well-taken, but not sufficient in my view to distinguish DFS formats from traditional sports gambling or even "gambling". Sure, picking DFS teams to maximize correlative aspects of their performances for example is a skill, but not distinguishable from handicapping sports moneyball style. Similarly, picking among differently "% owned" prospective draftees is little different than traditional figuring the price in determining whether or not Miguel Cotto at 3-1 was sufficiently priced to overcome the age difference against Canelo Alverez and deciding whether to bet or pass on "drafting" Cotto and entering the betting pool.

As a final matter consider the extent to which your analysis actually MAKES the point that your draft of your team leaves the outcome even more dependent upon others than a traditional sportsbet; not only does your team need to perform, but your opponents' picks affect the outcome of your stake ..... (I think an interesting stat, which I am sure someone has compiled, is how many teams do winning DFS players enter in the same contest. It is interesting in this instance because the NYAG seems to be convinced that winning players just buy a whole bunch of lottery tickets.)
Yes it's a common misconception that just putting in more lineups endures success or that strange combinations of players help your success. Speaking from experience putting in 50 or 100 lineups and not being good at selecting players just ensures that you will lose more. Many of the top DFS players may have 100 entries but choose to use 4 or 5 of the same players in all of them. There are so many combinations of players duplicate lineups are very rare even with 100k entries in a tournament.
CanadaPete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2015, 04:47 PM   #1566
CalledDownLight
Toonces the Posting Bot
 
CalledDownLight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: DUKE FOOTBALL<DUKE BASKETBALL
Posts: 88,404
Re: DFS Industry Discussion Thread

Just got the following email with new DK policies effective today. These should be good for the ecosystem:

Quote:
We wanted to make you aware of some changes to our contest entry limits going forward at DraftKings.

1. Non-guaranteed Contest Entry Limits
These limits apply to single-entry non-guaranteed contests (includes all H2H and league contests). They do NOT apply to our guaranteed prize pool (GPP) contests.

For the past 2+ years, our limits have been a max of 40 single-entry non-guaranteed contests per game set at $1 and $2 stakes.

Beginning with contests posted on Monday, November 23, our new limits will be 50 single-entry non-guaranteed contests per game set at $1, $2, $5, and $10 stakes. For example, you can have 50 entries of H2Hs at each of those stakes - i.e. 200 entries total - but any further single-entry non-guaranteed contest entries would need to be at stakes greater than $10.

2. Multi-entry Limits in Guaranteed Contests
We have thoroughly re-evaluated our multi-entry limits in guaranteed contests at all stakes and have implemented changes that will result in lower multi-entry limits in most contests types, especially at lower stakes, with a maximum of 3% of the field across the board. These limits apply to all contests posted on or after Monday, November 23.

Please note contests that were posted before today may still reflect the previous entry limits. If you have any questions please contact support@draftkings.com.

Best regards,
The DraftKings Team
I am assuming that the entry limit relates not simply to contests you create, but any you join.
CalledDownLight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2015, 04:49 PM   #1567
DefNotRsigley
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 11,266
Re: DFS Industry Discussion Thread

So old MM limit - 500 entries

New limit 3% of 268200 or 8586? Seems legit

Most of the $3 big tournaments had 200 entries limit and they regularly have > 90k entry limit which is > 200
DefNotRsigley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2015, 04:59 PM   #1568
CalledDownLight
Toonces the Posting Bot
 
CalledDownLight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: DUKE FOOTBALL<DUKE BASKETBALL
Posts: 88,404
Re: DFS Industry Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by DefNotRsigley View Post
So old MM limit - 500 entries

New limit 3% of 268200 or 8586? Seems legit

Most of the $3 big tournaments had 200 entries limit and they regularly have > 90k entry limit which is > 200
thats a maximum. the 3% will apply a lot more in DUs and 50/50s where there are lots of medium sized ones that allow more than 3% of entries. I doubt the maximum is raised in the big GPPs.
CalledDownLight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2015, 05:04 PM   #1569
dkgojackets
DKGOAT
 
dkgojackets's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 86,095
Re: DFS Industry Discussion Thread

am I reading that first one wrong, or did they simply increase the number of times pros can troll the microstakes h2h from 40 to 50?
dkgojackets is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2015, 05:29 PM   #1570
CalledDownLight
Toonces the Posting Bot
 
CalledDownLight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: DUKE FOOTBALL<DUKE BASKETBALL
Posts: 88,404
Re: DFS Industry Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by dkgojackets View Post
am I reading that first one wrong, or did they simply increase the number of times pros can troll the microstakes h2h from 40 to 50?
In the past they only allowed you to post 40 at a time, but you could scoop up more than that if you wanted. I am pretty sure the new rule is a hard cap at 50 regardless of whether you are posting or taking others' action and doesn't allow you to post more games once yours are gone. This new rule will likely result in assani having to get a 2nd job.
CalledDownLight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2015, 05:40 PM   #1571
dkgojackets
DKGOAT
 
dkgojackets's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 86,095
Re: DFS Industry Discussion Thread

oh, didnt even realize there was a difference before. sounds good to me.
dkgojackets is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2015, 05:44 PM   #1572
DefNotRsigley
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 11,266
Re: DFS Industry Discussion Thread

50 x $1 x 20% ROI is still $10

keep grinding
DefNotRsigley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2015, 06:13 PM   #1573
Onlydo2days
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 16,056
Re: DFS Industry Discussion Thread

Timing is interesting. The 3% was said by the MA AG.

The policy seems good but I'm surprised it isn't sport specific. NFL volume and everything else are just way different.
Onlydo2days is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2015, 06:27 PM   #1574
Lawnmower Man
Pooh-Bah
 
Lawnmower Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 3,774
Re: DFS Industry Discussion Thread

Damn, Assani already forced out of Nevada, and now he may be out of all countries with running water.
Lawnmower Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2015, 06:40 PM   #1575
DefNotRsigley
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 11,266
Re: DFS Industry Discussion Thread

you can still play in NV - i play every day
DefNotRsigley is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:51 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2008-2020, Two Plus Two Interactive