Adam Rubin Retweeted
Darren Rovell ;@darrenrovell
BREAKING: NY Attorney General says daily fantasy is gambling & illegal, says DraftKings & FanDuel must cease operating & taking action in NY
everyone on here (and of course on the commercials) turns small sums of money into hundreds or thousands of dollars (or of course the guy in the draft kings commercial who turned $35 into $2,000,000
if this is legal, then gambling on teams should be too (my first opinion)
from the revelation that DraftKings and FanDuel employees were, in essence, cheating their customer base by using algorithms available only to them in order to enrich themselves at the consumers' expense. The companies only have themselves to blame for allowing this it happen.
I love posts like this from people who have no clue about what actually happened.
It's not far off from what happened. It's why one of the companies forbid their employees from playing on the other site.
everyone who ever told me about DFS told me they make money. Same as online poker back in the day. I wonder whether they're lying or the ones who lose money just dont talk about it.
Is suspect there is a lot of delusion. People who dont realize how much they've put in/taken out.
everyone on here (and of course on the commercials) turns small sums of money into hundreds or thousands of dollars (or of course the guy in the draft kings commercial who turned $35 into $2,000,000
if this is legal, then gambling on teams should be too (my first opinion)
Im currently down $43 bucks
But thats on the yahoo version and I'm gonna win it back this weekend!!
from the revelation that DraftKings and FanDuel employees were, in essence, cheating their customer base by using algorithms available only to them in order to enrich themselves at the consumers' expense. The companies only have themselves to blame for allowing this it happen.
I love posts like this from people who have no clue about what actually happened.
It's not far off from what happened. It's why one of the companies forbid their employees from playing on the other site.
Yeah, it's pretty damn far off from what happened. And the companies all forbid their employees from playing on any DFS sites to avoid the appearance of any impropriety, not because the person involved in the incident was found to have actually used any of that information (which he didn't have until after his winning lineup was already set and locked) to help him win.
The DraftKings employee winning on FanDuel started this whole thing
It was only after that went public that they changed their policy and banned their employees from doing so.
Also, this same big winner accidentally did this: "Last week, a DraftKings employee said on an online message board that he prematurely released data about contestants lineups. That same week, the employee won $350,000 playing in a top contest on FanDuel. DraftKings said the leak was an accident, and both companies said the data didnt help the employee win. The employee hasnt commented beyond his message-board post."
You should check out that big winner's baseball winnings too:
RE: The DraftKings employee winning on FanDuel started this whole thing
It was only after that went public that they changed their policy and banned their employees from doing so.
Also, this same big winner accidentally did this: "Last week, a DraftKings employee said on an online message board that he prematurely released data about contestants lineups. That same week, the employee won $350,000 playing in a top contest on FanDuel. DraftKings said the leak was an accident, and both companies said the data didnt help the employee win. The employee hasnt commented beyond his message-board post."
You should check out that big winner's baseball winnings too:
I'm not sure how you missed the part where I referred to that in my previous post.
Please detail for me exactly what data he had, when he had it, and how it helped him win the 350K.
Wait, thats it? You were wrong about being allowed to play, but
...it hasn't been proven that this particular employee, who has already demonstrated access to insider info and has a logic-defying record of wins, can't be proven to have cheated?
Sure, you can have that.
RE: Wait, thats it? You were wrong about being allowed to play, but
...it hasn't been proven that this particular employee, who has already demonstrated access to insider info and has a logic-defying record of wins, can't be proven to have cheated?
Sure, you can have that.
Where was I wrong about being allowed to play? Where has it been shown that this access to info helped him? Do you even know what the info is and how it could help him? How are his wins logic-defying, considering his job is to analyze fantasy sports? Do you have the records for all his entries, not just his big wins?
are just anti-gambling regulation points, which is totally fair. But the prohibition is in the NYS Constitution and penal code, and I think the case that DFS is gambling is very, very strong.
If a business wants to do something that is illegal, it should try to get the law changed. Breaking the law is not a business model we should support. I feel the same way about Uber. It's a very smart product, but they've got to comply with local licensing, labor, insurance, and wage & hour laws even if they think the laws are dumb/outdated.
Very well put. This may be the best post on the thread.
1) I've also never heard anyone may they lost on either site. I only know a few people who say they play and they always "win". I'm sure this isn't unlike forms of gambling where you have people who only mention their wins and ignore the multiple times (more times than winning) where they lost and how they fail to recognize their net loss for the period.
2) This morning Carton was saying all they have to do is change the currency to Bitcoin and this all goes away. Is this true? I don't really value anything he has to say on the topic, though, because I think he is a degenerate gambler and allows his gambling to dominate their show quite often.
RE: RE: Wait, thats it? You were wrong about being allowed to play, but
...it hasn't been proven that this particular employee, who has already demonstrated access to insider info and has a logic-defying record of wins, can't be proven to have cheated?
Sure, you can have that.
Where was I wrong about being allowed to play? Where has it been shown that this access to info helped him? Do you even know what the info is and how it could help him? How are his wins logic-defying, considering his job is to analyze fantasy sports? Do you have the records for all his entries, not just his big wins?
You said all employees were banned from playing, which was clearly not true.
The guy had insider info, again clearly demonstrated.
I have fun with DFS. I play leagues with my friends for 10$-20$ buy ins. I play some big pools and certain types of leagues on there. I've made a little money (like $100), and had some fun on Sunday rooting for players in games. I definitely think there's skill involved, as I nearly never come in the bottom half of a 50/50 game because I tend to put thought into the players I'm playing (injury can mess it up though).
I hope they don't shut it down. The commercials are fucking annoying, though.
of the end of online poker. The vast majority of the cashouts are going to <5% of the players, the "sharks." At the end of online poker, you had sharks playing 10+ games at once with sophisticated software to find good games (games vs recreational players) and HUD software that would display live stats for each of the opponents. The average player had no chance in the long or even medium term.
DFS has matured a lot faster but is in a similar position. Only a very small minority of players are winning anything. The "insider trading" is ridiculous, but even that aside, the "sharks" have access to spreadsheets and algorithms that recreational players have no clue about.
RE: RE: RE: Wait, thats it? You were wrong about being allowed to play, but
...it hasn't been proven that this particular employee, who has already demonstrated access to insider info and has a logic-defying record of wins, can't be proven to have cheated?
Sure, you can have that.
Where was I wrong about being allowed to play? Where has it been shown that this access to info helped him? Do you even know what the info is and how it could help him? How are his wins logic-defying, considering his job is to analyze fantasy sports? Do you have the records for all his entries, not just his big wins?
You said all employees were banned from playing, which was clearly not true.
The guy had insider info, again clearly demonstrated.
It's covered pretty well at the link below. The one guy that may have ended DFS - ( New Window )
They were banned from playing on their own sites the whole time. They were banned from playing on other sites after the Ethan Haskell incident, but not because Ethan was found to have cheated. Which is exactly what I said.
RE: RE: RE: Wait, thats it? You were wrong about being allowed to play, but
...it hasn't been proven that this particular employee, who has already demonstrated access to insider info and has a logic-defying record of wins, can't be proven to have cheated?
Sure, you can have that.
Where was I wrong about being allowed to play? Where has it been shown that this access to info helped him? Do you even know what the info is and how it could help him? How are his wins logic-defying, considering his job is to analyze fantasy sports? Do you have the records for all his entries, not just his big wins?
You said all employees were banned from playing, which was clearly not true.
The guy had insider info, again clearly demonstrated.
It's covered pretty well at the link below. The one guy that may have ended DFS - ( New Window )
And again please explain how the insider info - which was ownership % on Draft Kings obtained after the 1pm kickoff - helped him win 350K on FanDuel.
I've conceded that point already, not sure why you're harping on it
But he already demonstrated that he had info not available to other players. That's why FanDuel didn't allow their employees to play. DraftKings should've done that too, they may have avoided their current problems.
I find it so strange that anyone would be comfortable with an industry insider gaming the system like this.
RE: I've conceded that point already, not sure why you're harping on it
But he already demonstrated that he had info not available to other players. That's why FanDuel didn't allow their employees to play. DraftKings should've done that too, they may have avoided their current problems.
I find it so strange that anyone would be comfortable with an industry insider gaming the system like this.
How did he game the system?
You didn't read the link? I can't tell if you're doing this
But he already demonstrated that he had info not available to other players. That's why FanDuel didn't allow their employees to play. DraftKings should've done that too, they may have avoided their current problems.
I find it so strange that anyone would be comfortable with an industry insider gaming the system like this.
DraftKings and FanDuel had the same policy. All this talk about Ethan Haskell very easily could have been about the guy who makes salaries at FanDuel who won a ton of money at DraftKings (he also won a ton of money before going to work for FanDuel as well)
RE: You didn't read the link? I can't tell if you're doing this
A New York state judge denied a temporary restraining order sought by daily fantasy sports companies DraftKings and FanDuel in an effort to keep operating in the state after New York's attorney general deemed the games to be illegal gambling. Link - ( New Window )
Andrew Brandt @AndrewBrandt 11m11 minutes ago
Andrew Brandt Retweeted NYDN Sports I-Team
Hmmm...sports leagues and team owners have invested in that "felonious product." Andrew Brandt added,
NYDN Sports I-Team @NYDNSportsITeam
Kathleen McGee, for Attorney General's office: "Both FanDuel and Draft Kings are making huge profits off their felonious product."
Seeks to Delay Some TV Commercials and Ad Payments
In some cases, the company has been asking for the commitments it made for advertising to air in the fourth quarter be pushed back until the first quarter, the people said. DraftKings has also asked at least one media company for more flexibility in its payment terms, one of the people said, such as giving DraftKings up to 120 days after a commercial airs to pay for it. Typically, ad contracts require the advertiser to pay within two months of a spot airing.
but expedited the preliminary injunction merits hearing to next week. Which means that they judge was probably just trying to be cautious, especially since TROs tend to be ex parte applications. That is in many TRO applications, only the lawyer for the side seeking the TRO is there. Lots of judges dont like to grant motions that are not tested in the hotbed of the adversarial back and forth. If I was a judge I wouldnt grant a motion like this, especially against the State's attorney (as opposed to a private litigant). Not sure if the AG's lawyers were there today though.
is on very firm ground in alleging that this is bookmaking, prohibited by the Penal Code. Not 100%, but a very good case. If he's right, it is felonious conduct. It's the chance/skill issue. Seems to me like DFS is pretty similar to a parlayed prop bet. And distinguishable from managing a fantasy team over the course of a season. People get tripped up on chance -- a game of chance doesnt need to be pure chance devoid of skill ("Contest of chance" means any contest, game, gaming scheme or gaming device in which the outcome depends in a material degree upon an element of chance, notwithstanding that skill of the contestants may also be a factor therein.")
The this is bullshit I dont need protection from myself argument is totally valid. But it's an argument that the law should be changed IMO. It is equally applicable to an argument that I should be allowed to bet the Giants to cover parlayed with the Packers to win straight out. It's an argument for the legislature not the AG, IMO.
Yeah, it's pretty damn far off from what happened. And the companies all forbid their employees from playing on any DFS sites to avoid the appearance of any impropriety, not because the person involved in the incident was found to have actually used any of that information (which he didn't have until after his winning lineup was already set and locked) to help him win.
That's pretty disingenuous. Your claim that "the companies all forbid their employees from playing on any DFS sites to avoid the appearance of any impropriety" may be true today, but it was not true when it was made public a few weeks ago that a DraftKings employee had played very successfully on FanDuel and had access to the functional equivalent of insider information.
And contrary to your claims, according the New York Times, the AG filing included a specific allegation that "both companies encouraged their employees to play on each others platforms and against regular customers. 'FanDuel recognized that this policy would be ill-received, instructing employees to minimize their public presence so users are less likely to be suspicious or angry and avoid becoming among the top five players by volume because top players frequently become targets for accusations.'"
In any event, the point of my original comment about "fallout" was less to do with whether this particular employee benefited from the information and more to do with the fact that both of these companies were pretty reckless in the way they operated. It was glaringly obvious to everyone that daily fantasy is a legal grey area at best. Rather than trying to fly somewhat below the radar, these two companies decided to blast people with advertisements for months on end. Coupled with DraftKings' (of not both companies') foolish decision to let employees play on rival sites with what we can reasonably call "insider information," they basically begged the AG to drop the hammer on them. These companies must have been pretty arrogant to think that someone like Schneiderman or Preet Bharara looking to advance their career wouldn't go after this low-hanging fruit when it was basically rubbed in their faces.
Plus, they are apparently on even more shaky factual ground regarding their argument that they are not gambling sites because, according to the AG's filings, DraftKings embedded "betting" and related keywords into their programming code for search engine purposes.
I don't really care one way or another about the legality of daily fantasy betting, but I do think Deej is pretty much spot-on in his analysis of whether daily fantasy is better and that the AG is on pretty solid ground here based on a plain reading of the NY Penal Code.
Exhibit S to the latest Affirmation in Support of Preliminary Restraints by the AG's office (filed on Monday) was a copy of FanDuel's policies regarding playing on other sites and it expressly included the following:
"Playing on other sites helps employees do their jobs better"
"Minimize internal flow of exploitable information where possible, so that there are fewer opportunities for exploitation" "so [non-employee] users are less likely to be suspicious or angry."
They also expressly acknowledge the risk of:
"Employees targeting weak users as opponents on other sites. This seems to concern users less, but is more of a real threat. In fact, in a sense, it is happening already. Information that is known cant be un-known, so its important that we put some controls in place to limit it."
They also encourage employees to try to "avoid playing anyone whose lineups you saw for that time period." They do not expressly prohibit such competition, but merely ask that the employees seek to avoid it.
Looking at this document alone, it seems to me that FanDuel was well aware of a very real risk of misuse of insider information and was using these somewhat loose standards as a CYA while fully aware that they their employees could exploit information. It seems like they were concerned that their employees might leave if they were not allowed to play on rival sites, but wanted to avoid the appearance (but necessarily not the actual occurrence) of impropriety.
Most damning, to me, is the following statement included on that document: "We hire people we trust, so we dont have any scandals." To me, that reads "be discreet - don't make it known that you are an employee and successful (whether or not legitimately) so this doesn't come back to bite us in the ass."
If nothing else, this really highlights why this industry needs regulating.
Yeah, it's pretty damn far off from what happened. And the companies all forbid their employees from playing on any DFS sites to avoid the appearance of any impropriety, not because the person involved in the incident was found to have actually used any of that information (which he didn't have until after his winning lineup was already set and locked) to help him win.
That's pretty disingenuous. Your claim that "the companies all forbid their employees from playing on any DFS sites to avoid the appearance of any impropriety" may be true today, but it was not true when it was made public a few weeks ago that a DraftKings employee had played very successfully on FanDuel and had access to the functional equivalent of insider information.
And contrary to your claims, according the New York Times, the AG filing included a specific allegation that "both companies encouraged their employees to play on each others platforms and against regular customers. 'FanDuel recognized that this policy would be ill-received, instructing employees to minimize their public presence so users are less likely to be suspicious or angry and avoid becoming among the top five players by volume because top players frequently become targets for accusations.'"
In any event, the point of my original comment about "fallout" was less to do with whether this particular employee benefited from the information and more to do with the fact that both of these companies were pretty reckless in the way they operated. It was glaringly obvious to everyone that daily fantasy is a legal grey area at best. Rather than trying to fly somewhat below the radar, these two companies decided to blast people with advertisements for months on end. Coupled with DraftKings' (of not both companies') foolish decision to let employees play on rival sites with what we can reasonably call "insider information," they basically begged the AG to drop the hammer on them. These companies must have been pretty arrogant to think that someone like Schneiderman or Preet Bharara looking to advance their career wouldn't go after this low-hanging fruit when it was basically rubbed in their faces.
Plus, they are apparently on even more shaky factual ground regarding their argument that they are not gambling sites because, according to the AG's filings, DraftKings embedded "betting" and related keywords into their programming code for search engine purposes.
I don't really care one way or another about the legality of daily fantasy betting, but I do think Deej is pretty much spot-on in his analysis of whether daily fantasy is better and that the AG is on pretty solid ground here based on a plain reading of the NY Penal Code.
Since I apparently didn't write that part clearly, let me try again. Up until the Haskell incident, both sites allowed their employees to play on each other's sites but not their own. After the Haskell incident, while there was no proof of cheating found both sites decided to stop allowing employees to play DFS on any site. So nothing is contrary to my claim, you guys just aren't reading what I wrote in the way it was intended.
And again, Haskell had the "insider" information after lineups were locked on FanDuel so it had 0 to do with his win there.
I agree with you that the sites should have been trying to stay more under the radar rather than saturate the world with their ads. They are also foolish for not attacking the AG in a united manner - FD has stopped allowing NY players to even play, while DK is still allowing them to play (and deposit as well at least last I checked). I also agree with you that they were foolish to allow (and encourage) their employees to play on other sites.
We are willing to place $100,000 of our money into escrow under the following conditions.
1) Attorney General Eric Schneiderman plays 100 contests (or, if he wants, a larger sample size) against a daily fantasy sports player of our choosing in a salary cap format game.
2) If Attorney General Schneiderman wins 50 or more of these contests, the $100,000 will be released to the general operating budget of New York City Schools (or a charity of his choosing).
3) If the pro of DFSRs choosing wins 60 or more contests (this should be enough to demonstrate that DFS is a game of skill, not of luck), then Attorney General Schneiderman will acknowledge that daily fantasy sports is a game of skill, and either A) retract his cease and desist order or B) admit that his cease and desist order is about something other than the absurd notion that daily fantasy sports do not involve skill.
Poker players tried to do the same thing following the shutdown of Pokerstars and FullTilt.
A pretty well known pro was willing to put up $1,000,000 of his own money vs $1 from anyone in Congress or the President. As far as I know, nobody took up the offer.
Legal woes for two of the largest fantasy-sports websites has now expanded to professional sports leagues, reported Sports Illustrated on Saturday morning. A new class action lawsuit filed in Florida this morning names embattled fantasy sites DraftKings and FanDuel alongside the National Basketball Association, Major League Baseball Ventures, National Hockey League Ventures and Major League Soccer, for their respective partnerships with the fantasy outlets. Furthermore, the suit targets payment institutions like Visa and American Express, along with media companies Turner Sports, Time Warner, and 21st Century Fox.
Andrew Brandt Retweeted
Rodney Buike @rbuike 9m9 minutes ago
Interesting that Fan Duel now has a disclaimer on their TV ads stating "Not a gambling website"
Betting on horses
Lottery
Scratch off lottery
Gaming machines at certain places(typically horse racing tracks)
Casinos on Indian reservations
oh, and they are building a Casino in Schenectady
...but Daily Fantasy is illegal
Seems logical
I remember that some bars in NY have some sort of gambling game that is played by the addicts. I don't know what it is though...In fact, I've seen it here in Florida too.
Betting on horses
Lottery
Scratch off lottery
Gaming machines at certain places(typically horse racing tracks)
Casinos on Indian reservations
oh, and they are building a Casino in Schenectady
...but Daily Fantasy is illegal
Seems logical
I remember that some bars in NY have some sort of gambling game that is played by the addicts. I don't know what it is though...In fact, I've seen it here in Florida too.
The numbers game? I've played some gigs in NY where they have a screen of numbers up. Keno maybe?
I remember that some bars in NY have some sort of gambling game that is played by the addicts. I don't know what it is though...In fact, I've seen it here in Florida too.
New York has Quick Draw (see link), played every 4 minutes. An absolute embarrassment for my state. It preys upon the weak and the addicted.
We can point out the ridiculousness of some forms of gambling being illegal versus others being legal. It's not the purview of the AG to iron out that silliness, since it comes from the State Constitution. In particular, the Freedom of Assembly / Divorce / Betting on Ponies clause (because that's a thing):
Quote:
9. 1. No law shall be passed abridging the rights of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the government, or any department thereof; nor shall any divorce be granted otherwise than by due judicial proceedings; except as hereinafter provided, no lottery or the sale of lottery tickets, pool-selling, book-making, or any other kind of gambling, except lotteries operated by the state and the sale of lottery tickets in connection therewith as may be authorized and prescribed by the legislature, the net proceeds of which shall be applied exclusively to or in aid or support of education in this state as the legislature may prescribe, and except pari-mutual betting on horse races as may be prescribed by the legislature and from which the state shall derive a reasonable revenue for the support of government, shall hereafter be authorized or allowed within this state; and the legislature shall pass appropriate laws to prevent offenses against any of the provisions of this section.
State constitution says the government can run gambling, you know, for education. The other stuff is verbotten. Link - ( New Window )
as Jon Oliver pointd out, it's not so much going to education as it is going to whatever the government wants it to go to. Per Oliver's piece, a number of state governments were just taking the money already ear-marked for education, using it for other expenditures, and then taking the lottery revenues and putting that to fill the void from the money for education that they spent elsewhere.
as Jon Oliver pointd out, it's not so much going to education as it is going to whatever the government wants it to go to. Per Oliver's piece, a number of state governments were just taking the money already ear-marked for education, using it for other expenditures, and then taking the lottery revenues and putting that to fill the void from the money for education that they spent elsewhere.
is that it is a lot easier to deny a motion like this from the bench than it is to grant it. So if the judge is taking the matter under advisement, it weighs towards him granting the motion. Not a scientific opinion. I believe it is the AG's motion.
Who got peppered with the most questions? I usually find that if a judge questions one side a lot and the other very little, the very little questions side is usually winning.
everyone on here (and of course on the commercials) turns small sums of money into hundreds or thousands of dollars (or of course the guy in the draft kings commercial who turned $35 into $2,000,000
if this is legal, then gambling on teams should be too (my first opinion)
Quote:
from the revelation that DraftKings and FanDuel employees were, in essence, cheating their customer base by using algorithms available only to them in order to enrich themselves at the consumers' expense. The companies only have themselves to blame for allowing this it happen.
I love posts like this from people who have no clue about what actually happened.
It's not far off from what happened. It's why one of the companies forbid their employees from playing on the other site.
Is suspect there is a lot of delusion. People who dont realize how much they've put in/taken out.
everyone on here (and of course on the commercials) turns small sums of money into hundreds or thousands of dollars (or of course the guy in the draft kings commercial who turned $35 into $2,000,000
if this is legal, then gambling on teams should be too (my first opinion)
Im currently down $43 bucks
But thats on the yahoo version and I'm gonna win it back this weekend!!
Quote:
In comment 12614840 TEPLimey said:
Quote:
from the revelation that DraftKings and FanDuel employees were, in essence, cheating their customer base by using algorithms available only to them in order to enrich themselves at the consumers' expense. The companies only have themselves to blame for allowing this it happen.
I love posts like this from people who have no clue about what actually happened.
It's not far off from what happened. It's why one of the companies forbid their employees from playing on the other site.
Yeah, it's pretty damn far off from what happened. And the companies all forbid their employees from playing on any DFS sites to avoid the appearance of any impropriety, not because the person involved in the incident was found to have actually used any of that information (which he didn't have until after his winning lineup was already set and locked) to help him win.
It was only after that went public that they changed their policy and banned their employees from doing so.
Also, this same big winner accidentally did this: "Last week, a DraftKings employee said on an online message board that he prematurely released data about contestants lineups. That same week, the employee won $350,000 playing in a top contest on FanDuel. DraftKings said the leak was an accident, and both companies said the data didnt help the employee win. The employee hasnt commented beyond his message-board post."
You should check out that big winner's baseball winnings too:
It was only after that went public that they changed their policy and banned their employees from doing so.
Also, this same big winner accidentally did this: "Last week, a DraftKings employee said on an online message board that he prematurely released data about contestants lineups. That same week, the employee won $350,000 playing in a top contest on FanDuel. DraftKings said the leak was an accident, and both companies said the data didnt help the employee win. The employee hasnt commented beyond his message-board post."
You should check out that big winner's baseball winnings too:
I'm not sure how you missed the part where I referred to that in my previous post.
Please detail for me exactly what data he had, when he had it, and how it helped him win the 350K.
Sure, you can have that.
Sure, you can have that.
Where was I wrong about being allowed to play? Where has it been shown that this access to info helped him? Do you even know what the info is and how it could help him? How are his wins logic-defying, considering his job is to analyze fantasy sports? Do you have the records for all his entries, not just his big wins?
If a business wants to do something that is illegal, it should try to get the law changed. Breaking the law is not a business model we should support. I feel the same way about Uber. It's a very smart product, but they've got to comply with local licensing, labor, insurance, and wage & hour laws even if they think the laws are dumb/outdated.
2) This morning Carton was saying all they have to do is change the currency to Bitcoin and this all goes away. Is this true? I don't really value anything he has to say on the topic, though, because I think he is a degenerate gambler and allows his gambling to dominate their show quite often.
Quote:
...it hasn't been proven that this particular employee, who has already demonstrated access to insider info and has a logic-defying record of wins, can't be proven to have cheated?
Sure, you can have that.
Where was I wrong about being allowed to play? Where has it been shown that this access to info helped him? Do you even know what the info is and how it could help him? How are his wins logic-defying, considering his job is to analyze fantasy sports? Do you have the records for all his entries, not just his big wins?
You said all employees were banned from playing, which was clearly not true.
The guy had insider info, again clearly demonstrated.
It's covered pretty well at the link below.
The one guy that may have ended DFS - ( New Window )
They already get their cut. Winnings over $600 are taxed and they have to send you a 1099 form.
I hope they don't shut it down. The commercials are fucking annoying, though.
You are the poor man's Bradley C!
DFS has matured a lot faster but is in a similar position. Only a very small minority of players are winning anything. The "insider trading" is ridiculous, but even that aside, the "sharks" have access to spreadsheets and algorithms that recreational players have no clue about.
Quote:
In comment 12615356 schabadoo said:
Quote:
...it hasn't been proven that this particular employee, who has already demonstrated access to insider info and has a logic-defying record of wins, can't be proven to have cheated?
Sure, you can have that.
Where was I wrong about being allowed to play? Where has it been shown that this access to info helped him? Do you even know what the info is and how it could help him? How are his wins logic-defying, considering his job is to analyze fantasy sports? Do you have the records for all his entries, not just his big wins?
You said all employees were banned from playing, which was clearly not true.
The guy had insider info, again clearly demonstrated.
It's covered pretty well at the link below. The one guy that may have ended DFS - ( New Window )
They were banned from playing on their own sites the whole time. They were banned from playing on other sites after the Ethan Haskell incident, but not because Ethan was found to have cheated. Which is exactly what I said.
Quote:
In comment 12615356 schabadoo said:
Quote:
...it hasn't been proven that this particular employee, who has already demonstrated access to insider info and has a logic-defying record of wins, can't be proven to have cheated?
Sure, you can have that.
Where was I wrong about being allowed to play? Where has it been shown that this access to info helped him? Do you even know what the info is and how it could help him? How are his wins logic-defying, considering his job is to analyze fantasy sports? Do you have the records for all his entries, not just his big wins?
You said all employees were banned from playing, which was clearly not true.
The guy had insider info, again clearly demonstrated.
It's covered pretty well at the link below. The one guy that may have ended DFS - ( New Window )
And again please explain how the insider info - which was ownership % on Draft Kings obtained after the 1pm kickoff - helped him win 350K on FanDuel.
I find it so strange that anyone would be comfortable with an industry insider gaming the system like this.
I find it so strange that anyone would be comfortable with an industry insider gaming the system like this.
How did he game the system?
I find it so strange that anyone would be comfortable with an industry insider gaming the system like this.
DraftKings and FanDuel had the same policy. All this talk about Ethan Haskell very easily could have been about the guy who makes salaries at FanDuel who won a ton of money at DraftKings (he also won a ton of money before going to work for FanDuel as well)
Funny, I was thinking the same about you. Please spell out for me how he cheated/committed fraud/gamed the system.
All very strange.
All very strange.
and again, please point out my exact quote where I was factually wrong.
These things are all pretty clear for you, so you should be able to find them quickly. Very strange that you choose not to.
Quote:
You don't seem interested in reading it, and have been factually wrong about DraftKing employees being allowed to play on Fan Duel.
All very strange.
and again, please point out my exact quote where I was factually wrong.
These things are all pretty clear for you, so you should be able to find them quickly. Very strange that you choose not to.
This was wrong. They only changed the policy after the scandal broke:
"And the companies all forbid their employees from playing on any DFS sites to avoid the appearance of any impropriety"
Quote:
In comment 12616535 schabadoo said:
Quote:
You don't seem interested in reading it, and have been factually wrong about DraftKing employees being allowed to play on Fan Duel.
All very strange.
and again, please point out my exact quote where I was factually wrong.
These things are all pretty clear for you, so you should be able to find them quickly. Very strange that you choose not to.
This was wrong. They only changed the policy after the scandal broke:
"And the companies all forbid their employees from playing on any DFS sites to avoid the appearance of any impropriety"
Which is what I said.
Link - ( New Window )
Andrew Brandt Retweeted NYDN Sports I-Team
Hmmm...sports leagues and team owners have invested in that "felonious product." Andrew Brandt added,
NYDN Sports I-Team @NYDNSportsITeam
Kathleen McGee, for Attorney General's office: "Both FanDuel and Draft Kings are making huge profits off their felonious product."
Wall St Journal - ( New Window )
What a crock of shit. Guess I'm cashing out after tonight's game. Of course I cash out after my worst week, up $100 less than I was before Sunday.
The this is bullshit I dont need protection from myself argument is totally valid. But it's an argument that the law should be changed IMO. It is equally applicable to an argument that I should be allowed to bet the Giants to cover parlayed with the Packers to win straight out. It's an argument for the legislature not the AG, IMO.
Yeah, it's pretty damn far off from what happened. And the companies all forbid their employees from playing on any DFS sites to avoid the appearance of any impropriety, not because the person involved in the incident was found to have actually used any of that information (which he didn't have until after his winning lineup was already set and locked) to help him win.
That's pretty disingenuous. Your claim that "the companies all forbid their employees from playing on any DFS sites to avoid the appearance of any impropriety" may be true today, but it was not true when it was made public a few weeks ago that a DraftKings employee had played very successfully on FanDuel and had access to the functional equivalent of insider information.
And contrary to your claims, according the New York Times, the AG filing included a specific allegation that "both companies encouraged their employees to play on each others platforms and against regular customers. 'FanDuel recognized that this policy would be ill-received, instructing employees to minimize their public presence so users are less likely to be suspicious or angry and avoid becoming among the top five players by volume because top players frequently become targets for accusations.'"
In any event, the point of my original comment about "fallout" was less to do with whether this particular employee benefited from the information and more to do with the fact that both of these companies were pretty reckless in the way they operated. It was glaringly obvious to everyone that daily fantasy is a legal grey area at best. Rather than trying to fly somewhat below the radar, these two companies decided to blast people with advertisements for months on end. Coupled with DraftKings' (of not both companies') foolish decision to let employees play on rival sites with what we can reasonably call "insider information," they basically begged the AG to drop the hammer on them. These companies must have been pretty arrogant to think that someone like Schneiderman or Preet Bharara looking to advance their career wouldn't go after this low-hanging fruit when it was basically rubbed in their faces.
Plus, they are apparently on even more shaky factual ground regarding their argument that they are not gambling sites because, according to the AG's filings, DraftKings embedded "betting" and related keywords into their programming code for search engine purposes.
I don't really care one way or another about the legality of daily fantasy betting, but I do think Deej is pretty much spot-on in his analysis of whether daily fantasy is better and that the AG is on pretty solid ground here based on a plain reading of the NY Penal Code.
"Playing on other sites helps employees do their jobs better"
"Minimize internal flow of exploitable information where possible, so that there are fewer opportunities for exploitation" "so [non-employee] users are less likely to be suspicious or angry."
They also expressly acknowledge the risk of:
"Employees targeting weak users as opponents on other sites. This seems to concern users less, but is more of a real threat. In fact, in a sense, it is happening already. Information that is known cant be un-known, so its important that we put some controls in place to limit it."
They also encourage employees to try to "avoid playing anyone whose lineups you saw for that time period." They do not expressly prohibit such competition, but merely ask that the employees seek to avoid it.
Looking at this document alone, it seems to me that FanDuel was well aware of a very real risk of misuse of insider information and was using these somewhat loose standards as a CYA while fully aware that they their employees could exploit information. It seems like they were concerned that their employees might leave if they were not allowed to play on rival sites, but wanted to avoid the appearance (but necessarily not the actual occurrence) of impropriety.
Most damning, to me, is the following statement included on that document: "We hire people we trust, so we dont have any scandals." To me, that reads "be discreet - don't make it known that you are an employee and successful (whether or not legitimately) so this doesn't come back to bite us in the ass."
If nothing else, this really highlights why this industry needs regulating.
Quote:
Yeah, it's pretty damn far off from what happened. And the companies all forbid their employees from playing on any DFS sites to avoid the appearance of any impropriety, not because the person involved in the incident was found to have actually used any of that information (which he didn't have until after his winning lineup was already set and locked) to help him win.
That's pretty disingenuous. Your claim that "the companies all forbid their employees from playing on any DFS sites to avoid the appearance of any impropriety" may be true today, but it was not true when it was made public a few weeks ago that a DraftKings employee had played very successfully on FanDuel and had access to the functional equivalent of insider information.
And contrary to your claims, according the New York Times, the AG filing included a specific allegation that "both companies encouraged their employees to play on each others platforms and against regular customers. 'FanDuel recognized that this policy would be ill-received, instructing employees to minimize their public presence so users are less likely to be suspicious or angry and avoid becoming among the top five players by volume because top players frequently become targets for accusations.'"
In any event, the point of my original comment about "fallout" was less to do with whether this particular employee benefited from the information and more to do with the fact that both of these companies were pretty reckless in the way they operated. It was glaringly obvious to everyone that daily fantasy is a legal grey area at best. Rather than trying to fly somewhat below the radar, these two companies decided to blast people with advertisements for months on end. Coupled with DraftKings' (of not both companies') foolish decision to let employees play on rival sites with what we can reasonably call "insider information," they basically begged the AG to drop the hammer on them. These companies must have been pretty arrogant to think that someone like Schneiderman or Preet Bharara looking to advance their career wouldn't go after this low-hanging fruit when it was basically rubbed in their faces.
Plus, they are apparently on even more shaky factual ground regarding their argument that they are not gambling sites because, according to the AG's filings, DraftKings embedded "betting" and related keywords into their programming code for search engine purposes.
I don't really care one way or another about the legality of daily fantasy betting, but I do think Deej is pretty much spot-on in his analysis of whether daily fantasy is better and that the AG is on pretty solid ground here based on a plain reading of the NY Penal Code.
Since I apparently didn't write that part clearly, let me try again. Up until the Haskell incident, both sites allowed their employees to play on each other's sites but not their own. After the Haskell incident, while there was no proof of cheating found both sites decided to stop allowing employees to play DFS on any site. So nothing is contrary to my claim, you guys just aren't reading what I wrote in the way it was intended.
And again, Haskell had the "insider" information after lineups were locked on FanDuel so it had 0 to do with his win there.
I agree with you that the sites should have been trying to stay more under the radar rather than saturate the world with their ads. They are also foolish for not attacking the AG in a united manner - FD has stopped allowing NY players to even play, while DK is still allowing them to play (and deposit as well at least last I checked). I also agree with you that they were foolish to allow (and encourage) their employees to play on other sites.
We are willing to place $100,000 of our money into escrow under the following conditions.
1) Attorney General Eric Schneiderman plays 100 contests (or, if he wants, a larger sample size) against a daily fantasy sports player of our choosing in a salary cap format game.
2) If Attorney General Schneiderman wins 50 or more of these contests, the $100,000 will be released to the general operating budget of New York City Schools (or a charity of his choosing).
3) If the pro of DFSRs choosing wins 60 or more contests (this should be enough to demonstrate that DFS is a game of skill, not of luck), then Attorney General Schneiderman will acknowledge that daily fantasy sports is a game of skill, and either A) retract his cease and desist order or B) admit that his cease and desist order is about something other than the absurd notion that daily fantasy sports do not involve skill.
http://dailyfantasytalk.com/2015/11/18/tout-site-offers-100k-to-nyc-public-schools-if-ag-can-beat-a-daily-fantasy-professional/ - ( New Window )
A pretty well known pro was willing to put up $1,000,000 of his own money vs $1 from anyone in Congress or the President. As far as I know, nobody took up the offer.
http://www.bluffeurope.com/poker-news/en/Galfond-vs-Obama-BlueFirePoker-issue-1m-challenge_4324.aspx
Read it at SI.com - ( New Window )
Rodney Buike @rbuike 9m9 minutes ago
Interesting that Fan Duel now has a disclaimer on their TV ads stating "Not a gambling website"
Courtroom Sports today in NY: Judge hears arguments of FanDuel/DraftKings fighting Attorney General on cease/desist orders
Lottery
Scratch off lottery
Gaming machines at certain places(typically horse racing tracks)
Casinos on Indian reservations
oh, and they are building a Casino in Schenectady
...but Daily Fantasy is illegal
Seems logical
I remember that some bars in NY have some sort of gambling game that is played by the addicts. I don't know what it is though...In fact, I've seen it here in Florida too.
Quote:
Betting on horses
Lottery
Scratch off lottery
Gaming machines at certain places(typically horse racing tracks)
Casinos on Indian reservations
oh, and they are building a Casino in Schenectady
...but Daily Fantasy is illegal
Seems logical
I remember that some bars in NY have some sort of gambling game that is played by the addicts. I don't know what it is though...In fact, I've seen it here in Florida too.
The numbers game? I've played some gigs in NY where they have a screen of numbers up. Keno maybe?
I remember that some bars in NY have some sort of gambling game that is played by the addicts. I don't know what it is though...In fact, I've seen it here in Florida too.
New York has Quick Draw (see link), played every 4 minutes. An absolute embarrassment for my state. It preys upon the weak and the addicted.
We can point out the ridiculousness of some forms of gambling being illegal versus others being legal. It's not the purview of the AG to iron out that silliness, since it comes from the State Constitution. In particular, the Freedom of Assembly / Divorce / Betting on Ponies clause (because that's a thing):
State constitution says the government can run gambling, you know, for education. The other stuff is verbotten.
Link - ( New Window )
/\ /\ /\ Florida
@LSPReport
NY AG: "DFS is about betting on what others do. That is 'gambling.'"
Judge Mendez wraps of hearing on FanDuel/DraftKings v. NY, no decision today. Would expect one within the week
Who got peppered with the most questions? I usually find that if a judge questions one side a lot and the other very little, the very little questions side is usually winning.
GPS. I was in NOLA last week, and tried to put in a DK lineup, and site rejected it...I live in NJ.