NRL Fantasy Fanatics

NRL Fantasy Fanatics - A place for discussion of NRL Fantasy / Virtual Sports / Super Coach and other Fantasy Sports

    2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5

    mattnz
    mattnz

    Posts : 2484
    Reputation : 608
    Join date : 2018-03-11

    2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5 - Page 3 Empty Re: 2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5

    Post by mattnz on Sun Feb 10, 2019 8:44 pm

    @multiple.scoregasms wrote:

    How about the opposite situation where your 10 PODs under perform. Stock standard puts up a 1000 point week and you score 800 points. 200 points back floundering outside the top 10,000. Perhaps at this point you start doubting your choices and figure out that not only is your POD(let's say Katoa) is being outscored by the masses, you have also spent an extra 150k over a Corey Allen tier player. That is the difference between a Leeson Ah Mau(who could still be scoring at priced average of 42 instead of Jai Arrow.

    Picking a POD for the sake of choosing a POD isn't the way to win fantasy. It's a nice way to lose it in the first 3 rounds.

    Happy to lose in the first 3 rounds (and get my life back), for the chance to have a commanding lead after 3 rounds if my lucky numbers come up.
    multiple.scoregasms
    multiple.scoregasms

    Posts : 2479
    Reputation : 970
    Join date : 2015-10-29

    2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5 - Page 3 Empty Re: 2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5

    Post by multiple.scoregasms on Sun Feb 10, 2019 8:46 pm

    @mattnz wrote:

    Happy to lose in the first 3 rounds (and get my life back), for the chance to have a commanding lead after 3 rounds if my lucky numbers come up.

    Respect the courage to back yourself. Best of luck with the strategy
    L-Jimmy
    L-Jimmy

    Posts : 611
    Reputation : 499
    Join date : 2018-01-16
    Age : 36
    Location : Melbourne

    2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5 - Page 3 Empty Re: 2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5

    Post by L-Jimmy on Sun Feb 10, 2019 9:05 pm

    @mattnz wrote:Ok, POD theory.....

    Lets say you have 2 possible teams. One is cookie cutter, basically take all the most owned players and assume conventional wisdom that the masses are choosing the right players generally and that is why they are popular. You have a team of 21 players that all have high ownership.

    By contrast I am hoping to have lets say 10 PODs, with 11 players in common with the other team (not just choosing PODs for the sake of it, but if I have 2 equal choices, I would go with the POD). Lets assume each team performs just as well as the other and of the 10 players that are different in each team, 8 do great and 2 not so great in round 1. I don't feel a compulsion to suddenly add lots of non-PODs. Those that dont have my PODs may start getting a couple of them in, but they arent going to get all my 8 PODs in, especially while they are increasing in value over the first few rounds. At most they could only get 2 per round and they are still less likely to be selected than the equally well performing non PODs in the other team.

    I am only looking to win the comp, not just get top 1000, top 100 or whatever. Having differentiation assists this goal. If it was entirely random like a lottery, you don't want to have the same numbers (players) as everyone else.

    This article discusses this phenomenon, where if you chose the numbers 1,2,3,4,5,6 that there are 10,000 others that choose this same sequence every week. https://www.lottoland.co.uk/magazine/why-you-should-avoid-the-most-popular-lottery-numbers.html

    If you won first prize, you would win very little money because you would be sharing first prize so many ways. Instead of 5 million pounds on your own, you get 500 pounds each.

    It isnt that the chances of hitting these numbers is any more or less likely than any other sequence, but that their popularity reduces what you win.

    Applying this game theory to Fantasy, selecting PODs doesn't make them any more likely to score higher, but means if I hit the jackpot and all my player numbers come up as winners, the rarity of my player pool amongst all other players makes it far more valuable.

    Lets say that the chances of my first round players all killing it in round 1 and getting 1,000 points is equal in both the 10 POD scenario as in the 0 POD scenario. If I get it with the 0 POD team, everyone goes wow what a huge round, everyone scored amazingly well. There are likely 50 other teams over 1000 that same round and yeah I have done well, but there are others around me.

    In the alternative scenario, my 10 PODs absolutely kill it and I get 1,000 points. My unique lottery numbers that no one else has picked all came up at once and I have 100 point lead in first place.

    Same likelihood of happening, different outcome if it does happen.

    Thats the POD theory.


    I understand where you’re going with this, and I’m sorry for not having been clearer in my previous response. I was rushed and just lent on jargon instead of communicating effectively.

    Your model is potentially correct for a single game, like the lottery (although I disagree with the attribution of probability, see below). But it needs to be a more complex model for a repeated game like NRLFF. This is because it is not sufficient to win once, but what is required is to win after 20-odd rounds.

    Let’s set up some boundary points that reflect the discussion so far. These apply before games are played, and player outcomes can be observed:

    1) Popular players exist
    2) There exists a ‘wisdom of crowds’ mechanism that means the probability of popular player having a desirable score/price ratio is greater than an unpopular player. Popularity is therefore positively linked with desirable score/price ratios (Kikass from 2018).
    3) (corrolary) There will be unpopular players who will also eventuate as having desireable score/price ratios (AFB, Holmes).
    4) Path dependence exists, so that a good start by your team is required for a good finish, but is not sufficient, as:
    5) Strategic responses also exist, so that advantage can be eroded by teams changing to pick up revealed value (eg Chompson, Maloney 2018)

    What I was trying to put forward in the finance analogy was the need for any overall winner to be strongly similar to the wisdom-of-crowds optimal group, but with some points of variation. This argument is a result of the repeated-game situation, where you want to maximise the probability of fully utilising the WOC value (because it has information linked to probably outcomes). But you’ll also want some degree of variation.

    The variation should ideally be high-impact, as the FF game takes place with many other players, all following similar strategies. Captaining a back is an example of the high-impact variation, but it fails due to having no positive next-game impact and is stastically unwise (if Teddy scores 30, 30, 30, 100 in every four games on average, then betting on any particular game being 100 returns an average of 70 compared with CS9 50 60 50 60 average of 110). A better strategy would be VK’s Fitz gamble last year, where a high-scoring forward with scoring volatility was added. But I digress.

    The benefit of the high early season POD strategy is point 4. A good start matters, in cash, points and zero-trade opportunities. These are huge benefits.
    The costs of the strategy are points 2 and 5: it probably won’t work, and if it does then other players can respond and narrow the gap. This gap will also likely automatically narrow due to point 2 - the non PODs are probably better. These are huge costs.

    I suspect the strongest argument in support of my argument is the cookie-cutter nature of the top 20 final teams last year.

    That said, I strongly suspect my wife will be running a POD team from the start, mostly because its fun!

    KalkadoonWarrior
    KalkadoonWarrior

    Posts : 262
    Reputation : 119
    Join date : 2019-01-29

    2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5 - Page 3 Empty Re: 2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5

    Post by KalkadoonWarrior on Sun Feb 10, 2019 9:06 pm

    @mattnz wrote:Ok, POD theory.....

    Lets say you have 2 possible teams. One is cookie cutter, basically take all the most owned players and assume conventional wisdom that the masses are choosing the right players generally and that is why they are popular. You have a team of 21 players that all have high ownership.

    By contrast I am hoping to have lets say 10 PODs, with 11 players in common with the other team (not just choosing PODs for the sake of it, but if I have 2 equal choices, I would go with the POD). Lets assume each team performs just as well as the other and of the 10 players that are different in each team, 8 do great and 2 not so great in round 1. I don't feel a compulsion to suddenly add lots of non-PODs. Those that dont have my PODs may start getting a couple of them in, but they arent going to get all my 8 PODs in, especially while they are increasing in value over the first few rounds. At most they could only get 2 per round and they are still less likely to be selected than the equally well performing non PODs in the other team.

    I am only looking to win the comp, not just get top 1000, top 100 or whatever. Having differentiation assists this goal. If it was entirely random like a lottery, you don't want to have the same numbers (players) as everyone else.

    This article discusses this phenomenon, where if you chose the numbers 1,2,3,4,5,6 that there are 10,000 others that choose this same sequence every week. https://www.lottoland.co.uk/magazine/why-you-should-avoid-the-most-popular-lottery-numbers.html

    If you won first prize, you would win very little money because you would be sharing first prize so many ways. Instead of 5 million pounds on your own, you get 500 pounds each.

    It isnt that the chances of hitting these numbers is any more or less likely than any other sequence, but that their popularity reduces what you win.

    Applying this game theory to Fantasy, selecting PODs doesn't make them any more likely to score higher, but means if I hit the jackpot and all my player numbers come up as winners, the rarity of my player pool amongst all other players makes it far more valuable.

    Lets say that the chances of my first round players all killing it in round 1 and getting 1,000 points is equal in both the 10 POD scenario as in the 0 POD scenario. If I get it with the 0 POD team, everyone goes wow what a huge round, everyone scored amazingly well. There are likely 50 other teams over 1000 that same round and yeah I have done well, but there are others around me.

    In the alternative scenario, my 10 PODs absolutely kill it and I get 1,000 points. My unique lottery numbers that no one else has picked all came up at once and I have 100 point lead in first place.

    Same likelihood of happening, different outcome if it does happen.

    Thats the POD theory.


    I understand your logic behind this but it’s flawed. Playing lotto, yes correct but this isn’t just random numbers there’s a great deal of skill involved in the decisions we make. Players with huge ownership get it by consistently proving their worth. PODS are 99% of the time there because they haven’t. The statistical chance of the big guns all doing well is extremely higher than a bunch of PODS. The huge risk huge reward theory is correct, however if you’re looking to win and not just finish top 1000 then realistically PODS have little to do with it. Choosing the right cows, timing of your trades and choice of your guns is how you win. PODS will usually only Play their part during the last rounds when everybody’s team is basically the same and you are chasing extra points to catch up. Cows, guns and value should be the only things to look at when starting a team. If your theory was correct than all horses in a race would have the same odds.
    mattnz
    mattnz

    Posts : 2484
    Reputation : 608
    Join date : 2018-03-11

    2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5 - Page 3 Empty Re: 2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5

    Post by mattnz on Sun Feb 10, 2019 9:18 pm

    [quote="L-Jimmy"]

    A) Lets change the parameters then, instead of being the best performers in a single round, lets make it the top performers over the first 11 rounds before the bye.

    If my 0 POD team was amazing across those 11 rounds, and I made all the right trade moves, I may have a small advantage over other teams at the end of 11 rounds, maybe 100 points if you were lucky, competing against a large number of other very similar teams.

    If my 10 POD teams was amazing across those 11 rounds, and I made all the right trade moves, I would have a very large advantage over other teams at the end of 11 rounds, maybe 500 points, as others gradually try to move towards my team, but burning extra trades and not being in a position to pay more for the same team.

    As you rightly pointed out, it is a rich get richer game. More points = more team value. If other players missed the right team at the start (and weren't even close to it with me having multiple PODs), their chances of catching up are massively reduced, than in the scenario with 0 PODs.

    B) At the end of the season everyone tends to have very cookie cutter teams, as the best performers are demonstrated throughout the season and they buy them into their team.

    As explained in A), if my team gets a large points margin and has a higher team value and I have more trades remaining from having the right (POD) team to start the season with, then I am more than happy for everyone behind me to have a similar gun team to what I have at that point in the competition. With a large points lead mid way through the season, the optimal strategy is likely to be reverting more towards the cookie cutter team. Fortunately the cookie cutter team of the best performers, is those you already had over the first 11 rounds.


    Last edited by mattnz on Sun Feb 10, 2019 9:23 pm; edited 1 time in total
    Fortitude
    Fortitude

    Posts : 2774
    Reputation : 1097
    Join date : 2016-02-25
    Location : National Capital

    2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5 - Page 3 Empty Re: 2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5

    Post by Fortitude on Sun Feb 10, 2019 9:23 pm

    @mattnz wrote:Ok, POD theory.....

    Lets say you have 2 possible teams. One is cookie cutter, basically take all the most owned players and assume conventional wisdom that the masses are choosing the right players generally and that is why they are popular. You have a team of 21 players that all have high ownership.

    By contrast I am hoping to have lets say 10 PODs, with 11 players in common with the other team (not just choosing PODs for the sake of it, but if I have 2 equal choices, I would go with the POD). Lets assume each team performs just as well as the other and of the 10 players that are different in each team, 8 do great and 2 not so great in round 1. I don't feel a compulsion to suddenly add lots of non-PODs. Those that dont have my PODs may start getting a couple of them in, but they arent going to get all my 8 PODs in, especially while they are increasing in value over the first few rounds. At most they could only get 2 per round and they are still less likely to be selected than the equally well performing non PODs in the other team.

    I am only looking to win the comp, not just get top 1000, top 100 or whatever. Having differentiation assists this goal. If it was entirely random like a lottery, you don't want to have the same numbers (players) as everyone else.

    This article discusses this phenomenon, where if you chose the numbers 1,2,3,4,5,6 that there are 10,000 others that choose this same sequence every week. https://www.lottoland.co.uk/magazine/why-you-should-avoid-the-most-popular-lottery-numbers.html

    If you won first prize, you would win very little money because you would be sharing first prize so many ways. Instead of 5 million pounds on your own, you get 500 pounds each.

    It isnt that the chances of hitting these numbers is any more or less likely than any other sequence, but that their popularity reduces what you win.

    Applying this game theory to Fantasy, selecting PODs doesn't make them any more likely to score higher, but means if I hit the jackpot and all my player numbers come up as winners, the rarity of my player pool amongst all other players makes it far more valuable.

    Lets say that the chances of my first round players all killing it in round 1 and getting 1,000 points is equal in both the 10 POD scenario as in the 0 POD scenario. If I get it with the 0 POD team, everyone goes wow what a huge round, everyone scored amazingly well. There are likely 50 other teams over 1000 that same round and yeah I have done well, but there are others around me.

    In the alternative scenario, my 10 PODs absolutely kill it and I get 1,000 points. My unique lottery numbers that no one else has picked all came up at once and I have 100 point lead in first place.

    Same likelihood of happening, different outcome if it does happen.

    Thats the POD theory.


    Find all “win” replace with “lose”

    mattnz
    mattnz

    Posts : 2484
    Reputation : 608
    Join date : 2018-03-11

    2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5 - Page 3 Empty Re: 2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5

    Post by mattnz on Sun Feb 10, 2019 9:25 pm

    @Fortitude wrote:

    Find all “win” replace with “lose”


    Would you agree that to win first place in fantasy there has to be an element of luck and getting things right?

    You need to be on the winning side of many decisions throughout the season. By playing PODs to start the season, you are increasing the opportunity for that good fortune to have an even greater impact than a cookie cutter team would have.
    mattnz
    mattnz

    Posts : 2484
    Reputation : 608
    Join date : 2018-03-11

    2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5 - Page 3 Empty Re: 2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5

    Post by mattnz on Sun Feb 10, 2019 9:32 pm

    @KalkadoonWarrior wrote:

    I understand your logic behind this but it’s flawed. Playing lotto, yes correct but this isn’t just random numbers there’s a great deal of skill involved in the decisions we make. Players with huge ownership get it by consistently proving their worth. PODS are 99% of the time there because they haven’t. The statistical chance of the big guns all doing well is extremely higher than a bunch of PODS. The huge risk huge reward theory is correct, however if you’re looking to win and not just finish top 1000 then realistically PODS have little to do with it. Choosing the right cows, timing of your trades and choice of your guns is how you win. PODS will usually only Play their part  during the last rounds when everybody’s team is basically the same and you are chasing extra points to catch up. Cows, guns and value should be the only things to look at when starting a team. If your theory was correct than all horses in a race would have the same odds.

    Horse racing is actually a really good example of this game theory in practice. If you place a bet at the TAB on a horse and lots of others then back the same horse, your payout reduces to less than the odds offered at the time you placed the bet. You want to be able to find opportunities that others miss, because the payout is higher if they become a winner.
    Fortitude
    Fortitude

    Posts : 2774
    Reputation : 1097
    Join date : 2016-02-25
    Location : National Capital

    2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5 - Page 3 Empty Re: 2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5

    Post by Fortitude on Sun Feb 10, 2019 9:33 pm

    I agree you need luck to win the lotto. But the lotto is a single event based on pure random outcomes. Fantasy is effected by talent mostly, game management and luck. It’s not a logical comparison.

    I’d argue that following the cookie cutter team (provided by an informed and learned bunch of supporters) is far and away the smarter plan. You identify two or theee weakness in that team and try and improve that area.

    If you’re picking pods. Expecting random luck. You MIGHT do well enough to win one round. But you won’t win the entire thing.
    Alfie
    Alfie

    Posts : 902
    Reputation : 235
    Join date : 2018-01-20
    Location : Manly

    2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5 - Page 3 Empty Re: 2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5

    Post by Alfie on Sun Feb 10, 2019 9:35 pm

    @mattnz wrote:

    Would you agree that to win first place in fantasy there has to be an element of luck and getting things right?

    You need to be on the winning side of many decisions throughout the season. By playing PODs to start the season, you are increasing the opportunity for that good fortune to have an even greater impact than a cookie cutter team would have.

    I don't think you need to go POD's at the start of the season in order to win. It's quite self-explanatory that if you go with PODs that outperform the usual cookie cutter players in the first few rounds then you will be in much better stead compared to the rest of us. However, if your PODs fail, you're at an incredible disadvantage from the get-go. I think its reasonable to steer away from PODs based on this fear because of the risk attached with making the decision to go all out on PODs. Much safer to only go with PODs if you genuinely feel in your gut that they will be a good pick rather than picking a player because he is a POD or avoiding a player just because he has high ownership
    mattnz
    mattnz

    Posts : 2484
    Reputation : 608
    Join date : 2018-03-11

    2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5 - Page 3 Empty Re: 2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5

    Post by mattnz on Sun Feb 10, 2019 9:38 pm

    @Fortitude wrote:I agree you need luck to win the lotto. But the lotto is a single event based on pure random outcomes. Fantasy is effected by talent mostly, game management and luck. It’s not a logical comparison.

    I’d argue that following the cookie cutter team (provided by an informed and learned bunch of supporters) is far and away the smarter plan. You identify two or theee weakness in that team and try and improve that area.

    If you’re picking pods. Expecting random luck. You MIGHT do well enough to win one round. But you won’t win the entire thing.

    Not expecting random luck, more just doing my research and when I find a player that I think is a great pick based on that research and they have 2% ownership, I'm thinking, awesome!

    If I have 2 players that I see having equal value and opportunity, and one has 30% ownership and the other 5%, where I can't differentiate the decision in any other way, I would select the 5% every time. It turns what looks like a 50/50 decision that could go either way, into a chance to have massively outperformed 95% of other players, and that has value each time you do it.
    KalkadoonWarrior
    KalkadoonWarrior

    Posts : 262
    Reputation : 119
    Join date : 2019-01-29

    2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5 - Page 3 Empty Re: 2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5

    Post by KalkadoonWarrior on Sun Feb 10, 2019 9:41 pm

    @mattnz wrote:

    Horse racing is actually a really good example of this game theory in practice. If you place a bet at the TAB on a horse and lots of others then back the same horse, your payout reduces to less than the odds offered at the time you placed the bet. You want to be able to find opportunities that others miss, because the payout is higher if they become a winner.

    It’s sort of a great example because people backing it lower the odds which means the reward is less, but there’s a reason people back them. There’s an understanding that particular horses are just simply better than others hence their favouritism. You could back against Black Caviar every time to be a POD and yes while your reward would be greater than the people who backed Black to win had you won, but you didn’t. Hence the likelihood isn’t the same.
    Fortitude
    Fortitude

    Posts : 2774
    Reputation : 1097
    Join date : 2016-02-25
    Location : National Capital

    2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5 - Page 3 Empty Re: 2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5

    Post by Fortitude on Sun Feb 10, 2019 9:44 pm

    @mattnz wrote:

    Not expecting random luck, more just doing my research and when I find a player that I think is a great pick based on that research and they have 2% ownership, I'm thinking, awesome!

    If I have 2 players that I see having equal value and opportunity, and one has 30% ownership and the other 5%, where I can't differentiate the decision in any other way, I would select the 5% every time. It turns what looks like a 50/50 decision that could go either way, into a chance to have massively outperformed 95% of other players, and that has value each time you do it.
    That sounds like a perfectly reasonable approach.

    You’re putting a lot of faith in your own opinion and if you’re confident doing that, then kudos to you. Im fairly risk adverse. I’d be extremely selective in making those calls.
    Boozecluez
    Boozecluez

    Posts : 3538
    Reputation : 1275
    Join date : 2016-01-12
    Age : 35
    Location : Sydney

    2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5 - Page 3 Empty Re: 2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5

    Post by Boozecluez on Sun Feb 10, 2019 9:47 pm



    Last edited by Boozecluez on Sun Feb 10, 2019 9:56 pm; edited 1 time in total
    SI
    SI
    Moderator

    Posts : 15227
    Reputation : 4582
    Join date : 2015-08-03

    2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5 - Page 3 Empty Re: 2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5

    Post by SI on Sun Feb 10, 2019 9:52 pm


    *boozed, as in "Have boozed this up for 2019" Very Happy
    Boozecluez
    Boozecluez

    Posts : 3538
    Reputation : 1275
    Join date : 2016-01-12
    Age : 35
    Location : Sydney

    2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5 - Page 3 Empty Re: 2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5

    Post by Boozecluez on Sun Feb 10, 2019 9:56 pm

    @SI wrote:

    *boozed, as in "Have boozed this up for 2019" Very Happy

    Haha Cheers, fixed it for you

    Beer
    Archer
    Archer

    Posts : 5439
    Reputation : 1561
    Join date : 2016-01-12
    Location : I think this displays

    2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5 - Page 3 Empty Re: 2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5

    Post by Archer on Sun Feb 10, 2019 10:13 pm

    @SI wrote:


    I'll await your PM Rapture  Very Happy
    Inb4 "instructions unclear, dick caught in gif"
    Archer
    Archer

    Posts : 5439
    Reputation : 1561
    Join date : 2016-01-12
    Location : I think this displays

    2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5 - Page 3 Empty Re: 2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5

    Post by Archer on Sun Feb 10, 2019 10:16 pm

    Weighing in on the POD debate, I love POD's but thats cause I'm a contrarian hippy hipster. I'm also bad at Fantasy (not welshy bad mind). Hope that helped.
    Random
    Random
    Moderator

    Posts : 6819
    Reputation : 1338
    Join date : 2015-01-12
    Age : 27

    2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5 - Page 3 Empty Re: 2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5

    Post by Random on Sun Feb 10, 2019 10:22 pm

    I want more information re Katoa. Is it just the fact that he will have Johnson inside him?

    Also what are the Sharks backline?
    mattnz
    mattnz

    Posts : 2484
    Reputation : 608
    Join date : 2018-03-11

    2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5 - Page 3 Empty Re: 2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5

    Post by mattnz on Sun Feb 10, 2019 10:25 pm

    As a simplified example, my back 3 I have spent $1,368k on.

    They all have <5% ownership and are all priced at points that I think even if they perform great, others may not see the value in them and overlook adding them into their teams in time to get them at a decent price point.

    Instead I could have spent similar money to get
    Ponga (36%) $795k
    Lomax (44%) $230k (he is actually in my team as NPR, but just as an example)
    Meaney (10%) $362k
    Total 1,387k

    If Ponga, Lomax and Meaney, as high ownership players start killing it early in the season, then everyone is likely to get them into their teams asap to avoid missing out, so that is a disadvantage compared to my far less popular PODs, that are less likely to be brought in.

    Lets assume that:
    1. who ever the best back 3 that could have been chosen within budget would score 200 points more than other combinations that could have been chosen; and
    2. there is equal chance that my back 3 could be the best back 3 to have started the season with as these 3 highly owned players (or any other combination for the same money).

    If there are 100k players in the comp, the number likely to have the popular 3 player combination is 100,000 x 0.36 x 0.44 x 0.10 = 1,496 players all with that same perfect combination from the start. Lots of competition for you even though you had a great start to the season with the perfect back 3 pick.

    The odds on another player having my back 3 are 100,000 x 0.02 x 0.03 x 0.04 = 2 players that all start with the same perfect combination from the start (and I am one of those 2!), if my PODs paid off as the best possible combination by 200 points.

    That is the power of having PODs. All other things being equal I am 200 points ahead of everyone except 1 other player that selected the same PODs vs being equally benefitted as 1,496 players, despite picking the perfect combination for the back 3 with the popular players. It is such a huge difference between the 2 scenarios.

    One you are sharing the lottery 2 ways, the other you are sharing the lottery 1,496 ways.

    At the end of the season 200 points is a huge difference to get you 1st place rather than 2nd.... vs no difference from 1500 other players that are still in the race.

      Current date/time is Sun Sep 22, 2019 8:20 am