Fantasy Sports

Yes, Fantasy Sports Companies Are 'Regulated'

Is the problem a lack of transparency, lack of tax revenue, or sore losers?


This could be you! But probably not.
Draft Kings

The New York Times simply cannot wait to point out how "unregulated" the recreational (and for some, extremely lucrative) activities of fantasy sports leagues are. The paper's story this week about what is being called a scandal involving two massively growing online fantasy sports companies prompted the Times to describe fantasy sports as "unregulated" in both the headline and in the lede paragraph. 

They're not alone. A recent Sports Illustrated explainer on the scandal calls the activity "largely unregulated." Deadspin describes an "absence of any sort of official regulatory oversight" on these companies when talking about the scandal. Nearly every story about fantasy sports references a lack of regulation. The reality is a lot more complicated. The federal government may not be treating fantasy sports leagues the same as online gambling, but that doesn't mean these companies can just do whatever they please.

But let's take a step back and explain the scandal, first of all. Fantasy sports leagues, like video games, are an example of a wildly popular activity that is treated like an odd, little, mistifying subculture, even though everybody knows somebody (or is somebody) who participates in it. Participants play pretend owners and build teams from actual playing athletes. The "owners" are competing against each other to build the best team, and the winner is determined based on how these actual athletes perform in real-world games.

Anybody watching sports or television (but especially those watching televised sports) has discovered that fantasy sports have blown up big time. Two major companies, Draft Kings and FanDuel are offering daily fantasy sports competitions and huge prize pools. Draft Kings boasts "More than $1 billion guaranteed in 2015." FanDuel claims they're expecting to pay out $2 billion.

There are generally fees involved in participating in fantasy sports leagues in order to win the big bucks. The winnings have to come from somewhere, right? So fantasy sports has the whiff of gambling to it. Yes, there's skill involved in building teams, but of course, there's no small amount of luck. Julian Edelman could unexpectedly blow out his knee in the middle of a game, and there go millions of fantasy sports players' chances of winning.

Setting the luck aside, what also helps determine success is being able to evaluate huge amounts of information about players and make some rather technical team makeup decisions. That's where the supposed scandal comes in. An employee of DraftKings had access to information about which athletes players within his company were selecting. Though DraftKings says he didn't get the information until it was too late to use it, he subsequently participated in competing FanDuel's leagues and won $350,000.

The behavior has been compared to insider trading. Though the employee obviously had no idea how these athletes would perform on the field, he could have known the choices other players were making (and more importantly, not making) to maximize his odds of winning.

The employee's behavior, though, isn't exactly insider trading, and it's not clear that anything illegal happened. A lot of folks clearly don't like the outcome that an employee of one company is winning the contests offered by another company, and so now the calls for more regulation are coming. The two companies themselves came forward and disclosed what had happened and announced they would stop their employees from participating in other sites' fantasy sports programs while they developed a more formal policy. New York's attorney general has announced a probe into the two companies.

It's ridiculous to say that fantasy sports companies are completely unregulated. What people really mean when they say this is that there are no specific regulations that oversee how fantasy sports leagues operate. There is no such thing as an unregulated business in America unless said business is actually operating in a black market, which is obviously not the case here. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) can investigate and prosecute fraudulent business practices aside from whether there are any specific federal regulations for fantasy sports leagues. If one of these sites collected players' fees and then never paid out promised winnings (for example), you better believe the FTC would be able to intervene. A representative from the FTC would not speak specifically about the Draft Kings/FanDuel controversy or the possibility of an investigation, but did affirm that, just as with virtually any other business in America, the FTC could get involved in cases of deceptive business practices.

Furthermore, these two companies appear to be in it for the long haul and are not looking to cash in on naïve customers and then disappear. They've got the backing of the major sports leagues. Patrick Redford at Deadspin argues that there's no way to substantiate whether FanDuel and Draft Kings are colluding with each other. But the fact is they have huge incentives to be as transparent as possible about who wins their big pools: If they aren't, participants won't believe that they could actually win, and they'll stop playing and stop giving the two companies money. Even if the employee hadn't had access to inside information, just the fact that a winner was internal to the industry is a public relations problem that could cost FanDuel and Draft Kings players.

This is not to say other fantasy sports companies could not come up with a plan less focused on longevity and more on trying to milk whatever they can from players, then disappearing. To the extent that may happen, it's honestly not clear what additional legislation or regulation may be productive based on these stories other than perhaps more transparency about how the sites work.

There is a bit of not-even-subtext to the criticism of these daily fantasy sports programs that it operates too much like online gambling sites and that it's really, really hard to win. It sounds not unlike what happens with online poker, which, despite often being lumped in with other forms of gambling, isn't just a game of chance. Most of the people who play are going to lose, because they are competing against other players. The top players of fantasy sports are "sharks," just like in poker or pool, or even a number of competitive video games. They spend huge amounts of time and effort winning these games that the average player will not. This, though, is also not an argument for regulation or an indication of a problem. Saying those who put in the most effort to win will reap the rewards is actually an argument against treating fantasy sports like gambling. It also has a paternalistic air of assuming that participants of fantasy sports are incapable of grasping what they're up against.

Nevertheless the scandal has given life to the idea that these sites are "unregulated" and the something-must-be-done argument is out in full force. The outcome may be a bit of a mixed bag. It appears that proponents of regulation are attempting to legitimize fantasy sports businesses, not ban them. On Tuesday, New Jersey Sen. Robert Menendez and Rep. Frank Pallone Jr., both Democrats, sent a letter asking the FTC consider setting up rules for fantasy sports companies:

"We believe that fantasy sports should be legal and subject to appropriate consumer and competitive protections," Menendez and Pallone wrote.  "Consumers also expect companies to hold online contests in a fair, transparent manner."

Pallone is also in favor of legalizing actual sports betting and has introduced federal legislation to allow states to decide whether or not to allow it, noting that billions of dollars change hands illegally each year in sports bets, despite federal law.

And then, of course, legitimizing the activity through the federal government opens up the possibility of new tax revenue. Some who call for the regulation of fantasy sports leagues add the possibility of taxing it in the very next breath.

Media scolds may cluck their tongues at rubes who insist on blowing money on competitions with very poor odds. But there's dollar signs in the eyes of some government officials watching this hobby massively expanding and being embraced by the entire sports industry. Government officials don't need to rely on either luck or skill to cash in.

NEXT: Nobel Peace Prize Winner Apologizes for Bombing Nobel Peace Prize Winner, U.S. Says It Avoided Collision With Russian Aircraft in Syria, NASA, ESA Working on Asteroid Deflection: P.M. Links

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Maybe they will start advertising their product soon.

  2. So fantasy sports are like Pokemon tournaments for armchair jocks, right?

    1. Pokemon tournaments, or Magic: The Gathering tournaments? Because it matters, Hugh. It matters.

      1. Let’s be real, Epi. It’s pogs.

        1. Touche, Hugh.

        2. Dude, check out this sweet poison slammer!

            1. With all this talk of pogs and pokemon, you guys are going to have a real hard time keeping all the damn kids off your lawns.

            2. Indeed. Alf returning, in pog form.

      2. Cock Magic are the only tournaments worth watching.

        1. I can’t tell if that is a typo.

          1. It is a typo. I should’ve said “Cock Magic tournaments are the only ones worth watching.”

    2. Nah, its more of an rpg.

    3. So fantasy sports are like Pokemon tournaments for armchair jocks, right?


      1. I’d have to agree. There is no “real world” component to Pokemon. Are Fantasy Sports Leagues like various SF and Anime fannish activities in some ways? Sure.

  3. Is the problem a lack of transparency, lack of tax revenue, or sore losers?


    Many gaming companies don’t let their employees play in tournaments that have prize payouts. This was completely forseeable. The fact that a ton of money is in play and this is endorsed by the NFL just makes it juicier.

  4. The New York Times simply cannot wait to point out how “unregulated” the recreational (and for some, extremely lucrative) activity

    While there are a disturbing amount of people who shit their pants just at the thought of other people participating in “unregulated” activites, I think the main issue here is the one in your parenthetical. The bien pensant state worshipers cannot stand people making money without the government sticking its fingers in. They hate it. I mean, people might be making money and not sharing it with others by having it stolen by the government! That’s just wrong!

  5. Somehow weekly fantasy leagues are legal while poker is illegal.

    1. Online, that is. Both are technically legal if no one is taking a cut.

      1. The online leagues do take a cut – the total payouts are less than the total take.

        1. Yes, that is my point. But poker still isn’t.

          1. Oh, sorry about that.

            I will say that I had the same feeling when I discovered Uber as when I discovered daily fantasy leagues – that the statists will bust a collective tit once they find out about it. I predict PSAs displaying broken homes caused by excessive daily fantasy losses.

  6. Why comes I didn’t win? Oh, I see it was rigged! Someone get the government involved.

  7. The NYT deserves the Scott scorn but Fox isn’t without its weird hammer happy people. Just this morning on Fox some cute establishment ass-sucking nobody fuck male was pouring the juice on the show with the dude with the thick forehead and short neck about how Fan Duel and ilk are essentially Napster in the wings… and, well, I do believe the stalwart news prince reporting to musclefuck head was erect as Poe eating out Mrs. Jane for being on live TV for 3 seconds.

    So Mr. Amazing sez and I sort of put a creative taint on it but the gist is clear as Jesus piss, “praise god and the regs, we know what pit Napster fell into” as he chuckled so fucking hollowly. Obviously nothing space, forever gone, and vamooso muchacho sucked napster into a dark alley and had their nothing ways with napster pummeling napster’s asshole with clever found nothing items which doesn’t matter because nothing can’t draw blood and ass crumbles from nothing.

    1. Did the acid kick in between the first and second paragraph??

      1. I’d say between the first and second trimesters.

  8. Furthermore, these two companies appear to be in it for the long haul and are not looking to cash in on na?ve customers and then disappear.

    Junior Soprano said it best: Even Chinks and housewives are betting football.

  9. The progressive obsession over “regulation” really baffles me. It’s treated almost like a charm or spell to ward off evil. Like a cross against a vampire. It doesn’t matter if the “unregulated” (by which they specifically mean government regulation) business is actually *harming* anyone. The fact that it is unregulated is itself an unquestioned bad thing.

    1. If you believe that people are evil and will, unless checked by government, always harm others for personal gain, then the fact that something is unregulated is in and of itself enough to condemn it. Since progressives do believe as such, the necessity of regulation is fully compatible with their belief structure.

      1. You not only have to believe the people, by and large, are evil, but also that the people who run the government are uncommonly good.

        In other words, you have to believe something that is precisely opposite of your actual experience.

      2. Just recently saw the comments on a story about the peanut company exec going to jail for shipping out tainted peanuts that killed a bunch of people and you can just guess what they were like. “See, this is why we need the FDA because evil corporations are literally poisoning their customers.” As if the guy were going to FDA jail for killing people or we were being urged to sign a petition to establish the FDA since obviously there was no FDA around to stop this guy. Trying to argue with these shitheads that the FDA did no good in stopping this guy and that the resulting lawsuits and jail time are a much bigger dissuasion to poisoning your customers than anything the FDA can do just didn’t penetrate. It’s like they wear their stupidity like fucking armor.

        1. It’s animism, dude. Just like always. Corporations are supernatural evil. The FDA is a supernatural totem of protection, like wearing a cross around your neck or having a tiger-repelling rock. Does it work? FUCK NO. Do they care? FUCK NO.

          Because they are animists, operating a rationality level barely above a caveman. They want to feel protected, they do not actually want to make sure they are protected. It’s fucking stupid, but…that’s because they’re stupid.

      3. But the kicker is, they apparently think people are evil, BUT GOVERNMENT ISN’T!

        1. Right, because evil, selfish people are drawn to profit making enterprises while good, selfless people are drawn to government “service.” They honestly believe that.

      4. Yet progtards have unceasing faith in the goodness of government bureaucrats. Despite massive irrefutable evidence of the opposite. Must be due to the innate evil of the soulless progtards.

    2. Ultra-conservatives are very far from being free and clear of their love of superstructures armed to the hilt with prisons and injustice. The destruction of liberty and freedom requires team work, cousin.

      1. That made sense. Who are you, and what have you done with Agile Cyborg?

    3. They’re still babbling about the “deregulation of the banking industry, which caused the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.”

      This “deregulation” resulted in more regulations, but oh well. I guess it’s like fake but accurate, and lowering spending by not spending as much as they could spend.

      1. Conservatives seem to go more for police action. Progressives seem to pine more for regulators. Two sides of the same coin, I suppose. The pants shitting is still astonishing.

        But I do get the feeling that progressives want to take regulation farther than conservatives want to take law and order. Like every human interaction needs to be regulated (or at least every economic interaction) or it’s just a ticking time bomb waiting to go off.

        1. Soi disant conservative judges routinely rubber stamp progressive regulations.

          1. Many conservatives are legalists, the law is their magic totem.

        2. I lean conservative. I prefer to be the one generating the violence, as I find the police to be clueless, useless, and largely obstructive. Best t keep violence out of the hands of government.

      2. Of course they are. If they don’t maintain the smoke screen, the people might figure out that a HUGE factor in the crash was well intentioned buttinskiism in the housing market, driven by (wait for it) the government.

        I have had people I once considered intelligent demand of me why Congress hasn’t convened an investigation into the Crash. At least when I told my sister-in-law that they haven’t because if they did somebody was likely to TELL THEM on national television that it was their fault, she looked thoughtful and nodded. I always thought she was the second brightest in that family.

        (i married the brightest)

  10. “The top players of fantasy sports are “sharks,” just like in poker or pool, or even a number of competitive video games. They spend huge amounts of time and effort winning these games that the average player will not. ”

    Not necessarily. The high stakes daily fantasy players generally pay for algorithms that spit out optimal lineups. As someone who has been playing in fantasy leagues since before the internet, I can attest to how far the analysis, and thus the level of competition, has risen.

    I play for small stakes on one of the sites a little and generally break even. I’m amazed when I click on one of the other players’ “names” and see on their history that they’ve played in tens of thousands of leagues/contests. One daily league option is to randomly pick someone to go head to head against, and I see people playing for 10k a shot.

    1. The sudden interest the NYT always seems to exert toward ‘average’ people is always fucking ultimately about ruining fuck all for ‘average’ people. I don’t fucking gamble. I appreciate other vices, but I’m pretty fucking positive ‘average’ people would like for the NYT to jam its own micro-dick up into its own diarrhea ass.

      1. Not to second guess you, the great awesomesauce AC, but I don’t think the NYT would suffer any pain because micro-dicks are just not equipped to deliver it.

        1. Well, this is a factual for sure. And, I checked the fucking ingredients on that awesomesauce shit and libertymike was listed right at the top, bro. Near the bottoms I saw acshroomklonoponin acid, tho, which makes for an interesting night.

          1. Does Monsanto make acshroomklonoponin acid?

  11. Everyone should just stick to playing with their drunk friends from college like a normal person.

    1. Everyone should grab the closest stick of whatever proportion, length, and shape and jam it up the government’s ass first, brady. Then stick with playing shit with drunk fucks they know and all.

    2. I only play fantasy baseball.

      I last won my league in 1992. I am the Cubs of my league.


      1. You might not be able to say that in a month.

        1. Nah, they’re still the Cubs, doing Cubs things spanning 3 centuries. Tonight, they have a catcher in LF and a 3B in right.

          1. Oops, meant catcher in right, 3B in left.

            1. Yeah, but I hear Mr. Arrieta is pretty good.

              You could make a damn good argument that Jake has been the best, most dominant pitcher after the All-Star break in MLB history.

              1. Happy Cubs fans are the worst, so go Pirates.

                1. They may be, but this baseball fan is rooting for them. If the Pirates win, I will be rooting for them to take the NL. Right now, I’m hoping for a Cubs / Astros WS.

                  1. I’m a Dodger fan, but I find this team they’ve put together oddly joyless and unpleasant aside from Kershaw and Greinke. I’m rooting for them but my heart isn’t in it.

                    1. What do you think of Adrian Gonzalez? How about Mattingly?

                      I hope for his sake that Kershaw pitches well. Your team does have some awesome starting pitching.

                      There are some Dodgers haters out there, but I am not one of them. So, vs. the Mets, go Dodgers. Nevertheless, if they end up facing the Pirates or the Cubs, I will not be bleeding Dodger blue.

                    2. I like Gonzalez, but I think Mattingly is in over his head. Too many bad lineups and questionable pitching moves with him. Of course, every fan hates the manager but I still think Mattingly is objectively bad at his job.

                  2. Thanks. Seeing this ultra young Astros shut the Yankees down in Yankee Stadium last night did this old heart good.

                    200+ million dollar payroll goes down in a shutout to an 80 million dollar payroll team.

                    Whoop !

      2. “I last won my league in 1992. I am the Cubs of my league.”

        I have a hard time believing this. I win at least 1 public league a year.

        There’s no way your luck is that bad.

        1. The public is a ass

        2. I play in exactly one league.

          11 members currently, and we have a dominant duopoly that combines win about 2 of 3 years.

          I have a ton of 2nds and 3rds.

      3. Fantasy smear the queer is far more engaging.

    3. In the Warrior Football League, we draft actual players (children) who play as actual teams.

  12. I’ve no doubt that there’s skill in fantasy football. But it fantasy football wagers are legal, there is no way that online poker should be illegal. There’s way more skill in poker.

    1. Do you need to worry about whether the Jack of Diamonds is playing with a hammy which he has not disclosed to his coaching staff?

      1. All I have to worry about is whether LandShark007 is bluffing this time when he three-bets me pre-flop.

        At the tournament stakes I used to play online for, I didn’t have to worry about collusion, bots, or cheating. I didn’t play online cash games because there was way too much potential for collusion.

        1. Don’t get me wrong, there is plenty of skill, IMO, needed to play poker.

          Of course, there is a fair amount of fortuity involved in fantasy football.

    2. I play card games for fun and tiny bits of money, and things can go wrong in those games in an instant. I have no control over what cards I get.

      I’m not opposed to online gambling, but DFS is safer and should require even less regulation than online poker. The low stakes 50/50 and double up cash games are relatively safe and will help you break even.

      1. I agree that the 50/50 and double cash games are probably more skilled based than poker while the giant tournaments are more luck based thank poker.

        I’ve tried DFS a bit because I got a free deposit through paying for something else but I’ve found it a pretty boring form of gambling.

    3. In a draft league in youth football there’s a little luck. You don’t know who’s going to skip a game because they twisted their ankle in school or have a family oblig’n. You also have no control over the coaches’ relatives who get to bypass the draft. Otherwise as far as the coaches are concerned the team results are a matter of coaches’ skill in scouting, drafting, & coaching the players.

  13. The employee apparently had player ownership figures, which becomes available to everyone once lineups lock.

    This isn’t really insider trading. There’s no guarantee that players with low ownership will go off. This employee probably floated dozens (if not hundreds) of lineups with the same core players and differentiated each of them with some contrarian picks here and there, and one of them clicked.

    Anyone with money can do this. It’s not hard to guess what kind of players will be “faded”. Not many will select pitchers starting at Coors Field. Some do, and if that pitcher throws a CG shutout, you gain an instant advantage.

    1. It definitely is insider trading when you are talking about the GPP tournaments (the ones with thousands of entries where the payscale weighted to the top). These tournaments you don’t only need to correctly need to pick who goes off, but you also need to pick at least some people who go off who no one else picked or you’ll never get to big bucks payouts.

      It is definitely cheating and its pretty crazy that these companies didn’t have an outright ban on their employees participating (not that the government should be involved).

      1. It was cheating insofar as the guy had information that wasn’t made publicly available prior to lock, but the outrage seems overblown to me.

        He had early access to ownership figures that’s not exactly trade secrets. Ownership numbers become public after games start, and the favorites and the faded are usually what you might expect.

        There are way more scrubs than stars. This guy had to sprinkle below average players around the same core group of players across different lineups and hoped for someone like JB Shuck would hit a 3 run bomb. This would require boatloads of entries to work, and sharks already play this way.

        1. A gambling website like them shouldn’t even have a whiff of cheating, even if the advantage is arguably slight. They should have an absolute ban on their employees participating at all, it’s ridiculous that the didn’t.

          Just because a bunch of statists are calling for regulations doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be skeptical as consumers.

          And yeah, the sharks aren’t cheating but the employees have access to even more information. They can do what the sharks do but reduce the number of entries they need because they know exactly what people are using instead of using algorithms to estimate it and play the odds. Hell think about it, the employees have access to what players the users are playing, including the sharks. They could just set up an algorithm to look at the sharks and copy what they do. No way no how should they be allowed to play. I’m sure they’ll clean it up now but the fact that they didn’t in the first place show make people wary of trusting their money with them.

    2. Hey! Coors Field is an excellent facility, with a team.

  14. Obama to Regulate Cow Farts…..cow-farts/

  15. What a shallow analysis of the issue.

    It isn’t just about the “insider” knowledge on fantasy betting that occurred. It’s all about the amount of dollars transacting, along with the blessing from two huge businesses, the NBA and NFL.

    Like any other gambling endeavors, it’s all about what protections exist for the pool. What system exists that protects that money from post-game bets, from robots being the competition, and much more. No one has any idea as to what protections exist within those two companies, such as has to be provided by para-mutual networks. You don’t know, Scott, and yet millions of dollars are involved.

    You’re way off as to how deep this problem might be.

    1. What problem? The problem that you don’t knows if there is a problem? So what?
      So we better get the government involved, because Jackand Ace can’t read the rules and do his own due diligence?
      Caveat emptor. You don’t like it, don’t play. Mind your own business.

      1. There is no due diligence to be done, because it isn’t available from the companies, like it is with other gambling endeavors. Which is the whole point. Thanks for making it for me.

    2. What’s the real issue? Wanna bet there is some political agitation, because the States REALLY don’t like competition for the lottery dollars they depend on so much?

      1. Not just the state, Las Vegas as well.

        But the point is protection of the consumer. Now you certainly can live by caveat emptor exclusively, but we do live in a country where you cant misrepresent yourself in the marketplace, particularly when multi-million dollars are involved. So when draft kings at one time touted how safe and secure they were, that needs to be true. And now they have the scrutiny that all other gambling ventures face.

        It was only a matter of time. My only point was Scott gave only a superficial pass over the issue. This is a huge deal to to businesses like NFL, ESPN, and more, who leant their name to both of these businesses.

        1. This is like lending money in the neighborhood and charging vigorish for it. The local mob boys don’t like competition. But they’re pikers compared to greedy government.

    3. Like any other gambling endeavors, it’s all about what protections exist for the pool. What system exists that protects that money from post-game bets, from robots being the competition, and much more.

      What “regulations” are best come through experience, and that’s why there is such a thing as industry custom. You have the burden of showing that only top-down, state-created rules can adequately address any wrongs that may occur here, especially where you haven’t identified any specific instances of wrongdoing. Government power feeds off of conjecture, so it’s not much to require progressive statists like you to shoulder the burden of proving to the rest of us why an activity should be regulated so.

      1. Actually, it’s the “statists” in the online gambling industry itself who are calling for the regulations so that the industry itself is protected from the scam artists. It’s the marketplace, not a liberal conspiracy. Read for yourself.


        1. Huh? Are you saying that, when sellers are wanting the government to promulgate regulations, that is “the marketplace” at work? If so, you are wildly incorrect.

          You are erroneously assuming that libertarians like myself are simply pro-industry. We are only pro-industry when we think that constraints on commercial activity violate certain principles of liberty, such as the NAP or freedom of contract. And the means to respect those principles is rarely, if ever, through new rules promulgated by a regulatory agency. That’s the point of the article that you seemed to miss. There are already remedies available to combat fraud and the like, if that is what is going on here (and which is simply being assumed: a presumption of fraud analogous to the liberty-crushing precautionary principle). The NYT and leftists in general mislead the public when they say activities like the one here are “unregulated.”

    4. So then don’t play.

      No, seriously. Gambling is inherently risky. You should do due diligence to mitigate the risks as much as possible.

      If you can’t accept that, then don’t play. If the companies seem shady to you and you can’t verify that they are on the up and up, don’t play.

      It really is that simple.

    5. “What a shallow analysis of the issue.”

      It’s shallow to you, because you either want government regulation to the point of Utopia or you don’t understand daily fantasy.

      Outside of head to head games, you’re not actually competing directly against individual players like you would at a poker game. You pay an entry fee to submit a lineup. The higher the points, the more money you would earn. It’s almost like an insurance pool, and the losers pay into the pot.

      Collusion can only occur if these sites pay off the players or the teams or otherwise change the outcome of a game. To prevent that, you actually need blessings or cooperation from the league, and that’s already happened. You can have robots optimize your teams and team up with friends to improve the odds, but the variance within the game will usually render that a moot point if all you’re just entering 10-20 lineups.

      So what protection are we talking about? Should we run IQs on prospective buyers of lottery tickets? Because some idiot might think he’ll win the jackpot and spend his entire life buying them?

  16. Lets go with a slam dunk dude.

  17. The top players of fantasy sports are “sharks,” just like in poker or pool…

    In pool, a shark is not a top player. A shark is an individual who disguises his or her skill in order to get you to either bet, or to bet more.

  18. The top players of fantasy sports are “sharks,” just like in poker or pool…

    In pool, a shark is not a top player. A shark is an individual who disguises his or her skill in order to get you to either bet, or to bet more.

    1. Squirrels, on the other hand, make great shark bait.

  19. It’s ridiculous to say that fantasy sports companies are completely unregulated. What people really mean when they say this is that there are no specific regulations that oversee how fantasy sports leagues operate.

    That misleading meme keeps coming up whenever someone introduces a new type of, or mode of doing, business?as if none of the existing legal structure that applies to biz generally applied! So what do these people want? New legisl’n or regs on the local, st., and/or fed’l level to apply specifically to those who’d like to sell Italian bread scored from upper L to lower R & sliced on a bias between 6 & 10 AM on the shady side of E-W streets on Tue. in mos. w no “r”?

    1. And where the hell do they get the ideal that regulation is an unalloyed Good? Never mind, I know where. I just have contempt for it.

      1. They don’t believe it automatically is, only that regs can be adjusted & readjusted to progressively weed out the bad in them as the badnesses become apparent.

    2. Hell, even when an industry is smothered within a planet-sized ball of red tape, they still whine about how “unregulated” it is.

      See: healthcare

  20. Google pay 97$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12k for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it out.
    This is wha- I do…… ??????

  21. I really can’t believe that anyone thinks this isn’t gambling.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.