Thursday game vs Sunday only schedule? Anybody use this as a strategy? The short week often produces crappy offensive efforts. I don't plan on playing anyone this week from the Thursday game and would really only consider the Defenses. Broncos D looked too good to play any Chiefs on a short week and Broncos O looked too bad to play anytime in the near future.

My theory is I want to play against Thursday schedules since I think it should be a less than stellar offensive game from both sides and I want my opponents to play as many of those guys as possible. If last week is any indication lots of guys will play players from that game just for the action. Then again the first Thursday is different since it isn't coming off of a short week.

Fading Thursday games is a highly used strategy.

Assuming the same payout structure, wouldn't entering 10 x $1 contests with the same lineup in each be superior to 1 x $10 tournament because of weaker competition?

yes mostly for two reasons IMO...reduces the variance; if you are in 1 contest it could be an outlier where you need a higher score to win. and presumably the smaller stakes are fishier.

Definitely playing the Thursday slate this weekend and fading the game entirely. Maclin is gimpy, the Broncos matchup perfectly against the Chiefs (especially if they use Talib to cover Kelce), and Peyton's arm looked awful plus they play in KC. Hopefully Peyton's name will lead to high ownership.

are there free sites that have all of the RZ target and rushing data updating through the year or do you need to pay up for something like rotowire or footballdiehards?

It's easy enough to google and get last years stats but real time this year harder to find!

Landry, Ivory and Foles all look like pure value to me. Gonna give Forsett and B. Cookes another chance too, their matchups look good. Gotta get on that Gronk train too!

I have been thinking and working on a way to come to an estimation of percentage owned each week for FanDuel and Draft Kings.

Like a hype stat for each player.

I need some help on this if anybody is interested and a super math wiz, PM me.

idk what to do with AP. i want to play him on DK because he's cheap but i am not sure for norv turner is going to give him the 25 carries he needs..

Darren sproles at 3.5k...he got more touches than demarco murray.

At one point this season the Eagles RB stack of Murray/Sproles is gonna ship someone a Milly.

I don't particularly think there is any difference in quality of opponent at $1 vs. $10 in h2h games. People who put money on still put $100 or whatever on. Its not like the super fishy people are loading $5 and the only kinda fishy ones are putting $100 on.

Too early for you to be drunk already

I mean there are a lot of people only putting 20-50 dollars on FD/DK and im relatively sure they aren't in $10 contests with that kind of roll

the two aren't mutually exclusive, but I think its almost certain the % of "fish" in $1 contests is higher than in $10 contests

the reason for not playing him should not be because of fear of touches, should be because that the offensive line is really really bad.

you think that people say "I deposited $50 and am now going to use bankroll management to grind it up to something respectable" very frequently? I will be tons of people with <$100 bankrolls on dk enter the MM and all kinds of other contests that violate sound bankroll management. For most players this is just a hobby they expect to lose money on, but hold out hope they can win. Also, there is the fact that these people don't view the money on the site as their entire bankroll. Redepositing is a thing.

Being behind and gameflow dictated this more than overall planned usage, although this weekend's matchup could have similar results.

pretty cheap for full PPR on DK. Might be using him this week.

I agree they probably aren't all using proper bankroll management but you really believe that there are an equal amount of fish in $1 games as $10 games? that seems nuts.

would be like trying to tell me theres an equal amount of fish at a 5/10 game as at a 1/2 game...

the thing about smaller games is the way fish are protected, is actually by making them pay more rake.

obviously this isn't the case on every site, but why would I play down and pay way more rake when the people at $10 are just as bad as at $1?

no, this isn't at all analogous to poker. In poker you only have the ability to functionally play so many tables at a time. In DFS you can play the same lineup at $1 as you play at $10k with almost no additional time or effort. Pros play all the way down the structure and there is no functional difference between the hobbyist who feels he can play a $10 game and the one that only wants to play a $1 game. The different risk tolerances do not represent different skill levels.

wat? the rake at $1 and $50 and everywhere inbetween is the exact same for h2h games on dk.

Understood. and I agree there are fish at the $10 stakes as well... but there are far more at the $1 stakes. I don't understand how this is even disputable...

yes there are sharks at the low levels because of how easy it is for them to just mass enter like you said, but we were never talking about the sharks, were talking about the fish. The sharks can be considered a constant throughout all stakes therefor irrelevant (this may not actually be true as some of them don't bother entering $1 contests)

your explanation as to why its not analogous to poker is fine for sharks, but is irrelevant to fish.

The functional difference between the fish playing $10 games and the one playing $1 games is that there are far more playing $1 games...

If you need proof you can just look at how many contests fire off at each entry level...Way more $1 than $10.. so we clearly established there are more fish in $1 (Raw number wise) than in $10. Now if you want to argue that % wise the $10 stakes are more fishy than $1... well then all I can do is completely disagree... Its just like poker in the sense that as you get better you move up in stakes, that alone means the fields at higher stakes will be tougher.

You're argument would suggest that there are an equal number of fish at the 10k buy in level as at the $1 buy in level.

I just checked the dk lobby for h2hs at $1 and $10 and while there are indeed more total h2hs offered at the $1 level there are actually FEWER unique players offering these games so I don't think what you are saying is empirically true. This is just for NFL and obviously its early in the week, but I don't know where you came up with your numbers as I don't think the sites publish how many run at each level or unique players. I do imagine other sports have less interest at higher levels though.

Just did a quick check (via mobile app so numbers may be off) for the thursday night NFL slate H2H unique user postings:

FD $1: 101
FD $10: 83

DK $1: 98
DK$10: 88

this isn't including 50/50s which if you have tried to get volume in via 50/50s (at least to me) it is clear the $1 contest fire far more often than the $10 contests. not to mention on DK the higher entry fee contests are generally smaller contests (20 man 50/50 as opposed to 30 or 50 at lower stakes) This is where I think most of the fish are as I think people willing to post HU matches are generally more confident, and I believe there is likely a correlation between confidence and strength.

there are definitely "sharks" that scoop up $1 and $2 h2hs, which is kind of annoying for new people trying to learn the game. idk about the beginner games but i don't think new players utilize those enough...