To see less ads Register or Login ----- Daily Fantasy Sports games 18+

Discussion around good; very good or genius FPL players

A Fantasy Football forum for news on fantasy football games run by the Premierleague (FPL).
Post Reply
User avatar
Carlos Kickaball
Dumbledore
Posts: 7801
Joined: 04 Sep 2013, 18:02

Re: Discussion around good; very good or genius FPL players

Post by Carlos Kickaball »

Unless FPL change their pricing methods fairly radically, I would imagine a similar structure will be useful at the start of next season.

I think the reason spending a lot on your front seven works, aside from defenders being cheaper anyway, is that rotation gives a much larger benefit to cheap defenders than it does to cheap attackers. It probably often gets pushed into the forwards, as the cheap strikers are usually harder to pick out, if you think at the start of the season Kane and Welbeck were not starting.

triggerlips
Kevin and Perry
Posts: 20
Joined: 17 Aug 2010, 06:36

Re: Discussion around good; very good or genius FPL players

Post by triggerlips »

This is my first visit to this forum since 17 Aug 2010, 07:08

May i congratulate you guys on an excellent thread, it was a joy to read through it. Great analysis on Ville Ronke who appears to be a class apart at the top.

I read with interest the thoughts on my team structure. Just to clear something up, the amount i distribute between defence, midfield and attack remains fairly static each season with attack receiving a very generous chunk.
What does change is the allocation within each group. For example last season from memory it was 10.5 10.5 8.5 This season it could be 12.5 8.5 8.5 depending on players, or 12.5 10 6.5

The reason for spending such a generous amount on attack is the need to cover the captain bases, i always captain the top of the poll so it is essential i own those players.

Once it became clear this season that there were simply not the expensive strikers around , and we had Kane and Austin i gradually moved more funds into midfield. However for the start of the season i always keep the same structure

I remember reading analysis of the top 10 on a site called Simon says. Was that you guys? Was very interesting. If anyone would like to carry out such an analysis next season i would be more than happy to give them a page on my blog to host such a project. I find study of the top ten very interesting

One thing for sure is it seems very difficult to stay there, and i certainly feel the pressure, even a 5k finish which many would love, could see me out of the top 10

User avatar
Stemania
FISO Jedi Knight
Posts: 20448
Joined: 27 Aug 2006, 11:54
Location: On the Iron Throne of xG, the seat of The Crown Prince of the Stat Perverts. Or if not, in the STC!
FS Record: Best: TFF 321st. FPL 129th. FFS Career HoF Peak 2nd (Live 1st). Ability since lost.

Re: Discussion around good; very good or genius FPL players

Post by Stemania »

Aha, great to hear from you triggerlips - we have seen a fair few articles from your blog copied here throughout the year (you can mainly thank liquidfootball2 for that, though I know there are a few others who have followed your blog closely) so you are actually fairly familiar to many of us. :D

The forum will likely turn pretty quiet until the fixture/price lists etc come out again, so I really hope you stick around - the preseason time is usually excellent with lots of constructive geeky over-analysis and strategic discussion, which I'm sure would benefit from your presence - I certainly find FISO much more useful than say FFS for that kindof thing (whose comment system is just a chaotic mess imo). :mrgreen:

Welcome (back)!

User avatar
owenclass
Grumpy Old Man
Posts: 1938
Joined: 08 Aug 2010, 21:03

Re: Discussion around good; very good or genius FPL players

Post by owenclass »

I wish i could be better at this game

The Username
Grumpy Old Man
Posts: 1877
Joined: 15 Apr 2012, 10:40

Re: Discussion around good; very good or genius FPL players

Post by The Username »

Just read the article on the other site by Simon March, the overall winner, he says he only watched 3 or 4 live matches all season which is quite amazing, its in an interesting point, in a game of statistical potential how much does analysis/over analysis of the actual events prejudice the process.

I wonder would our points totals be better if we actually watched less games.

User avatar
Mav3rick
FISO Jedi Knight
Posts: 20858
Joined: 20 Jul 2009, 20:35
FS Record: FPL: 1082, 1201, 1800, 10203

The stats are dark and full of errors.

Re: Discussion around good; very good or genius FPL players

Post by Mav3rick »

triggerlips wrote:This is my first visit to this forum since 17 Aug 2010, 07:08

May i congratulate you guys on an excellent thread, it was a joy to read through it. Great analysis on Ville Ronke who appears to be a class apart at the top.

I read with interest the thoughts on my team structure. Just to clear something up, the amount i distribute between defence, midfield and attack remains fairly static each season with attack receiving a very generous chunk.
What does change is the allocation within each group. For example last season from memory it was 10.5 10.5 8.5 This season it could be 12.5 8.5 8.5 depending on players, or 12.5 10 6.5

The reason for spending such a generous amount on attack is the need to cover the captain bases, i always captain the top of the poll so it is essential i own those players.

Once it became clear this season that there were simply not the expensive strikers around , and we had Kane and Austin i gradually moved more funds into midfield. However for the start of the season i always keep the same structure

I remember reading analysis of the top 10 on a site called Simon says. Was that you guys? Was very interesting. If anyone would like to carry out such an analysis next season i would be more than happy to give them a page on my blog to host such a project. I find study of the top ten very interesting

One thing for sure is it seems very difficult to stay there, and i certainly feel the pressure, even a 5k finish which many would love, could see me out of the top 10
Thanks for the clarification triggerlips, also it would be great to have you posting more frequently here as I'm one of the ones who was introduced to your blog by liquidfootball2 this season and I enjoyed (and agreed with) pretty much everything you posted there. Having the number two ranked HoF manager posting here regularly would be amazing and you'd certainly enhance the list of elite managers we have here.

I've also just read your article inspired by this thread, which is another great read by the way. Risk reduction is something that many of us here encourage, but I'm interested in how much that applies to your transfer strategies too. Spiderm4tt had some views around having high quality but deliberately lower ownership players in some positions in your squad and he finished well again this year so I think it goes to show that there are several ways to play the game successfully, if you stick to a few basic rules.

Also, just for the avoidance of doubt, very few posters here were calling Ville (or by extension yourself) lucky. This related thread will show some context

viewtopic.php?f=18&t=116201

but I can honestly say that I think 90% of contributors to this thread believe Ville and anyone else near the top of the HoF to be very highly skilled, and not just lucky statistical quirks.
Last edited by Mav3rick on 30 May 2015, 11:17, edited 6 times in total.

User avatar
Mav3rick
FISO Jedi Knight
Posts: 20858
Joined: 20 Jul 2009, 20:35
FS Record: FPL: 1082, 1201, 1800, 10203

The stats are dark and full of errors.

Re: Discussion around good; very good or genius FPL players

Post by Mav3rick »

owenclass wrote:I wish i could be better at this game
Did you read triggerlips season review? Which of the things he highights do you not do because identifying that would probably be a good way to improve your game next year.

hancockjr
Dumbledore
Posts: 7976
Joined: 17 Aug 2006, 21:24
FS Record: FPL: Not as good as it was, but still very respectable.

Re: Discussion around good; very good or genius FPL players

Post by hancockjr »

I do think clean sheets are a bit more random at the start as teams (actual, not fantasy) settle down, so spending money on defence may well not provide such good value.

hancockjr
Dumbledore
Posts: 7976
Joined: 17 Aug 2006, 21:24
FS Record: FPL: Not as good as it was, but still very respectable.

Re: Discussion around good; very good or genius FPL players

Post by hancockjr »

The Dazzler wrote:Let's finish up with Ville;
http://fantasy.premierleague.com/entry/366766/history/
So he was at a season high of 315th after the penultimate week of GW37.
He did the logical and very popular move of transferring out Hazard to Silva in the final week. That cost him 4 points but he nevertheless posted a decent score of 47 and moved up to another season high of 277th.
He is confirmed as World number 1 in the FFS Hall of Fame for next season. And rather remarkably, the gap between him (98.27) and Nick {Triggerlips} (97.22) in 2nd place is more than that between Trigger and 26th place (96.2) in the HOF.
It appears as though Triggers first 3 mediocre seasons are preventing him from possibly taking that 1st spot, which seems a little unfair? But that ranking system is an argument for another day.

So what, if anything, have we learned from following Ville this year? Certainly not a huge amount of ground breaking concepts but possibly a myriad of small things.
And perhaps that's the most important concept to take away.
It's doing all the small things well that counts in the long run. We all have FPL 'leaks' where we give away points, even Ville, but the best players can minimise those leaks and maximise his opportunities so that in the long run, the cream rises to the top.
I'll do a follow up post where I try and pinpoint some of those skills.
Do you have the updated HOF rankings? If so would you be able to post them?

User avatar
Carlos Kickaball
Dumbledore
Posts: 7801
Joined: 04 Sep 2013, 18:02

Re: Discussion around good; very good or genius FPL players

Post by Carlos Kickaball »

Notable movers Nick (up 4), and Jon Sumner whose 2nd place finish this year pushed him into the top ten.

Image

User avatar
MJ6987
Wideboy
Posts: 71
Joined: 22 May 2014, 18:45

Re: Discussion around good; very good or genius FPL players

Post by MJ6987 »

Carlos Kickaball wrote:Notable movers Nick (up 4), and Jon Sumner whose 2nd place finish this year pushed him into the top ten.

Image
I am hanging in there in 17th place. It's so hard to stay there though and getting tougher every year, mainly due to the rise in popularity of FFS.

hancockjr
Dumbledore
Posts: 7976
Joined: 17 Aug 2006, 21:24
FS Record: FPL: Not as good as it was, but still very respectable.

Re: Discussion around good; very good or genius FPL players

Post by hancockjr »

Thanks. Seems awfully biased to more recent years, I wonder if they have chnaged the weightings as I'm sure it ddn't used to be. Then again 4th and 5th have poor recent scores, so in fact I'm just not sure how they assess it. Certainly the turnover in the top 10 (only 3 remain from last year) suggests this is more a "current form" than a long term measure (which is what I'd expect from a "Hall of Fame"). David Meecham was 8th, finished in 3,179 place, and is now out of the top 20 (unless he didn't join the Scout league, which would seem unlikely).

User avatar
MJ6987
Wideboy
Posts: 71
Joined: 22 May 2014, 18:45

Re: Discussion around good; very good or genius FPL players

Post by MJ6987 »

hancockjr wrote:Thanks. Seems awfully biased to more recent years, I wonder if they have chnaged the weightings as I'm sure it ddn't used to be. Then again 4th and 5th have poor recent scores, so in fact I'm just not sure how they assess it. Certainly the turnover in the top 10 (only 3 remain from last year) suggests this is more a "current form" than a long term measure (which is what I'd expect from a "Hall of Fame"). David Meecham was 8th, finished in 3,179 place, and is now out of the top 20 (unless he didn't join the Scout league, which would seem unlikely).
Yeah, it does seem very weighted towards your last season. I finished 1,565th this season which is pretty respectable and yet that is the second worst out of the whole top 20 - only the guy in 20th finished lower than me! I think it should be more based on longer term consistency.

User avatar
Stemania
FISO Jedi Knight
Posts: 20448
Joined: 27 Aug 2006, 11:54
Location: On the Iron Throne of xG, the seat of The Crown Prince of the Stat Perverts. Or if not, in the STC!
FS Record: Best: TFF 321st. FPL 129th. FFS Career HoF Peak 2nd (Live 1st). Ability since lost.

Re: Discussion around good; very good or genius FPL players

Post by Stemania »

I've moved to 191st, so would obviously prefer a weighting system that doesn't reward talent so heavily. 8-) :oops:

ChrisA
Kevin and Perry
Posts: 12
Joined: 04 Jun 2015, 20:41

Re: Discussion around good; very good or genius FPL players

Post by ChrisA »

Hi there. I'm the person who is in charge of the HoF on FFS and I thought I'd elaborate a bit on a few points. To answer Mr Hancock's point about it not really being a Hall of Fame because it places too much weight on the most recent seasons.

My original idea of the HoF was as a way of trying to rank managers so I can decide who's opinions are most worth listening to (in practice, who's teams and strategies I should place most weight on) when deciding decisions for my own team. Plus it was interesting to find how amazing some manager's records have been.

So, as it stands, I like to think that it very accurately ranks how good a manager *currently* is. Which I suppose is slightly subtly different from what most people think about when they hear the phrase Hall of Fame (i.e. a Hall of Fame for footballers has Pele and Maradonna in it even though they would now struggle to play professionally!!) To be honest, I hadn't really thought to much about the naming of it until now.

Also, strictly speaking it is not position that matters, it is points for that season (we just don't display points for past years). And usually difference in points relative to position tends to be logarithmic. i.e. the gap between 100th and 200th is similar to the gap between 200th and 400th as well as the gap between 400th and 800th e.t.c. People tend to think two 2000th finishes will be roughly the same as a 1000th finish and a 3000th finish but actually the 1000th and 3000th will usually have the better average points, despite having the same average position.

Oh, and by the way, David Meechan is 21st and only 0.57 behind Derek Simpson in 5th, so he is still in and around the top. It seems this year was one where most good managers did very well, so his 3179th position actually lost him quite a bit of ground on the top.

For me the HoF is most interesting and useful if it is an indication of current ability and hence the reason it places most weight on recent seasons. Perhaps we should rename it The Ultimate Ranking Device but the acronym doesn't quite have the same ring to it as the HoF! :)

User avatar
Stemania
FISO Jedi Knight
Posts: 20448
Joined: 27 Aug 2006, 11:54
Location: On the Iron Throne of xG, the seat of The Crown Prince of the Stat Perverts. Or if not, in the STC!
FS Record: Best: TFF 321st. FPL 129th. FFS Career HoF Peak 2nd (Live 1st). Ability since lost.

Re: Discussion around good; very good or genius FPL players

Post by Stemania »

Hey ChrisA,

Many thanks for taking the time to (sign up and) post - it makes sense that it's weighted as it is if those were your reasons for developing it. I think many of us (certainly me anyway) assumed it was created (or at least commissioned) by the scout team with the intention of simply ranking and rating the members of the site rather than a tool you made for your own use that was maybe later incorporated into the site.

I think almost everyone here is actually quite happy with the fact that the points between ranks grow as they do - we've seen many a logarithmic scale over the years - though that's a whole other debate (for example, should you just add everyone's race times together at the end of a Formula 1 season or use points each race to determine the championship?). The main critique I think was why it seems to weight recent years so heavily (which you have answered fully). :D

By the way, is there any chance you could share the actual formulas used (as I'm sure people would be interested) or is that top secret?

Oh, and also many many thanks for doing it and sharing the HoF in the first place as it's been a very interesting thing to have available.

ChrisA
Kevin and Perry
Posts: 12
Joined: 04 Jun 2015, 20:41

Re: Discussion around good; very good or genius FPL players

Post by ChrisA »

Thanks Stemania. Some of you may remember an old site called ratemyteam, which I started. The Hall of Fame was actually on that site. My website doesn't exist anymore but the HoF and RMT have been transferred to FFS. I help update RMT, but it's mostly the guys at FFS who update it (things like how likely players are to play). I just focus on team parameters, which I aim to update even more regularly next season.

I solely maintain the HoF and I have tweaked it a bit in recent years. The hardest problem is figuring out what to do for blank years, which I think I've done quite well. At the beginning of this year (2014-15), I figured there was a bug in the way I filled in those blanks, which I corrected for the start of the year. The 'down-weight' (the amount each previous season matters relative to the one after it) used to be 80%, although I have slightly lowered it this year to 78%. I'll look at this again next year. It will be interesting whether, based on the idea of the HoF ranking current ability, people think the weighting should be higher or lower. I certainly agree that if it were a traditional 'Hall of Fame' the weight should not be so strong. Really, it should be 100% in this case. Perhaps I could do both... (would be very easy to do).

As for whether there is anyone with a superior record to Ville than is not in the HoF, I don't think there is. When I originally did the HoF, I scraped the top 100K players in the game histories, whereas now I only grab the histories of the players in the FFS leagues. All the managers with stupendous records then, are accounted for in the HoF.
Last edited by ChrisA on 04 Jun 2015, 22:07, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Carlos Kickaball
Dumbledore
Posts: 7801
Joined: 04 Sep 2013, 18:02

Re: Discussion around good; very good or genius FPL players

Post by Carlos Kickaball »

Thanks Chris, the HoF system sounds almost ideal to me. :)

User avatar
Stemania
FISO Jedi Knight
Posts: 20448
Joined: 27 Aug 2006, 11:54
Location: On the Iron Throne of xG, the seat of The Crown Prince of the Stat Perverts. Or if not, in the STC!
FS Record: Best: TFF 321st. FPL 129th. FFS Career HoF Peak 2nd (Live 1st). Ability since lost.

Re: Discussion around good; very good or genius FPL players

Post by Stemania »

Ah, well in that case ChrisA you deserve some third thanks for the RMT tool too as I know a number of people on here use it as a guide sometimes. In fact, it's funny because there's another site out there providing projections (Fantasy Football Fix I think) which is often quoted alongside the FFS RMT numbers. My impression is that their figures are usually more optimistic than the ones on FFS, but I don't think it's ever been decided which are more accurate. :P :lol:

Cheers for providing the actual weighting factors - going from 0.8 to 0.78 seems a bit of a strangely precise change to me, you can tell you're a connoisseur. 8-)
ChrisA wrote: As for whether there is anyone with a superior record to Ville than is not in the HoF, I don't think there is. When I originally did the HoF, I scraped the top 100K players in the game histories, whereas now I only grab the histories of the players in the FFS leagues. All the managers with stupendous records then, are accounted for in the HoF.
Wow, that's interesting. We all assumed it was comprised solely of members of the FFS leagues. I was actually hoping to post something as definitive about Ville's record here next week - the superb blog FPL Discovery is due to publish some analysis of the previous finishes of members of the top 10k and 1k in terms of precisely how many have had how many previous 10k an 1k finishes in the past. :D

The Dazzler
Grumpy Old Man
Posts: 1248
Joined: 03 Dec 2008, 20:26
FS Record: 9th overall in FPL 2005/06, 50th 2010/11, 288th 2014/15

Re: Discussion around good; very good or genius FPL players

Post by The Dazzler »

Hi ChrisA, thx for coming on and sharing your thoughts.
Would it be possible to create a filter in the HOF? So for instance, you could filter it to the last 2 years, 3 years, 4 years, etc, etc?
Over the last 2 years, Ville would probably be World number 1. Over 3 years, it might be our own SpiderM4tt. Over 4 years, it could be Triggerlips.
This would remove the difficulties over the blank years too, I guess?
I don't know, maybe that's too difficult to do?

Also on the RMT, how accurate do you think those figures are? Do you have any historical data results to back them up? I must admit that I'm often pretty reticent about using them to make a starting decision between 2 players as I just don't know how accurate they are.

User avatar
Mav3rick
FISO Jedi Knight
Posts: 20858
Joined: 20 Jul 2009, 20:35
FS Record: FPL: 1082, 1201, 1800, 10203

The stats are dark and full of errors.

Re: Discussion around good; very good or genius FPL players

Post by Mav3rick »

Yep, just want to reiterate the thanks to ChrisA for taking the time to post that explanation of the HoF.

User avatar
Sutter Kane
Dumbledore
Posts: 7522
Joined: 05 Aug 2010, 12:13
FS Record: Unknown.

Re: Discussion around good; very good or genius FPL players

Post by Sutter Kane »

Mav3rick wrote:Yep, just want to reiterate the thanks to ChrisA for taking the time to post that explanation of the HoF.
Ditto.

Don't necessarily agree with the weighting but no system will be fool proof - I like the filtering idea. The most recent season should be the most important but the earlier seasons (where there was just one WC or even before that with no WCs for eg) are given way too little significance compared to the most recent seasons. They were still seasons (where everyone had equal conditions) but with slightly less unpredictability; with the lack of spoon-fed info then, watching matches and planning strategies actually worked which it randomly doesn't now (so as in most walks of life, you got out what you put in back then). So to be very consistent in last 3-4 years is really top drawer, which is why in imo, finishes of say 3k,2k,3k is more respectable than a 300, 4k, 25k nowadays. (I think mentioned similarly with the opposite view on another thread, maybe Dazzler? :D )

As for Ville, as Stemania mentioned, I think his start must be his magical key to every season. I don't know how he does it, but that is the 'consistency edge' he has. The start is so important - with the comparative differentiation in the squads. Get a good start and with the info out there, 500th+ is not impossible - have a bad first few weeks and it's likely to be good night Tromsø...

User avatar
Stemania
FISO Jedi Knight
Posts: 20448
Joined: 27 Aug 2006, 11:54
Location: On the Iron Throne of xG, the seat of The Crown Prince of the Stat Perverts. Or if not, in the STC!
FS Record: Best: TFF 321st. FPL 129th. FFS Career HoF Peak 2nd (Live 1st). Ability since lost.

Re: Discussion around good; very good or genius FPL players

Post by Stemania »

Sutter Kane wrote: So to be very consistent in last 3-4 years is really top drawer, which is why in imo, finishes of say 3k,2k,3k is more respectable than a 300, 4k, 25k nowadays. (I think mentioned similarly with the opposite view on another thread, maybe Dazzler? :D )
Just to be helpful twas Droughton btw, not TD. :D

ChrisA
Kevin and Perry
Posts: 12
Joined: 04 Jun 2015, 20:41

Re: Discussion around good; very good or genius FPL players

Post by ChrisA »

As I see it, the arguments for a strong downweight (when trying to create a ranking system that decides how good a manager *currently* is) are: (again this does make the name Hall of Fame misleading)

Sometimes a manager decides to take FPL less seriously, which consequently impairs their decision making. The most recent seasons are the best indication for whether someone is taking it seriously recently are the most recent seasons. For example: *Evs* recent decline is due to his decision not to take FPL seriously after about November this year.

If someone has picked the "right" players recently, that is more important that someone who has picked the "right" players further in the past. This is because if someone has picked the "right" players recently, it implies they probably have a better understanding of all the players, teams and stats and they are more likely to pick the "right" players in the future. Squads change very quickly and there's a small percentage of Prem footballers who were in the prem 5 years ago and even less 8 years ago. Plus the players abilities change quickly too (most notably someone like Torres). I suppose this point is the same as my point above about players taking the game seriously. Current knowledge of squads, formations, players is very valuable for a FPL manager.

In favour of a weaker downweight: good strategies, in general, don't change. Flexibility, playing the transfer market, reacting to bandwagons, evaluating fixture strength, incorporating home advantage, gauging form, looking at the underlying stats, picking captains, deciding who to bench. These remain largely the same. You could argue if someone has performed brilliantly 6 or 7 years but averagely the other years, it does suggest they could repeat that brilliant year again, whereas my model puts a small amount of weight on it. I suppose my reply would be if they don't repeat it, it could suggest that brilliant performance was "just luck". Ah luck, our good friend!

Sometimes though, an excellent player, can have a bad year because they might have a different approach to the game and refuse to jump on the successful bandwagons and follow the crowd. 2013-14 (Ramsey/Yaya) was an example of this type of season and although you could argue a 'correct' strategy should have more success in the long wrong, my model does place most weight on the recent seasons so a bad current year can throw you off a lot. Perhaps, unfairly.

It's an interesting debate. :) In fact, I'll have another go, this summer, at trying to work out what the optimum percentage for the downweight is. Should be pretty easy to do- look at optimising the correlation between what their HoF score would be without this season and their points this season.

User avatar
Stemania
FISO Jedi Knight
Posts: 20448
Joined: 27 Aug 2006, 11:54
Location: On the Iron Throne of xG, the seat of The Crown Prince of the Stat Perverts. Or if not, in the STC!
FS Record: Best: TFF 321st. FPL 129th. FFS Career HoF Peak 2nd (Live 1st). Ability since lost.

Re: Discussion around good; very good or genius FPL players

Post by Stemania »

Could it even be an option for a viewer to choose their own weighting factor (100%, 80% etc) with a button to update the table for their personal view? A bit like FFS already has for the fixture ticker and team difficulty perhaps?

Nice reasoning above ChrisA. I think everyone accepts that some form of weighting is fair (if nothing else to take into account the increasing number of competitors as years go by but also for some of the reasons you list above), but I don't think you'll ever find a consensus on what weighting should be used as it's pretty subjective. I guess people will inevitably prefer the weighting that makes their own record seem better.

Could an option for whether it's done by points or ranks be possible? There are reasonable arguments either way as to which is better and which people prefer is a bit of a question of individual taste. I guess there's a danger of it becoming too fiddly to appeal to the masses, but possibly that would be of interest to members.

The problem I suppose if there is an option is that it will just start lots of bickering as to which is the better system, and as a result there might be a danger of de-valuing what you currentl

smarty_pants
Cheetah
Posts: 3
Joined: 06 Jun 2015, 14:27
FS Record: FPL

Re: Discussion around good; very good or genius FPL players

Post by smarty_pants »

As someone who happens to have scraped data of the final top 100K, I can confirm that there is nobody in there with season history obviously better than Villie Ronka's.
Simply summing up total points for each season gives 9 champions for different time spans (no adjustments for blank seasons or season weights):
1 season (2014-2015) - Simon March - http://fantasy.premierleague.com/entry/390/history/
2 seasons (2013-2015) - Sean Creamer - http://fantasy.premierleague.com/entry/425694/history/
3 seasons - Matthew Martyniak - http://fantasy.premierleague.com/entry/27410/history/
4 & 5 seasons - triggerlips - http://fantasy.premierleague.com/entry/424/history/
6 & 7 seasons - Ville Rönkä - http://fantasy.premierleague.com/entry/366766/history/
8 seasons - Jay Egersdorff ESP - http://fantasy.premierleague.com/entry/5691/history/
9 seasons - Ulrik Nylund - http://fantasy.premierleague.com/entry/16470/history/

I think only 2 of these guys are not in the HOF

Only 2 teams with 5 top 1K finishes (and both degrading):
http://fantasy.premierleague.com/entry/213258/history/
http://fantasy.premierleague.com/entry/21466/history/

6 teams with 2 top 100 finishes (not a single team with 3 or more)
4 teams with 8 top 10K finishes...

User avatar
Stemania
FISO Jedi Knight
Posts: 20448
Joined: 27 Aug 2006, 11:54
Location: On the Iron Throne of xG, the seat of The Crown Prince of the Stat Perverts. Or if not, in the STC!
FS Record: Best: TFF 321st. FPL 129th. FFS Career HoF Peak 2nd (Live 1st). Ability since lost.

Re: Discussion around good; very good or genius FPL players

Post by Stemania »

Thanks s_p. Yep I think only Jay Egersdorff ESP and Sean Creamer are not known to us - all the other names are familiar including the final two (Kenneth Tang & Pascal Evans). MM is a regular poster here (and on FFS and twitter) under the name spiderm4tt, and pascalevans is a FISO member too - trigger signed up last week. :D

Jay Egersdorff ESP has an extremely impressive record for sure. It would be even more remarkable if he (or Sean Creamer) didn't use FFS, which I suspect they must do in the current climate.

ChrisA
Kevin and Perry
Posts: 12
Joined: 04 Jun 2015, 20:41

Re: Discussion around good; very good or genius FPL players

Post by ChrisA »

Cheers SmartyP. Wow- I may just add these guys to the HoF to see where they would land... Might do that after the match!!

ChrisA
Kevin and Perry
Posts: 12
Joined: 04 Jun 2015, 20:41

Re: Discussion around good; very good or genius FPL players

Post by ChrisA »

I've just chucked Egersdorff and Creamer in and they end up 5th and 21st respectively.

Now, I was having a think about the downweight. Because it's made up of two factors (current knowledge of players, formations e.t.c and general FPL tactics) and the former pushes towards a strong downweight and whilst the latter for a weak downweight, I could make the weighting for the season n years ago as follows: 0.5(0.95^n+0.6^n). Notice that the first year would have a 0.775 weight, but each subsequent year would end up slightly more than I currently give it. 2 years ago would get 0.63125 weight instead of 0.6084... ...and something 5 years ago would get 0.4257705 weight instead of 0.2887174. To me, this feels much fairer and I'll be looking to implement this in the future. What do you guys think?

User avatar
Mav3rick
FISO Jedi Knight
Posts: 20858
Joined: 20 Jul 2009, 20:35
FS Record: FPL: 1082, 1201, 1800, 10203

The stats are dark and full of errors.

Re: Discussion around good; very good or genius FPL players

Post by Mav3rick »

I guess the thing I'm not sure on is how you can scientifically justify any of the factors that are applied to someone with a record that suffers as a result of weighting changes.

It does feel fairer to me that previous years count a bit more but I don't think I could come up with a justifiable argument for either the .28 or .42 factor being correct or even preferable. There may well be one beyond my understanding of course because I know you have thought about this a lot and are clearly skilled at it.

Is it better to not rock the boat too much? Or to stage the weighting changes slowly over a number of years?

View Latest: 1 Day View Your posts
Post Reply

Return to “Fantasy PremierLeague.com (FPL)”