FSTA lobbyist

[Gekko]

Very easy to show that playing one season long contest allows owners to utilize much more skill than playing one DFS contest

[Roger Dorn]

From testimony today in NJ: FSTA lobbyist Jeremy Kudon: "Skill comes more into play in DFS than season-long"

https://mobile.twitter.com/LSPReport/st ... 6605062144

Greg: do u know this guy? Me thinks he has it ass backwards; however he's an FSTA lobbyist so does that mean the FSTA is throwing "season long" under the bus

He can't possibly believe the garbage spewing from his mouth.

Luck vs skill in daily vs season long isn't debatable.

Michael Mauboussin has done a good job distinguishing between skill and luck and his work applies nicely here.
Maybe we can call him to testify on behalf of season long gamers.
http://success-equation.com/
http://www.michaelmauboussin.com/

One take away from Mauboussin is: can you lose on purpose? If so, there is skill involved.

Can you lose playing roulette on purpose? It would be very hard to. Therefore luck is the driver.
Can you lose in a running race on purpose? Sure can. Therefore more skill vs luck.

In season long, take an auction for comparison purposes, it would be easy to over pay and create a losing team.
In daily, just keeping with active/known starters, because of randomness due to an extremely small/short playing window creating a losing team on purpose would be pretty tough.

For a test, in the same $$ league try creating a few teams you expect to win and a few teams you expect to lose. Do this over the next few Sundays and I bet the 'winning' and 'losing' teams will average the same scores.

DFS is random. Gambling.

[Gekko]

IMO, DFS is very similar to placing a wager on a professional game or placing a wager on a horse race.

1. Research every attribute you believe factors into determining the best bet/lineup
2. Select your bet/lineup
3. Once your bet/lineup is made/locked-in, you sit back and have no further decision points. Everything after this point is "chance"

If placing a wager on a professional game or placing a wager on a horse race is deemed gambling, it would be hard to argue DFS is not gambling.

[low talkers]

Once you start drawing lines on what level of skill is necessary before you are allowed to wager on that game, it is a very difficult line to draw. Should Draft Champion Leagues be legal? What about the playoffs league? Cutline?

This is where it gets difficult and murky to me. It is one thing for us to be able to explain to someone who plays fantasy sports how there are differing levels of skill between ‘1 one-day game vs a season long game’, and then ‘a series of daily games vs a season long game’, and then ‘a seasons worth of thousands of daily games vs a season long game’. But, every single type of DFS or season long has some element of skill and some element of chance. So, the question then becomes, can you wager money on a game that contains some level of skill and some element of chance? There is no exact way to quantify how much more skill a season long NFBC league takes than one single $1 DFS game on some random Tuesday night. Even though all of us here would say a season long league takes more skill than one single daily game, how much more? It’s an undefineable matter of opinion.

This does not mean that I don't see a distinction between DFS and season long, of course I do, it's just a more difficult thing to quantify than we might want to admit.

[DOUGHBOYS]

Once you start drawing lines on what level of skill is necessary before you are allowed to wager on that game, it is a very difficult line to draw. Should Draft Champion Leagues be legal? What about the playoffs league? Cutline?

This is where it gets difficult and murky to me. It is one thing for us to be able to explain to someone who plays fantasy sports how there are differing levels of skill between ‘1 one-day game vs a season long game’, and then ‘a series of daily games vs a season long game’, and then ‘a seasons worth of thousands of daily games vs a season long game’. But, every single type of DFS or season long has some element of skill and some element of chance. So, the question then becomes, can you wager money on a game that contains some level of skill and some element of chance? There is no exact way to quantify how much more skill a season long NFBC league takes than one single $1 DFS game on some random Tuesday night. Even though all of us here would say a season long league takes more skill than one single daily game, how much more? It’s an undefineable matter of opinion.

This does not mean that I don't see a distinction between DFS and season long, of course I do, it's just a more difficult thing to quantify than we might want to admit.

As fantasy players, we all have differing opinions as to the luck vs. skill of any fantasy game.
It is unquantifiable.
In our Main Event, players that have finished first overall have also placed 300th overall.
These players did not get stupid in finishing 300th.
It takes both elements of skill and luck to win. Period.
Placing a percentage of skill vs. luck is folly.

In effect, whether it is daily or seasonal, or whether it is football or baseball, we are not doing anything different than what the stock market does.
We are investing in players like stocks. We investigate and study these players to tedium. Like analysts who follow stocks.
Our stock falls when a player is injured or underperforms. Their stocks fall when a Steve Jobs dies or a stock underperforms.
Is investing in stocks illegal?
No.
In my mind, the skill/luck equation of investing in players, mirrors those of investing in stocks
The legality of what we do, no matter the percentage of luck or skill should not be questioned.
But, it is.

[Gekko]

the stocks analogy isnt a good one.

when you place a bet on a team to win, place a bet on a horse to win, or enter your DFS lineup, you sit back with no further decisions to make and you need to wait until the contest period is over to find out if you won or not.

with investing, the skill of the investor affords him the opportunity to decide for himself when the contest ends.

completely different

[Gekko]

Once you start drawing lines on what level of skill is necessary before you are allowed to wager on that game, it is a very difficult line to draw. Should Draft Champion Leagues be legal? What about the playoffs league? Cutline?

i don't play in the playoff league so im not positive of the structure of it, but 100% someone playing in a DC league or a cutline leagues affords their owners more opportunities to have their level of skill to determine the winner than someone playing a DFS contest.

[DOUGHBOYS]

the stocks analogy isnt a good one.

when you place a bet on a team to win, place a bet on a horse to win, or enter your DFS lineup, you sit back with no further decisions to make and you need to wait until the contest period is over to find out if you won or not.

with investing, the skill of the investor affords him the opportunity to decide for himself when the contest ends.

completely different

You are only stating the timing element. True, like baseball, stocks do not have a clock.
Everything else applies.

[DOUGHBOYS]

And like stocks, we can be in it for the long haul (the seasonal game)
Or we can day trade (like the daily game)

[Gekko]

the stocks analogy isnt a good one.

when you place a bet on a team to win, place a bet on a horse to win, or enter your DFS lineup, you sit back with no further decisions to make and you need to wait until the contest period is over to find out if you won or not.

with investing, the skill of the investor affords him the opportunity to decide for himself when the contest ends.

completely different

You are only stating the timing element. True, like baseball, stocks do not have a clock.
Everything else applies.

when someone can alter the ending of the contest to their benefit, it is a completely different "game". imagine if someone who placed a bet on a horse to win. the horse ran to the lead at the quarter pole and the bettor says, "okay, race is over. i win". completely different.

[DOUGHBOYS]

the stocks analogy isnt a good one.

when you place a bet on a team to win, place a bet on a horse to win, or enter your DFS lineup, you sit back with no further decisions to make and you need to wait until the contest period is over to find out if you won or not.

with investing, the skill of the investor affords him the opportunity to decide for himself when the contest ends.

completely different

You are only stating the timing element. True, like baseball, stocks do not have a clock.
Everything else applies.

when someone can alter the ending of the contest to their benefit, it is a completely different "game". imagine if someone who placed a bet on a horse to win. the horse ran to the lead at the quarter pole and the bettor says, "okay, race is over. i win". completely different.

We do have those. The fellows who give up after a quarter of our season. These fellows effect the results of remaining players.
True, nobody can win and leave early. With us, we have the ones who throw in the towel early.
It still works.

[BK METS]

No one is saying season long doesn't require an amount of luck, especially football. But if you are saying there is little difference between DFS and season long leagues wih regards to a luck/skill comparison, I have to strongly disagree. The random player choices of DFS is indisputable. I suppose you can increase your chances, by playing a 50/50 game, but if DFS was simply a 50/50 game, we wouldn't be facing the issues we are having. Its the lottery type, million dollar contests where you can be the most skillful fantasy player in the world and it will not matter. Even if you pick 200 different teams, there will be someone that has the precise combination needed to win the big dollars. Drafting a team for an entire year, specifically baseball, where FAAB and lower end picks turn out to be as important as your top picks, takes a skill that is not found in DFS. There is a reason why Mark/Gekko wins such a high percentage of his leagues and it isn't just luck. Its a high level of research and skill that allows him to choose a guy in the 30th round that helps him win. In baseball DFS, one day, one player could breakout at any time or implode at any time, with 5 guys valued at exactly the same price. If you can't see that there is a huge difference, I don't know what to tell you.

[Gekko]

in addition, when you "buy" a stock, someone is "selling" it to you.

you are happy to buy it at a certain price and someone is happy to sell it to you at a certain price. it's called a win-win. no one loses when the transaction is made

sorry Dan, but the stock analogy doesn't work for me

[DOUGHBOYS]

in addition, when you "buy" a stock, someone is "selling" it to you.

you are happy to buy it at a certain price and someone is happy to sell it to you at a certain price. it's called a win-win. no one loses when the transaction is made

sorry Dan, but the stock analogy doesn't work for me

Those stocks are bought in every draft, Mark.
I'm too old to care if it works for you

[Gekko]

no worries dan.

IMO when comparing DFS to other "games", a common baseline of assumptions need to be in place for a genuine comparison to be made; otherwise it's mixes apples & oranges.

A common baseline for me would be something like:
1. contest has distinct start
2. contest has distinct end
3. all participants bets/team are "live" throughout the duration of the contest

daily, season-long, placing a bet on a team to win, and placing a bet on a horse to win all meet those basic criteria and can be evaluated further

poker and stocks don't meet those baselines and wouldn't be good comparisons IMO

[Ichiban]

Congress does not really care about the distinction between skill and luck and gambling. They only care about protecting certain interests. I mean you can say we should ban games of short duration, but then why does NY have zero interest in banning horse racing? It all comes down to political will. There are some people who benefit by poker being illegal, both politically and profitably. And I'm sure when DFS was so in everybody's face with their ads, Vegas interests took note and saw the games as a threat to gambling dollars just like poker and sports betting are, and season-long fantasy sports aren't. And then when FanDuel and DK handled things so stupidly, it made it easy to get people to not understand them and move to ban them. So obviously daily games are gambling, but so is horse racing, so is day trading, so is this game. It's not the distinctions that really matter- it's political interests and perception. So clearly it is in the best interest of season long games to distinguish themselves from DFS, which is quite easy, since they really are very different games. And it's going to be in the best interests of DFS companies to say they are in the same industry, since a lot of people like their daily yahoo leagues. So in short, I think everyone here realizes the games are different, but both take both skill and luck to do well in long time, and you can argue all day about how much of each is needed. In the end, that's not why these games will be legal or illegal, because if that were the case horse racing would have been banned long ago, as opposed to anyone in America over 18 being able to open a legal and regulated online horse racing betting account.

[Gekko]

Oh, they will deem DFS illegal to start and then provide them a way to buy a license, regulate them and tax them. Just another arm of a casino

[rickerbockerNFBC]

Here's the funniest thing (not funny like haha but funny as in it's a damn shame), we're debating skill vs chance like it matters. I thought the United States was a country where its citizens enjoy FREEDOMS. Ironic on Veteran's Day that we're having this discussion. If I was a veteran (BTW, thank you to all who have served) and I was watching how complete incompetent and corrupt governments take away FREEDOMS from the people I fought to defend, I would be beyond pissed off! Gambling being illegal is an outdated thought and people who think ALL forms of gambling should be illegal are completely too dumb to even have a conversation with. Our incompetent and corrupt politicians continue to step all over the American people and until the American people stand up and fight for their rights, these crooked politicians will continue to dismantle this country.

[Gekko]

CONgress

[EWeaver]

Congress does not really care about the distinction between skill and luck and gambling. They only care about protecting certain interests. I mean you can say we should ban games of short duration, but then why does NY have zero interest in banning horse racing? It all comes down to political will. There are some people who benefit by poker being illegal, both politically and profitably. And I'm sure when DFS was so in everybody's face with their ads, Vegas interests took note and saw the games as a threat to gambling dollars just like poker and sports betting are, and season-long fantasy sports aren't. And then when FanDuel and DK handled things so stupidly, it made it easy to get people to not understand them and move to ban them. So obviously daily games are gambling, but so is horse racing, so is day trading, so is this game. It's not the distinctions that really matter- it's political interests and perception. So clearly it is in the best interest of season long games to distinguish themselves from DFS, which is quite easy, since they really are very different games. And it's going to be in the best interests of DFS companies to say they are in the same industry, since a lot of people like their daily yahoo leagues. So in short, I think everyone here realizes the games are different, but both take both skill and luck to do well in long time, and you can argue all day about how much of each is needed. In the end, that's not why these games will be legal or illegal, because if that were the case horse racing would have been banned long ago, as opposed to anyone in America over 18 being able to open a legal and regulated online horse racing betting account.

spot on

Anybody know the genesis of the skill vs. luck distinction as applied to U.S. gaming law? I don't (if you do, fill me in). I assume the policy behind it is that a player could, in theory, control ruining their life in a game of skill, but would have no control over ruining their life (and society around them) in a game of chance, hence the distinction. It's bullshit (to a degree), but here ya'll are, debating luck vs skill as though there is merit to the distinction as applied in this context. Sound like the politicians!

DFS is fucked as we know it, season long will be fine.

Also, regulation and taxation are not all bad, and "freedom" is not, nor has it ever remotely been, absolute in the United States. I enjoy the fact that I don't personally have to pay in full for my own fire department, interstate system, air traffic controllers, and, being veterans day, military - so in that sense, I support some taxation for the greater good and for my own personal good. I'm also glad I can't be legally murdered and that eight year olds can't buy machine guns. Or is that all another #moneygrab?

None of which is an endorsement of politicians on an individual level.

[rickerbockerNFBC]

Congress does not really care about the distinction between skill and luck and gambling. They only care about protecting certain interests. I mean you can say we should ban games of short duration, but then why does NY have zero interest in banning horse racing? It all comes down to political will. There are some people who benefit by poker being illegal, both politically and profitably. And I'm sure when DFS was so in everybody's face with their ads, Vegas interests took note and saw the games as a threat to gambling dollars just like poker and sports betting are, and season-long fantasy sports aren't. And then when FanDuel and DK handled things so stupidly, it made it easy to get people to not understand them and move to ban them. So obviously daily games are gambling, but so is horse racing, so is day trading, so is this game. It's not the distinctions that really matter- it's political interests and perception. So clearly it is in the best interest of season long games to distinguish themselves from DFS, which is quite easy, since they really are very different games. And it's going to be in the best interests of DFS companies to say they are in the same industry, since a lot of people like their daily yahoo leagues. So in short, I think everyone here realizes the games are different, but both take both skill and luck to do well in long time, and you can argue all day about how much of each is needed. In the end, that's not why these games will be legal or illegal, because if that were the case horse racing would have been banned long ago, as opposed to anyone in America over 18 being able to open a legal and regulated online horse racing betting account.

spot on

Anybody know the genesis of the skill vs. luck distinction as applied to U.S. gaming law? I don't (if you do, fill me in). I assume the policy behind it is that a player could, in theory, control ruining their life in a game of skill, but would have no control over ruining their life (and society around them) in a game of chance, hence the distinction. It's bullshit (to a degree), but here ya'll are, debating luck vs skill as though there is merit to the distinction as applied in this context. Sound like the politicians!

DFS is fucked as we know it, season long will be fine.

Also, regulation and taxation are not all bad, and "freedom" is not, nor has it ever remotely been, absolute in the United States. I enjoy the fact that I don't personally have to pay in full for my own fire department, interstate system, air traffic controllers, and, being veterans day, military - so in that sense, I support some taxation for the greater good and for my own personal good. I'm also glad I can't be legally murdered and that eight year olds can't buy machine guns. Or is that all another #moneygrab?

None of which is an endorsement of politicians on an individual level.

First, yes, of course you pay for your fire department & interstate system. LMAO! Really? Second, if a politician thought he would win an election because the people would elect him based on a stance that 8 year olds could purchase guns, then he/she would. Really? I mean, this is basic, obvious, & elementary stuff. I can't fathom that we're even having that discussion. LMAO!

[rickerbockerNFBC]

Congress does not really care about the distinction between skill and luck and gambling. They only care about protecting certain interests. I mean you can say we should ban games of short duration, but then why does NY have zero interest in banning horse racing? It all comes down to political will. There are some people who benefit by poker being illegal, both politically and profitably. And I'm sure when DFS was so in everybody's face with their ads, Vegas interests took note and saw the games as a threat to gambling dollars just like poker and sports betting are, and season-long fantasy sports aren't. And then when FanDuel and DK handled things so stupidly, it made it easy to get people to not understand them and move to ban them. So obviously daily games are gambling, but so is horse racing, so is day trading, so is this game. It's not the distinctions that really matter- it's political interests and perception. So clearly it is in the best interest of season long games to distinguish themselves from DFS, which is quite easy, since they really are very different games. And it's going to be in the best interests of DFS companies to say they are in the same industry, since a lot of people like their daily yahoo leagues. So in short, I think everyone here realizes the games are different, but both take both skill and luck to do well in long time, and you can argue all day about how much of each is needed. In the end, that's not why these games will be legal or illegal, because if that were the case horse racing would have been banned long ago, as opposed to anyone in America over 18 being able to open a legal and regulated online horse racing betting account.

spot on

Anybody know the genesis of the skill vs. luck distinction as applied to U.S. gaming law? I don't (if you do, fill me in). I assume the policy behind it is that a player could, in theory, control ruining their life in a game of skill, but would have no control over ruining their life (and society around them) in a game of chance, hence the distinction. It's bullshit (to a degree), but here ya'll are, debating luck vs skill as though there is merit to the distinction as applied in this context. Sound like the politicians!

DFS is fucked as we know it, season long will be fine.

Also, regulation and taxation are not all bad, and "freedom" is not, nor has it ever remotely been, absolute in the United States. I enjoy the fact that I don't personally have to pay in full for my own fire department, interstate system, air traffic controllers, and, being veterans day, military - so in that sense, I support some taxation for the greater good and for my own personal good. I'm also glad I can't be legally murdered and that eight year olds can't buy machine guns. Or is that all another #moneygrab?

None of which is an endorsement of politicians on an individual level.

I forgot the funniest thing. DFS IS TAXED ALREADY! 1099's are submitted, at least by FanDuel. Also, they're incorporated in a state, believe it's MASS, if I remember correctly. So, they pay corporate taxes. LMAO! I love this forum. It's free, laughable, entertainment.

[KJ Duke]

People have often misinterpreted Milton Friedman as an anti-regulation, anything-goes economist. In fact, he was in favor of regulation that offered protections against those who would use power to abuse/coerce and restrict freedom, whether corporate or individual. Monopolies do need to be regulated. Criminals need to be prosecuted.

Unfortunately, laws such as we see now and for most of the past 20-30 years is more about those in power abusing those who are not in power. This is the complete opposite of "good" legislation.

Complicated laws that are presented under the ruse of "protecting" citizens are generally motivated by special interests building moats to protect their business from competition. That is obviously what's happening here. It kills small business, it kills wage growth and economic opportunity and takes away personal freedoms.

[EWeaver]

Congress does not really care about the distinction between skill and luck and gambling. They only care about protecting certain interests. I mean you can say we should ban games of short duration, but then why does NY have zero interest in banning horse racing? It all comes down to political will. There are some people who benefit by poker being illegal, both politically and profitably. And I'm sure when DFS was so in everybody's face with their ads, Vegas interests took note and saw the games as a threat to gambling dollars just like poker and sports betting are, and season-long fantasy sports aren't. And then when FanDuel and DK handled things so stupidly, it made it easy to get people to not understand them and move to ban them. So obviously daily games are gambling, but so is horse racing, so is day trading, so is this game. It's not the distinctions that really matter- it's political interests and perception. So clearly it is in the best interest of season long games to distinguish themselves from DFS, which is quite easy, since they really are very different games. And it's going to be in the best interests of DFS companies to say they are in the same industry, since a lot of people like their daily yahoo leagues. So in short, I think everyone here realizes the games are different, but both take both skill and luck to do well in long time, and you can argue all day about how much of each is needed. In the end, that's not why these games will be legal or illegal, because if that were the case horse racing would have been banned long ago, as opposed to anyone in America over 18 being able to open a legal and regulated online horse racing betting account.

spot on

Anybody know the genesis of the skill vs. luck distinction as applied to U.S. gaming law? I don't (if you do, fill me in). I assume the policy behind it is that a player could, in theory, control ruining their life in a game of skill, but would have no control over ruining their life (and society around them) in a game of chance, hence the distinction. It's bullshit (to a degree), but here ya'll are, debating luck vs skill as though there is merit to the distinction as applied in this context. Sound like the politicians!

DFS is fucked as we know it, season long will be fine.

Also, regulation and taxation are not all bad, and "freedom" is not, nor has it ever remotely been, absolute in the United States. I enjoy the fact that I don't personally have to pay in full for my own fire department, interstate system, air traffic controllers, and, being veterans day, military - so in that sense, I support some taxation for the greater good and for my own personal good. I'm also glad I can't be legally murdered and that eight year olds can't buy machine guns. Or is that all another #moneygrab?

None of which is an endorsement of politicians on an individual level.

I forgot the funniest thing. DFS IS TAXED ALREADY! 1099's are submitted, at least by FanDuel. Also, they're incorporated in a state, believe it's MASS, if I remember correctly. So, they pay corporate taxes. LMAO! I love this forum. It's free, laughable, entertainment.

i literally don't know if you're agreeing with me or arguing against arguments you're perceiving me to be advancing, or if it's all just a joke?

[Walla Walla]

We're waiting here in Washington state to see what they do in the next week or so. Daily Fantasy Games have really hurt any chances of anything passing though. They've watered down whats being proposed here to a season long contest with no more than 50 entries and an entry fee of no more than $50.00. I don't even think that will pass now. A daily contest is like a parlay card. Meanwhile a season long contest is like poker. A game of skill based on many thought out moves that need to be made to win. That's why poker is legal in so many states. When Washington state went after the NFBC it was based on the use of the internet. I always felt since the draft was live in Nevada than Washington St law shouldn't be applied. Oh well. A nickel for my thoughts. Here's your 4 cents change.