As many states want to get their hands on the golden goose, DFS finds itself possibly on the edge of obliteration. Nevada recently ruled it was considered "gambling" and a court case brought up by the NY State AG is also arguing the same.
For those who don't play, Daily Fantasy gives you a salary cap in which to build a lineup from all of the players going that day, and awards points (negative and positive) for certain statistics. You then compete against others for prizes, with the high scores winning. The sites take a rake of up to 12% for hosting the games.
The sites and its players are arguing it's a game of skill; the states are arguing it's a game of chance. Where do you stand?
As a sporadic DFS player the last three years, I can certainly see both sides of the issue. It's certainly a helluva lot more than pulling a lever at a slot machine -- noobs will get housed in any DFS game in due time. In order to be successful, you have to know nuances of the various sports only someone who has done a TON of research would know, such as lefty/righty splits, pitcher vs batter matchups, ballpark tendencies, football defensive ratings and stats, etc. It's far more than just plunking down Tom Brady and filling out the rest of your lineup in 2 minutes.
But, on the other hand, we can't control if a player will get hurt; or if a game will be rained out; or if a guy hitting .350 will pull an o-for-4 that night. All signs pointed to the Eagles getting trashed by the Pats last Sunday, but the Eagles won. Who knew? And like Francesa argued, horse racing enthusiasts also have to know a ton of stats on horses, and that's considered gambling since as much as we may know we still can't control the outcome, especially not one of a horse. Yet there are great horseplayers, too.
So as much as I'd like to think you can control your destiny by picking savvy lineups, you still can't control the outcome, and therefore it has to be considered gambling. I'd lean it 55% chance, 45% skill, so there's one man's opinion. What say you?
For those who don't play, Daily Fantasy gives you a salary cap in which to build a lineup from all of the players going that day, and awards points (negative and positive) for certain statistics. You then compete against others for prizes, with the high scores winning. The sites take a rake of up to 12% for hosting the games.
The sites and its players are arguing it's a game of skill; the states are arguing it's a game of chance. Where do you stand?
As a sporadic DFS player the last three years, I can certainly see both sides of the issue. It's certainly a helluva lot more than pulling a lever at a slot machine -- noobs will get housed in any DFS game in due time. In order to be successful, you have to know nuances of the various sports only someone who has done a TON of research would know, such as lefty/righty splits, pitcher vs batter matchups, ballpark tendencies, football defensive ratings and stats, etc. It's far more than just plunking down Tom Brady and filling out the rest of your lineup in 2 minutes.
But, on the other hand, we can't control if a player will get hurt; or if a game will be rained out; or if a guy hitting .350 will pull an o-for-4 that night. All signs pointed to the Eagles getting trashed by the Pats last Sunday, but the Eagles won. Who knew? And like Francesa argued, horse racing enthusiasts also have to know a ton of stats on horses, and that's considered gambling since as much as we may know we still can't control the outcome, especially not one of a horse. Yet there are great horseplayers, too.
So as much as I'd like to think you can control your destiny by picking savvy lineups, you still can't control the outcome, and therefore it has to be considered gambling. I'd lean it 55% chance, 45% skill, so there's one man's opinion. What say you?
Comment