Breakeven DFS: Becoming the Roulette Wheel

Ok, so now that we’re playing a high volume of games against a diverse set of opponents, how many of these games do we actually need to win in order to show a profit, Dolla? That’s why we’re here after all.

Well, let’s see here…please hold.

There we go. It turns out we need to win 55.5% of our games to break-even. That means we need to exceed that level of performance to show a profit. Coincidentally, that’s about the same edge that the average ‘American Style’ (the one with 0 and 00)  roulette table has over the player on any spin.

So in head to head format, we have to ask ourselves if we think we can make better decisions than another player, and be right at least 55.5% of the time. If we believe that we can do that, we should play as many head-to-heads as possible – to infinity. Another way of thinking about this asking ourselves how much of an edge we have over the casual player or user of a DFS site or app. So, we can also say that if we believe we have a  5.5% edge over the average player then we are breakeven at DFS.  If we can truthfully say, or even better, demonstrate this with data, that our edge exceeds this breakeven point, then we can state  that 5.5% + our additional winrate = our edge over the field at that buy-in level, if the sample size is large enough.

You will find that with enough volume, competition will tend to trend towards an increase in the higher buy-in head-to-heads. That is, in general, when there is more money at stake. Against these types of players, your ‘edge’ can be blunted, or erode altogether. There are plenty of players who can show a profit at $1 games who get crushed by the field at the $5 entry level. As the buy-in increases, you will see an increase in the number of more advanced players, who may be using basic tools like excel spreadsheets and implementing their own custom built models for projecting sports performance.

They may also be using advanced analytical software, and algorithms to generate and enter hundreds of lineups in a fraction of a second.  This is not as big of an issue in a head to head contest, but becomes a significant threat to the casual user in ‘multi-entry’ events. A skilled player entering 500 lineups into a contest has a higher cumulative chance of ‘winning’ these type of events than someone entering a lone lineup, even when controlling for skill – taking it out of the equation completely.

Think of a raffle in which there are 5,000 tickets. You hold one ticket, and someone else holds 500 for the same event. This ‘raffle’ is an example of a competition based on pure luck. Your odds are 1 in 5,000 – .02% or less than one half of one percent! Now, compare this to your opponent’s odds at 500 in 5,000 – or 10%.That is why it is important to know if you have an edge, and if that edge is growing or diminishing over time.

To end by putting this frankly – if you only played head to head games for a lifetime, and won around 55.5% of those games, the same raw winrate as an American Style roulette wheel – you would not make any money at all! Forget about opportunity cost – DFS may not be so easy, after all!

 

The Great Equalizer: Pump Up The Volume

Spinal_Tap_-_Up_to_Eleven (1)

“These Go To 11” – Nigel Tufnel, Spinal Tap

In DFS, we can never know our true win rate in advance – we can only deconstruct it once the dust has settled. The good news is, we can get closer to it though. This can be achieved by increasing volume, or playing a higher number of games.

As a simple example, let’s say that you put together a lineup that ranks within the 95th percentile, so you’ve done better than 95 out of 100 players. You could STILL theoretically play 10 head-to-head games and lose them ALL! This is the nature of a thing called – variance.

Well wait a second here, you made a lineup which was better than 95% of the other players and LOST! That doesn’t seem to be very fair at all! Unfortunately, you are suffering from a common affliction –  small sample size.

After all, you may flip a fair coin heads/tails and it may come up heads 3 times in a row, 5 times, or yes, even 10. But 3 million times in a row? (Unless of course, you are former Harvard student, Professor and current Stanford professor Persi Diaconis)  A smarter decision than playing 10 expensive games may be to play 100 or even 1,000 games at lower stakes. Doing so will get you closer to your theoretical true win rate and broaden your sample size significantly.

If you go one step further than most and take a moment to post the games yourself using the ‘create’ panel, and utilize the opponent limiting tab on DraftKings, it should diversify your opponent pool in such a way that it reduces variance.

DFS and Its Utility as an Entertainment Product

You will hear the owners of DFS sites constantly quipping about skill, but a close second is the fact that the majority of players view their offering on sites like DraftKings and Fanduel as an entertainment product.

I thought about this blog after watching the new Bond movie – Spectre. I paid for my ticket, enjoyed the movie, and afterwards, left relatively satisfied. I did not leave the theater with anything but the stub in my pocket. And that was ok. I had just consumed an entertainment product.

This is how the vast majority of users consumer daily fantasy sports. Focusing on the ‘entertainment value’ is of key importance for the DFS community because there has to be an aura that it is fun to play, even if you don’t win. The fact is that more often than not more people will lose than win. That’s just the math side of this business.

What is harder to calculate in the enjoyment derived from these games by the players, win lose or draw. This idea is very similar to the theory of utility discussed in economics. How many ‘utils’ did an individual derive from watching Red Zone on Sunday? It is always a subjective measure.

What is more tangible are the fiscal losses incurred and emotional effects of losing on players of any game – of skill, or otherwise. One of the more responsible things to do would be to warn others to consider their ‘utility bill’. Gambling addiction is real and there are resources available to help ensure that your ‘utility bill’ doesn’t get too high!

I’ve included a few below. Please game responsibly, or not at all!

http://www.ncpgambling.org/programs-resources/resources/

http://www.helpguide.org/articles/addiction/gambling-addiction-and-problem-gambling.

NATIONAL PROBLEM GAMBLING HELPLINE

1-800-522-4700

FACE/OFF: Coming to the Realization That Your Face is Not Always the Best Bet to Represent Your Brand on Social Media

Early on in the semester, I had a change of heart, and more importantly (sometimes!) in thought. After using a picture of my face to represent myself on twitter for over 2 months….I felt it was time for a change. Here I will detail some of the reasoning behind my swap and consider the thought process behind using your face to represent your brand.

The industry I am covering is arguably one of the most dynamic which exists today. We are in the ‘wild west era’ because although fantasy sports has been around for decades, it is only now we are really seeing it in a concentrated form where money, real profit and loss are concerned. Initially wary of using my face to represent my social media brand because my day job is in an area which frowns upon any sort of risk taking, real or perceived impropriety, or involvement in anything that could be considered gambling – I felt that showing up on social media media as a ‘person’ was important to establish rapport with an audience. It is a unique challenge to try and separate your personal  views and quirks from that of your brand – and experience that shift where you begin to be able to distance yourself from your ego and realize that often the person, or face, behind the brand – is not the most effective spokesperson for it, especially in some areas. In others, it might be the best possible solution! ‘It depends’, especially in social media!

dailydolla_1442243092_140

Initially, I felt the recent picture of myself aligned well with the brand portrayed the state of the industry. Still in it’s very raw, formative stages, shrouded in a bit of that murky mystery which leaves customers and fans wanting to hear more. But alas, I don’t think brands are built on furry faces alone! Enter the ‘Daily Dolla’ logo which after some tweaking accurately reflects the feelings of anxiety, triumph and disaster players have when watching a live sporting event which is augmented by action in Daily Fantasy Sports contests.

tZteq_K8.jpg

Changing to the Daily Dolla image allowed me to develop more consistency between my social media accounts, and unify my brand.

Since swapping out to a logo consistent with how your dollar might feel if it could reflect its emotion upon being wagered in a DFS contest, my brand has been much more successful. However, I cannot necessarily attribute this to a profile image alone. If I had to guess the biggest factor in the growth or success of any brand on social media, I would have to say that content is king.

If you can provide value in one form or another to an audience – you will become a go-to member of that social media community. What is troubling is there was no way to continue using my personal photo as a representative of the brand in tandem with the new image, so it is impossible to tell if I would have fared better or worse, by using a different profile image or ‘logo’ in order to represent the brand!

In A NY State of Mind – Attorney General Eric Schneiderman’s War On DFS

Attorney General for the State of New York, available at @AGSchneiderman on twitter, has vowed to shutter DFS sites in the state, which represents roughly 10% of the current market share on sites like DraftKings and FanDuel. He has ordered that such sites cease and desist from taking deposits from players in his state.

In response there has been an outcry from industry insiders culminating in a rally outside of the attorney general’s office, and the AG’s office being sued by DraftKings – who said: “We are confident in our legal position and intend to continue to fight to preserve the right of the over 500,000 New York consumers to play the fantasy sports games they love,”

As Attorney Generals across the nation anxiously await the showdown in NY, players are concerned about having their accounts frozen – as happened to many players during the ‘Black Friday’ poker crackdown.

FanDuel has also set out to sue the NY Attorney General, in a document which can be read in full here.

.

Here Come The Players (and their suits!)

pg-hero-main

NFL Player Files Class-Action Lawsuit Against Fantasy Giant:
Scary Times For Fan Duel – Happy Halloween!

Recently, NFL wide receiver Pierre Garcon filed a class-action lawsuit on behalf of NFL players who’s likeness had been ‘misappropriated’ without  their permission by daily fantasy giant Fan DuelFan Duel only has affiliate deals with a select number of teams and there are 32 in the league.

This is in stark contrast to competitor Draft Kings’ deal with the players and their NFL Player’s Association, who was not named in the lawsuit.

According to USA Today:

The suit does not name FanDuel’s chief rival, DraftKings, as a defendant. DraftKings has a marketing and licensing agreement with the NFL Players Association. FanDuel does not, the company said, leading to speculation that this is why one company was sued and not the other.

As parties including these players, states, politicians and federal regulators circle the table of the DFS money pool, everyone, it seems, is looking for their piece of the pie. Will there be enough to go around? Only time will tell!

Rockwell-freedom from want (1)

‘Freedom From Want’ by Norman Rockwell

State of DFS

United-States-of-Scary-Things

Weekend Update: State of DFS

Recently, the state of Nevada banned DFS. The Nevada Gaming Commission has banned the playing of DFS games in the state because it claims that the sites are operating without a gambling license. The gaming board acted unilaterally in defining playing in daily fantasy sports contests (yes, even free ones!) as gambling rather than skill based gaming. After defining the activity as gambling, it quickly imposed the ban on DFS because the sites do not have gambling licenses in the state. But how did we come to this point?

As you can imagine, a great deal of revenue for the state of Nevada comes from one of it’s most lucrative draws – Las Vegas, or ‘sin city’ – which is filled with casino gambling at every turn.

It’s no coincidence that a powerful gaming board filled with ex-casino executives, in a state which survives in the desert largely based off of large inflows of tax revenue from casinos and gambling licensing, has acted so decisively to deter what it perceives to be one of its biggest competitors.

comp_casino15__01__970-630x420

I would argue that consenting adults who are playing DFS from the privacy of their own homes are not so easily converted into casino patrons. People who throw in an entry into a $1 DFS tournament, like myself, from my cell phone, on the trip between work and home, are not necessarily willing to drive or fly for several hours to enter a dark, often creepy and smoke filled brick and mortar casino. I won’t suddenly take that $1 I was willing to risk on DFS in a large contest or even a head to head (1v1) game against my little brother and put it into a slot machine instead. Capturing the entire DFS market by banning the activity is a pipe dream, and shows that brick and mortar casino operators, state lotteries and their lobbyists do not fully understand the product that companies like DraftKings or FanDuel offer.

Adam Smith once wrote:

“It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest.”

This self-interest – specifically, that of an entire industry which is already hurting in the US, is causing much of the pressure for individual states to crack down on DFS gaming. Brick and mortar casinos have suffered for awhile now, as the population of dronelike slot machine playing patrons has given way to an equally dronelike ‘electronic music’ patron more interested in clubbing and the VIP experience than in actual gambling vs. the house, at games designed to make them lose as long as they play for long enough. The data bears this out:

comp_casino15__01__315inline

So, what can you do when a large industry acts to eliminate another it perceives as competing with it? There is a grassroots campaign developing in many states to prevent what has happened in Nevada from happening across the nation. However, others fear that the state of Nevada is just the first domino to fall in a nationwide push by those who feel they ‘aren’t getting their cut’ of the massive amounts of money moving around in the DFS economy each and every day.

What we have here is a action clearly compelled by greed, self-interest, and desire for self-preservation. This is a cash grab by certain states which operate their own lotteries and games, as well as a powerful casino lobby which holds great influence over statewide gaming commissions and has conspired to railroad any and all competition.

The Dark Side of Daily Fantasy Sports

Vader-Force-Choke

The Dark Side of DFS

Well, that didn’t take long. The first major scandal in the DFS industry broke recently. As we discussed in our last blog, most DFS competitions are based on a group of real life athletes. Each DFS player combines these players in  their own unique roster setup and enters their roster into each contest.  None of the players on a roster are revealed until their real games begin in order to keep the playing field fair.

If you knew what your opponents had (think knowing your opponent’s cards in poker or knowing your opponent’s next move in chess) you would gain a significant advantage over players without that information. In the stock market – it is considered ‘insider trading’ and is punishable by fines and imprisonment. The first real scandal in the industry erupted with the inadvertent leak of information about the overall ownership of players within the player pool at DraftKings, from  a DraftKings employee. The information alone is not the problem, it’s that it was insecure and being shared prior to rosters locking.

One of the biggest components of winning in DFS is trying to project what the rest of the market will do each week. As an employee with the right access, all of the guesswork is removed from the equation in this regard. Instead of plugging in a range of outcomes and having to make assumptions about player behavior – you have discrete data on hand and simply need to make optimal plays vs. the rest of the field to show a profit.

Being an industry insider confers a significant advantage if you are allowed to play on sites you work for – or even those competitors which have similar pricing/game models.  In other words, it is very, very hard to know these player ownership percentages and mirror top player’s picks prior to the contest begging, sprinkle in some lower owned players to make your lineup ‘unique’ and still lose.

download222

That this may have been being done is pretty shocking and distasteful, and if DFS were regulated the way say the NYSE stock exchange was, such conduct would amount to insider trading, punishable by fines and jail time. But this is the wild west of DFS, which as we discussed in our last blog was born in a grey area of the law, and largely still resides – at least partly in these shades of grey.

In response to the issue – sites have taken a number of steps and issued several press releases. For the time being, employees of DraftKings will not be permitted to play on FanDuel, and vice versa. Something tells me that their cousins, good friends and significant others are going to see a significant boost in their ROI after registering a new account this week.

LEARN MORE: 2 Minute Summary of Scandal Link Below!

http://player.theplatform.com/p/2E2eJC/nbcNewsOffsite?guid=nn_rmo_fantasy_sport_151006

What Makes DFS Legal?

On the surface, it looks very simple. If betting on sports is illegal is most of the 50 states in US, why is betting on the performance of a group of players – by way of a scoring system, any different? This is the question many states are asking as they wrestle with the growing business of daily fantasy sports.

Right now, we can look to the same legislation which eventually sounded the death knell for US-facing online poker sites when it was eventually enforced in 2011. These poker sites, as most will remember – were also advertised heavily on ESPN.

This relatively small, but powerful piece of legislation was known as the UIGEA – Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006. This article was somehow tacked on to a much larger piece of legislation called the SAFE Port Act – which had to deal with safety regulations and securing our key ports from being owned and operated by foreign nations. What member of congress would vote against something called the SAFE Port Act in a post 9/11 world? Some of the key points it addressed were:

  • Additional requirements for maritime facilities
  • Creation of the Transportation Worker Identification Credential
  • Establishment of Interagency Operations Centers for port security
  • Port Security Grant Program
  • Container Security Initiative
  • Foreign port assessments
  • Customs Trade Partnership against Terrorism

Sounds reasonable to tack on an additional clause regulating online gambling, right?

uigea

Whether lawmakers knew it or not at the time, with the bill’s passing, a ‘carve out’ for DFS was born. Although the UIGEA expressly prohibits traditional sports betting over the internet, it does allow for DFS under an interpretation of the language in one of its key articles:

(ix) participation in any fantasy or simulation sports game or educational game or contest in which (if the game or contest involves a team or teams) no fantasy or simulation sports team is based on the current membership of an actual team that is a member of an amateur or professional sports organization (as those terms are defined in section 3701 of title 28) and that meets the following conditions:

  • (I) All prizes and awards offered to winning participants are established and made known to the participants in advance of the game or contest and their value is not determined by the number of participants or the amount of any fees paid by those participants.
  • (II) All winning outcomes reflect the relative knowledge and skill of the participants and are determined predominantly by accumulated statistical results of the performance of individuals (athletes in the case of sports events) in multiple real-world sporting or other events.
    (III) No winning outcome is based—
  • (aa) on the score, point-spread, or any performance or performances of any single real-world team or any combination of such teams; or
  • (bb) solely on any single performance of an individual athlete in any single real-world sporting or other event.

Weeding through the legalese here we can clearly see that the focus was to prohibit betting solely on teams – or solely on individuals in a single event – so by constructing fantasy rosters (see: building our own teams) – we are not actually betting on a ‘real life’ team to win or lose, or on a single player in a single game. We are instead betting on a collection of individuals from various teams. Winning/losing is not defined by a team’s single performance or that of any one individual, but rather by a motley crew of characters chosen by the DFS player. DFS therefore is occupying a grey area that exists within the law. It’s a billion dollar loophole.

The author of the UIGEA, Jim Leach, a Republican Rep. from Iowa, recently reported that:

“The assumption was that while unconstrained Internet gambling could change the nature of America’s savings and investment patterns, fantasy sports would be a ‘de minimus’ footnote. No one ever conceived of it becoming a large scale activity or that it could transition into one-day contests.”

In other words, they never saw DFS coming or conceived it would become a booming business back in 2006. Rest assured that with every passing ad this weekend, someone at a congressional cocktail party or tailgate will be reconsidering their lack of foresight, and considering ways to tap in to the revenue stream that for better or worse has become a billion dollar industry.