DraftKings employee wins fanduel 350K with Inside Informatio

[JETS SB]

I've dabbled in DFS and it is absolutely an advantage to know the %'s ahead of time. IMO anyone who doesn't thinks so, doesn't understand how to be a successful DFS player.

I'm sure there are NFBC'ers who think a current adp report is meaningless, ie, u should have a general idea where players go. Those folks are called dead money in my book

One has nothing to do with the other. Obviously I don't understand how to be a successful DFS player and I should just be quiet. But I disagree with you and I disagree with anyone who says that knowing % owned has any major effect on your chance of winning. It doesn't. No football player is going to play better or worse because of how much he is owned in fantasy football and these "successful" DFS players would do no better or worse if they knew the numbers. Reason is, they basically already know the numbers. Its pretty simple to predict these trends. Won't help you win. Are we all of a sudden making DFS a game of skill? Million dollar contests are simply a lottery ticket, proven by 3 of the 4 "million dollar” winners at FanDuel this year having hardly ever played before.

[Sandman62]

Alan,

Say you've decided that two players who have the same salary this week are both going to score the same high score this week. You're really going back and forth between them because you feel their upside is identical. Now, if you knew that one's ownership percentage was 1% and the other's 15%, why wouldn't you pick the one less-owned and potentially reduce your competition if they both hit???

You're right, knowing ownership percentages doesn't at all effect their ability to score. But if they both score the same, you'd want the one less-owned so you don't have to split the prize money so much.

[JETS SB]

Alan,

Say you've decided that two players who have the same salary this week are both going to score the same high score this week. You're really going back and forth between them because you feel their upside is identical. Now, if you knew that one's ownership percentage was 1% and the other's 15%, why wouldn't you pick the one less-owned and potentially reduce your competition if they both hit???

You're right, knowing ownership percentages doesn't at all effect their ability to score. But if they both score the same, you'd want the one less-owned so you don't have to split the prize money so much.

I would base my decision on a combination of matchup and upside. But don't listen to me, I am a poor DFS players. Ask the "winners".

[Tom Kessenich]

Alan, you seem to think the argument is that access to percent owned guarantees success. As I said before nobody is suggesting or even implying that. However, having access that others do not have to data that directly contributes to how the game is played is a significant issue and that's what is at stake here. The playing field needs to be level for all participants and the allegations here suggest that has not been the case. As I said DK and Fanduel need to get out in front of this and make it crystal clear to everyone that is not occurring. Regardless of what you believe the value of said data is NO ONE should have access to it before the games have begun.

[JETS SB]

Alan, you seem to think the argument is that access to percent owned guarantees success. As I said before nobody is suggesting or even implying that. However, having access that others do not have to data that directly contributes to how the game is played is a significant issue and that's what is at stake here. The playing field needs to be level for all participants and the allegations here suggest that has not been the case. As I said DK and Fanduel need to get out in front of this and make it crystal clear to everyone that is not occurring. Regardless of what you believe the value of said data is NO ONE should have access to it before the games have begun.

Tom, I have agreed with the fact that everyone or no one should have the information. That's not my argument. My issue is that the media is liking this to insider trading and its not even close to being the same. Knowing the outcome is insider trading. I'm not saying it is right for some to have the information. I think it needs to be governed. But this is completely overblown as someone knowing pertinent information to help them win big money. If this was the case, we would see many guys like Ethan Haskell. He got lucky. The $6 million won by employees will shown to be offset by many more losses. Sure everyone is looking for an advantage and maybe it gives someone a better chance to not share as much winnings, IF they win. But doesn't help them win. Sorry. It just doesn't.

[Tom Kessenich]

I don't consider the allegation to be insider trading at this time unless there is word that DK and Fanduel employees were exchanging the information. I have not seen that allegation and I certainly hope that was not the case. Again, you don't believe there is significant value in knowing percent owned data. I think that is a huge variable in the game as do many others. And again, if it wasn't considered a huge variable this wouldn't have become the major issue it has become.

[kjduke]

This is not akin to "illegal" insider trading.

It is, however, a lot like being a specialist/ major market-making firm on the exchange. Specialists' use proprietary knowledge of their order book to make highly consistent profits at the expense of other market participants. They trade against their customers with that knowledge. That is exactly what DK/FD employees have done in this case, with the exception being they do it on a different platform. It isn't illegal but it would be if the regulatory objective was protecting consumers/investors.

Maybe when the NY AG is done going after these companies he can get started on Goldman Sachs, JPM and all for doing the same thing on a massively larger scale.

[JETS SB]

I don't consider the allegation to be insider trading at this time unless there is word that DK and Fanduel employees were exchanging the information. I have not seen that allegation and I certainly hope that was not the case. Again, you don't believe there is significant value in knowing percent owned data. I think that is a huge variable in the game as do many others. And again, if it wasn't considered a huge variable this wouldn't have become the major issue it has become.

Tom, nearly every article I am reading on this story is either headlined or mentions "insider trading". That is what the public sees, whether it is the official accusation or not. This is not anything of the sort.

[TR]

I will stand by my statement that knowing the percentage owned means very little to winning. We all know the guys that will be highly owned and those who will be sleepers. Its not rocket science.

If "we all" know those that will be sleepers then they will be higher owned as everyone will be on the same sleepers. All we can do is guess who will be highly owned, but not the exact percentages. It may mean very little to u, but I'm sure it means a great deal to plenty in terms of their contrarian plays and I definitely can see how it would provide an edge. What percent do u think would have owned Andre Johnson this week? I'd guess the percentage would be very low..and the ppl who did use him in contrarian lineups have a significant edge now. Fact is u may have someone u think is a sleeper but over 15% could be on him as opposed to less than 5%. Regardless what u think in terms of how much/if any advantage it provides, we should ALL have access to the same information from DFS websites and their databases. It's very shady if certain individuals can obtain info pertaining to the contests that most of us cannot.

Are you saying that if you knew that Andre Johnson was owned by 1.5% of players, a guy who has done NOTHING for 4 weeks, you would have played him? I dont think so. The guy looked like he was done. He had a good game last night. Very few played him, nor should they have.

I would have if playing bunch of different lineups...his cheap price point, facing a mediocre secondary, and of course facing the only team he played his entire career for..back in that stadium. He had a different QB and who cares if he did nothing for 4 weeks..sometimes takes receivers time to get used to new system...he still getting significant snaps and I'm sure a few near the top of the leaderboard had him in their lineups.

[Don Draper]

suppose there are two players:

Player 1: knows the real-time % owned AND knows which players the "sharks" are "buying"
Player 2: plays it straight up. No "inside" info

If u think player 2 will make the same amount of money as player 1 in the long term, you are living in la la land. Sorry. No offense to anyone that falls into that category