NFBC Message Boards

COZ wrote:888 entries? OMG, that is not even normal. As I think TLC said it best, "don't go chasing waterfalls, stick to the lakes & the rivers that you're used to..." I will not be chasing the DFS waterfalls, and will continue to stick to the NFBC lakes & rivers and being devoured by the sharks & whales that I'm used to.

COZ

Red Sox Nation- wrote:

COZ wrote:888 entries? OMG, that is not even normal. As I think TLC said it best, "don't go chasing waterfalls, stick to the lakes & the rivers that you're used to..." I will not be chasing the DFS waterfalls, and will continue to stick to the NFBC lakes & rivers and being devoured by the sharks & whales that I'm used to.

COZ

This is crazy. 2,208 entries from 3 owners. I'll be staying away from those tournaments as well. DFS seems to be chugging along but I can see this "issue" derailing the progress soon once the masses catch onto this. I understand why they allow multi entries but it's putting the average daily player at a massive disadvantage. Perhaps they could tweak this and allow no owner to have more than a certain percentage of the max entries?

Scoony32 wrote:I'm curious how people feel about having multiple entries in season long competitions. Specifically the Main Event, Primetime and Rotowire Championship. Does having 1 or maybe 2 teams versus having 10, 15 or even more teams per player change the way you view the completion we are in?


Scott Waggener

COZ wrote:

Scoony32 wrote:I'm curious how people feel about having multiple entries in season long competitions. Specifically the Main Event, Primetime and Rotowire Championship. Does having 1 or maybe 2 teams versus having 10, 15 or even more teams per player change the way you view the completion we are in?


Scott Waggener

Apples/ Oranges. Season long is dynamic & has too many variables to be able to duplicate exact teams whereas DFS is static with set salaries thereby allowing one to duplicate exact line-up but change pitcher for instance on every entry. Multiple entries in NFBC just does not bother me like it does in DFS for that reason, but just my opinion.

COZ

Scoony32 wrote:I'm curious how people feel about having multiple entries in season long competitions. Specifically the Main Event, Primetime and Rotowire Championship. Does having 1 or maybe 2 teams versus having 10, 15 or even more teams per player change the way you view the completion we are in?


Scott Waggener

Cocktails and Dreams wrote:

Scoony32 wrote:I'm curious how people feel about having multiple entries in season long competitions. Specifically the Main Event, Primetime and Rotowire Championship. Does having 1 or maybe 2 teams versus having 10, 15 or even more teams per player change the way you view the completion we are in?


Scott Waggener

It changes my view from the standpoint of how much more impressive it is to me if you win the primetime with one team, than if I were to pull it off with one of 16. This talk comes up more often in football. It is why the money list shown is to a large degree irrelevant. I don't even think some people fairly high up are even net profit.

We didn't think that many leagues would fill. We didn't know which ones would though when signing up. And quite honestly I had some doubts the game would even take place. It is possible that our 16 helped make the game survive. And with your incredible team, you should certainly be happy it did.

As for the game itself, you cannot win this with some lucky random oddball lineup that nobody in their right mind would use under a different circumstance. You have to be complete. Draft, FAAB, somewhat lucky with injuries, and good lineup setting. Many of those things do not involve anything like the daily example. For instance, I have no way to acquire Trout, even though I set KDS 1 first every time. We do have the opportunity to take a little exposure to a player once or something that maybe we would not have done with less teams. So there is a very slight advantage perhaps. But you don't know what team to do it on and if that player sucks and you do it on an otherwise great team, it can cost you badly as well. And it is much tougher to execute things well with less concentration on a team. Another factor that is not in play in daily.

You have a tremendous team, and I think there are a whole lot more people rooting for it than the 16 teams we have:) Enjoy the ride.

knuckleheads wrote:

Cocktails and Dreams wrote:

Scoony32 wrote:I'm curious how people feel about having multiple entries in season long competitions. Specifically the Main Event, Primetime and Rotowire Championship. Does having 1 or maybe 2 teams versus having 10, 15 or even more teams per player change the way you view the completion we are in?


Scott Waggener

It changes my view from the standpoint of how much more impressive it is to me if you win the primetime with one team, than if I were to pull it off with one of 16. This talk comes up more often in football. It is why the money list shown is to a large degree irrelevant. I don't even think some people fairly high up are even net profit.

We didn't think that many leagues would fill. We didn't know which ones would though when signing up. And quite honestly I had some doubts the game would even take place. It is possible that our 16 helped make the game survive. And with your incredible team, you should certainly be happy it did.

As for the game itself, you cannot win this with some lucky random oddball lineup that nobody in their right mind would use under a different circumstance. You have to be complete. Draft, FAAB, somewhat lucky with injuries, and good lineup setting. Many of those things do not involve anything like the daily example. For instance, I have no way to acquire Trout, even though I set KDS 1 first every time. We do have the opportunity to take a little exposure to a player once or something that maybe we would not have done with less teams. So there is a very slight advantage perhaps. But you don't know what team to do it on and if that player sucks and you do it on an otherwise great team, it can cost you badly as well. And it is much tougher to execute things well with less concentration on a team. Another factor that is not in play in daily.

You have a tremendous team, and I think there are a whole lot more people rooting for it than the 16 teams we have:) Enjoy the ride.

Scott, I think the answer has already come in the 14% drop in entries this year in the Primetime. When two renowned players like Heberlig and Schroeder are one, the other, or both in every league, I think it drives down participation.

This was the first time in three years I didn't participate in the Primetime. I'm not one to avoid "winners" when signing up, but as I was looking at potential leagues this year, I noticed 15 teams or so apiece for just two owners. While that may only give a minor advantage when drafting, it gives a huge advantage for in-season management. They have the option of taking every fork in the road when comes to FAAB bidding down the stretch. I expect that is something you will feel as the season plays out.

There may be more people rooting for you as Chad suggests. Unfortunately for you, fans don't help you win.

Please don't take this as an opinion that Chad or Eric did anything wrong. But, as there is a similar argument going on right now in DFS, I feel it is the game operators' responsibility to control an issue like this.

Should Eric or Chad win the league this year, and the two of them combined do something like place 3 of the top five teams, or 7 of the top 10 teams, then the Primetime competition will probably be defunct next year. If neither places too many teams in the top 5 or 10, then it likely will not affect next year's entries. However, the reduced number of entries this year I think tells us that it did have an negative impact on entry totals.

Cocktails and Dreams wrote:
Can you please enlighten me on the advantage that faab gives me and Eric? Last I knew there are 12 teams in a league trying to win that league. We bid accordingly, to help our specific team try to improve and better position it. You are making this far too complicated.

Quite frankly you sound like a chickenshit. And if we get 3 of the top 5 I will consider it an unbelievable accomplishment. Having 16 times, I should have about one in the top 12.75. I should have one from 12.75 to 25.5 and on and on. To get 3 in top 5 would be absurdly good. About a one in 13 chance of winning with 16 teams. Hoping to overcome those odds and have a shot. But if I do, it will be because I did a hell of a good job. Not because you didn't have a chance because I had 16 teams. That is a bunch of bullshit. I have never even won anything before at the NFBC. Eric had. I should have been a chickenshit too I guess since he is an awesome player.

Cocktails and Dreams wrote:They are choosing to spend far more than they need to IMO. Obviously, they have determined that will work better in the long run. There are ways for newcomers to take advantage of all of the advertising that draftkings and fanduel do and have better margins. Have heard one such idea recently and it was very interesting.

To sustain growth, people need to have success. That is a problem with the current set up. I don't think that strategically the companies are maximizing efficiency. I am not exactly sure what the right solution is, but there has got to be a better one than is currently in place, especially at fanduel. Very few newcomers have much of a chance at success in the long run without getting very lucky. There are tremendous amounts of very good players.

Lets look at baseball for instance. I would personally like to play some large money contests. I think I can hold my own with most. But holding your own is not going to work, when they are taking out so much rake. I want to know I have a shot at beating the rake levels. So I go to the lobby and there are obviously the large tournaments. Perhaps I should specialize in large field tourneys. Enter 20-50 lineups, using stacks of players that are not going to be widely owned. Eat it when the obvious plays get it done, but succeed some when they don't. I personally don't like playing that way at this point. It is sort of like punting wins and K like I did in diamond one year. It is just not for me. I like playing what I think is my best club, or some close alternatives of it if I enter a few teams in a tourney. But it is not brilliant tournament strategy, especially in baseball. I think it can work fine in NBA and maybe NFL though.

So now that we have determined that I don't want to specialize in tournaments, or at least want to try to stabilize things in the "cash games." These are 50-50 tournaments, head to heads, and 3 man tourneys. I go to the lobby to look at the options. I cannot play in any league for ten dollars on up without having to play against lovesbases. He is one of the best I have ever seen. Seems he runs lucky as hell, and is also skilled as hell. After trading plenty of rake and eventually losing more often than winning against him last year, I had to pump the brakes and figure out a new plan. Even though two thirds of the losses were an investor(and I got 2/3rd of profit if I had won) it was wearing on me. So I decided that I just wouldn't play any 50-50 in any league he was(all of them) unless there were at least 20 people. I would not play in any type of league with him, other than multiplayer tournaments. I would migrate down to play people I can beat. And play in bulk. And there are better players than me that have done the same thing. So it is very hard to the newcomer to have any level of success with the current structure.

They also have no matchup blocking. I enter a head to head 5 times at the 200 level for instance. Lovesbases can grab all five just like that. Not a damn thing I can do about it, other than probably lose, or trade rake at the very best. Fanduel is costing themselves an insane amount of revenue. Nobody is opening up any contests at the large levels, other than lovesbases and the same other couple of guys. If you could put stipulations on who you do not want to play against in a particular event when setting it up, then it simply didn't show up in those players lobby, then people would be much more inclined to offer contests. And more imortantly, those contest would fill and fanduel would make more money.

By allowing these lobby hogs to occur at all levels, it is both allowing the fewest amount of people to have success, which is horrible for their business. And it also prevents contests from filling, which is also horrible for their business. There would be so many more people willing to play 500, 1k matches etc if you could do it without having to play lovesbases every single time. It is hard to believe how fanduel doesn't realize it is damaging the health of the industry, and more importantly their amount of contests that fill.

The percentage of payouts has nothing to do with the problems they have. And it is completely noncomparable to the full season companies percentages IMO. They would be better off having lower rake. And allowing for more people to have a chance to be successful. If people are successful they will pass word on to friends. If you have a great business you can succeed without spending so much on advertising. But I am sure as hell not going to recommend them to my friends. I know they are likely to get gobbled up by the shark pools that reside at every buy in level due to nobody wanting to take on the best at the larger levels. It all funnels down. And they are making a huge mistake by not fixing it.

Money wrote:This conversation is a bit premature when discussing any success of lack there of. In reality I think it's a DFS discussion but one that is not new to the NFBC or the NFFC. Some have challenged 2 or 3 entries into the overall championships. This is well within the rules and the NFBC has determined that there is no competitive advantage. If there was they wouldn't allow it.

Our success will not determine the future of the primetime. NFBC marketing and their approach to it will.

We currently have 3 teams entered into the Online Championship. If we were to place multiple teams in the top 10 I doubt anyone would bat an eye. I understand the every league objection and as Chad stated we did not know which ones would fill or not fill. Every player that signed up and looked at the sign up thread had to have seen that Chad was entered into each league. To speak up now seems a little late.

Cocktails and Dreams wrote:Knuckle: I don't want to requote the whole thing. If you cannot understand the difference between someone winning daily major events with someone having enough to take absurd random combinations that are not logical on their own merit, and this, I cannot help you any further. It is pretty much as simple as that. It is not even remotely the same thing. In daily fantasy baseball, can I have Mike Trout if I want him? With whatever 2nd player I want? You damn right I can. I cannot have Mike Trout even one time in this contest.

And as for me being a chickenshit. Lovesbases and some others have proven to win things. They are dominant forces. If me not wanting to play against them in cash games any longer makes me a chickenshit, then I am a huge chickenshit.

But you acting like you didn't play because I have 16 teams and Eric has 15 or whatever teams does come across as chickenshit. For one, WTF have I ever won here? You would have a 1 in 204 chance of winning if you played. To suggest that it is much longer shot because people have multiple teams is a bit ridiculous. Do I have a better chance than you? Ofcourse. I have more teams. But you are badly confusing the conceptual differences between DFS and full season.

I would love it if you played in every league. It would make the contest and prizes much better.

knuckleheads wrote:

Cocktails and Dreams wrote:Knuckle: I don't want to requote the whole thing. If you cannot understand the difference between someone winning daily major events with someone having enough to take absurd random combinations that are not logical on their own merit, and this, I cannot help you any further. It is pretty much as simple as that. It is not even remotely the same thing. In daily fantasy baseball, can I have Mike Trout if I want him? With whatever 2nd player I want? You damn right I can. I cannot have Mike Trout even one time in this contest.

And as for me being a chickenshit. Lovesbases and some others have proven to win things. They are dominant forces. If me not wanting to play against them in cash games any longer makes me a chickenshit, then I am a huge chickenshit.

But you acting like you didn't play because I have 16 teams and Eric has 15 or whatever teams does come across as chickenshit. For one, WTF have I ever won here? You would have a 1 in 204 chance of winning if you played. To suggest that it is much longer shot because people have multiple teams is a bit ridiculous. Do I have a better chance than you? Ofcourse. I have more teams. But you are badly confusing the conceptual differences between DFS and full season.

I would love it if you played in every league. It would make the contest and prizes much better.

Chickenshit is your word. I wasn't calling names. If I were, I would use hypocrite. But I'd rather this thread remain civil.

To summarize your DFS post, you're not playing DFS because there are better players in every contest who can't be avoided. When two teams are in 90% of the Primetime contests, is it unrealistic that the 25% drop in participation is a result of similar concerns?

The advantage you have in FAAB is the ability to take both options on difficult decisions on who to pick up, or how much to bid. Let's say Carlos Correa is called up tomorrow and you have six teams in the top 15. (Which is a remarkable feat. congratulations). You have the option of going heavy after him with 3 teams, and light after him with 3 others. No doubt you've earned that ability (congratulations), but that doesn't make the guy with one team feel like it's a square race to the finish.

Again, let me reiterate, I think you've done nothing wrong. But I do think it's a glitch in the game.

Cocktails and Dreams wrote:Hypocrite would be incredibly stupid as well. Nothing even remotely hypocritical about it. You comparing dfs cash games to this is ludicrous. And if you read closely, I never once called you any names.

Cocktails and Dreams wrote:Quite frankly you sound like a chickenshit.

Cocktails and Dreams wrote:By allowing these lobby hogs to occur at all levels, it is both allowing the fewest amount of people to have success, which is horrible for their business. And it also prevents contests from filling, which is also horrible for their business. There would be so many more people willing to play 500, 1k matches etc if you could do it without having to play lovesbases every single time. It is hard to believe how fanduel doesn't realize it is damaging the health of the industry, and more importantly their amount of contests that fill.