3 ms·

>But I think that's a flawed conclusion. The article notes that many unskilled players play daily fantasy as well. In the NHL (to continue the example), every s

>But I think that's a flawed conclusion. The article notes that many unskilled players play daily fantasy as well. In the NHL (to continue the example), every single player and team is elite compared to all hockey players. If NHL teams played minor and rec league teams, their records would be stunningly lopsided. Came to say this - Hosoi should compare the top 0.01% of fantasy players against each other and report back

ssharp 10y ago
It's a completely ridiculous comparison. Imagine a high school team playing the Cleveland Cavaliers or Golden State Warriors. Poker is probably a better example since it's far more likely for bad players to play in a game against a great player than it is a bad basketball player to play against Lebron James. In poker, the more skilled players there are at the table, the harder it is to tell who the bad players are. Even the highest cash games in the world rely on extremely wealthy gamblers who aren't skilled in order to remain lucrative to the professionals.
smallnamespace 10y ago
> Came to say this - Hosoi should compare the top 0.01% of fantasy players against each other and report back Why? If you really did that, then every single game would be considered a game of chance, even chess. I don't necessarily agree with the article's conclusions, but only comparing the top players isn't a legitimate thing to do -- if you take any distribution and zoom in at the extremes, it will look just like noise.
- schwap 10y ago
  It's not as ridiculous as you think. To continue to abuse the hockey analogy, there are ~979000 registered hockey players in the US and Canada[1]. There are 30 NHL teams, each with a contract limit of 50, for a total of 1500 players. That's 0.153% of all hockey players in North America. EDIT: Need to read better, that's an order of magnitude off so it is a bit ridiculous. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_hockey#Number_of_registered_players_by_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_hockey#Number_of_registere...
  - smallnamespace 10y ago
    I think you're missing what I'm saying. The criticism is, 'I don't like the article's metric because it doesn't zoom in on the tail of the distribution'. But if you do that with any game, the answer you will get is uniformly 0.5, even when comparing chess to tic tac toe.
    - schwap 10y ago
      No I understand your argument, I'm just trying to illustrate how small a part of the tail professional sports really is (turns out it's small but not that small).
      - simplemath 10y ago
        Depends on the sport. For NBA and NFL athletes in the US, it is close to 1 in 10k high school athletes in those sports that make it to the pros
    - x1798DE 10y ago
      I think schwap's point was that you can't draw the conclusion "Fantasy games are more games of skill than their professional counterparts" when you're comparing people self-selected to have close to even skill levels (elite athletes) to a random sampling of the population. Of course there's more skill advantage in a random sampling than a sample biased by skill.
- NeutronBoy 10y ago
  They're basically saying that in RL sport, the skill level at that top level is so close that 'chance' has a significant impact on the outcomes. However, the skill gap between 2 random players of fantasy sport is so large that chance has very little impact.
jjuel 10y ago
If you read down the article it does say that games of skill between similarly skilled players will result in 'chance' having a bigger affect on the outcome. But lets not act like DFS are not a game of skill.

ssharp 10y ago

It's a completely ridiculous comparison. Imagine a high school team playing the Cleveland Cavaliers or Golden State Warriors. Poker is probably a better example since it's far more likely for bad players to play in a game against a great player than it is a bad basketball player to play against Lebron James. In poker, the more skilled players there are at the table, the harder it is to tell who the bad players are. Even the highest cash games in the world rely on extremely wealthy gamblers who aren't skilled in order to remain lucrative to the professionals.

smallnamespace 10y ago

> Came to say this - Hosoi should compare the top 0.01% of fantasy players against each other and report back Why? If you really did that, then every single game would be considered a game of chance, even chess. I don't necessarily agree with the article's conclusions, but only comparing the top players isn't a legitimate thing to do -- if you take any distribution and zoom in at the extremes, it will look just like noise.

schwap 10y ago
It's not as ridiculous as you think. To continue to abuse the hockey analogy, there are ~979000 registered hockey players in the US and Canada[1]. There are 30 NHL teams, each with a contract limit of 50, for a total of 1500 players. That's 0.153% of all hockey players in North America. EDIT: Need to read better, that's an order of magnitude off so it is a bit ridiculous. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_hockey#Number_of_registered_players_by_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_hockey#Number_of_registere...
- smallnamespace 10y ago
  I think you're missing what I'm saying. The criticism is, 'I don't like the article's metric because it doesn't zoom in on the tail of the distribution'. But if you do that with any game, the answer you will get is uniformly 0.5, even when comparing chess to tic tac toe.
  - schwap 10y ago
    No I understand your argument, I'm just trying to illustrate how small a part of the tail professional sports really is (turns out it's small but not that small).
    - simplemath 10y ago
      Depends on the sport. For NBA and NFL athletes in the US, it is close to 1 in 10k high school athletes in those sports that make it to the pros
  - x1798DE 10y ago
    I think schwap's point was that you can't draw the conclusion "Fantasy games are more games of skill than their professional counterparts" when you're comparing people self-selected to have close to even skill levels (elite athletes) to a random sampling of the population. Of course there's more skill advantage in a random sampling than a sample biased by skill.
NeutronBoy 10y ago
They're basically saying that in RL sport, the skill level at that top level is so close that 'chance' has a significant impact on the outcomes. However, the skill gap between 2 random players of fantasy sport is so large that chance has very little impact.

jjuel 10y ago

If you read down the article it does say that games of skill between similarly skilled players will result in 'chance' having a bigger affect on the outcome. But lets not act like DFS are not a game of skill.