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

Ville Rönkä is lucky, isn't he?

A Fantasy Football forum for news on fantasy football games run by the Premierleague (FPL).
Post Reply
maddocio
Treebeard
Posts: 203
Joined: 06 Feb 2006, 17:40

Re: Ville Rönkä is lucky, isn't he?

Post by maddocio »

Finisher1 wrote:
maddocio wrote:Ok, I accept that there is a chance that there is a manager who could have enjoyed the utterly remarkable good fortune to generate Ville Ronka's incredible performance over EIGHT seasons and 304 gameweeks each involving at least 2 (and generally more) key decisions. However, even if there is a person who has enjoyed this luck, what are the odds that this person happens to be Ville Ronka?
hancockjr wrote: The chances of one of those 10 being one of the best (say top 1,000) players anyway, which is the whole premise here, is (give or take) 1 in 400. i.e. very unlikely.
You are missing the point. I'm not saying Ville is the luckiest FPL manager in the world.

We were using this example only to illustrate that luck doesn't even out during 8 seasons. It's a very fundamental thing here - luck doesn't even out during 8 seasons. But you don't have to be "one out of million" lucky (or unlucky) to get remarkable advantage (or disadvantage). Even some very slight variance with luck will make big differences.
Come off it, we're not talking about a few or even a few dozen judgement calls here , we're talking about several hundred. The odds of him getting the requisite number of calls right to achieve his historic performance being purely due to good fortune are astronomic. One of the benefits of this game is that your performance is completely quantifiable - the points you get get is all that matters and Ville Ronka's numbers are on the record for all to see.

User avatar
Ruth_NZ
Grumpy Old Gorilla
Posts: 9156
Joined: 25 May 2015, 22:46

Re: Ville Rönkä is lucky, isn't he?

Post by Ruth_NZ »

Aww, shoot. That's twice now that I have composed a long comment here and then deleted it. I just don't see the point and I don't want to get tied up in a circular argument. So I'm out. :? :|

User avatar
Valeron
FISOhead
Posts: 754
Joined: 30 Dec 2011, 09:53

Re: Ville Rönkä is lucky, isn't he?

Post by Valeron »

How many times do we need to say the same thing.

Ville is a highly skilled manager. There's no doubt about that.

Simple maths dictates that there will be some managers in FPL, even over a number of seasons, who get more than their fair share of luck. And some who get less.

Some of us believe Ville has been one of the lucky ones down the years.

There's a long thread on ville and nobody has come up with anything he does that's really any different from a number of smart managers on here.

With all that considered, there's a very logical conclusion to be drawn.

maddocio
Treebeard
Posts: 203
Joined: 06 Feb 2006, 17:40

Re: Ville Rönkä is lucky, isn't he?

Post by maddocio »

Valeron wrote:How many times do we need to say the same thing.

Ville is a highly skilled manager. There's no doubt about that.

Simple maths dictates that there will be some managers in FPL, even over a number of seasons, who get more than their fair share of luck. And some who get less.

Some of us believe Ville has been one of the lucky ones down the years.

There's a long thread on ville and nobody has come up with anything he does that's really any different from a number of smart managers on here.

With all that considered, there's a very logical conclusion to be drawn.
Yes indeed, I promise that this will be my last contribution, my argument is that his record (look at it it's really good, really good, utterly remarkable) has been achieved over EIGHT seasons and THREE HUNDRED gameweeks with probably OVER ONE THOUSAND decisions to achieve this. Luck may well have played a role in this but over this long timescale it is at best a secondary and most likely a tertiary factor, if that.

User avatar
Valeron
FISOhead
Posts: 754
Joined: 30 Dec 2011, 09:53

Re: Ville Rönkä is lucky, isn't he?

Post by Valeron »

Agreed, but that is enough to earn the few points per season that sets his record apart from the other elite managers. Which is all we're saying really. He's had a few more lucky breaks.

Nobody is having a go at Ville and good luck to him, what i'm saying is that the Ville disciples are wasting their time looking for his magic formula as there isn't one.

maddocio
Treebeard
Posts: 203
Joined: 06 Feb 2006, 17:40

Re: Ville Rönkä is lucky, isn't he?

Post by maddocio »

Valeron wrote:Agreed, but that is enough to earn the few points per season that sets his record apart from the other elite managers. Which is all we're saying really. He's had a few more lucky breaks.

Nobody is having a go at Ville and good luck to him, what i'm saying is that the Ville disciples are wasting their time looking for his magic formula as there isn't one.
Haha. I certainly agree on the latter, I for one have had several 'what the f*ck are you doing' moments this season :)

User avatar
Ruth_NZ
Grumpy Old Gorilla
Posts: 9156
Joined: 25 May 2015, 22:46

Re: Ville Rönkä is lucky, isn't he?

Post by Ruth_NZ »

Valeron wrote:Ville is a highly skilled manager. There's no doubt about that.
But there is. That's the point. And that's the root of my dissent about this argument.

What if no-one has achieved any standard above moderately competent in FPL? Then we are discussing which moderately competent (or mediocre) manager is the best or the luckiest. Seems pretty pointless. Like a bunch of yokels arguing about who is the cleverest. :shock:

Better would be to try to improve the way you play rather than assuming you already know it all - or that VR does, or that the HOF top 20 do, or that anyone does. If some people want to do that by looking at what one of the most successful managers so far does then good for them. It's positive. Whatever floats your boat.

If some on here think they are as good as VR but just not as lucky then why not come out and say so? :roll:

User avatar
ZeroRemorse
Grumpy Old Man
Posts: 2181
Joined: 12 Aug 2016, 15:29

Re: Ville Rönkä is lucky, isn't he?

Post by ZeroRemorse »

I actually think The Scout Mark Sutherns is better than Ville, has higher finishes on a regular basis and makes really well calculated hits and uses his high TV to good use.

Mashed Potatoes
Wideboy
Posts: 86
Joined: 18 Jul 2013, 16:16

Re: Ville Rönkä is lucky, isn't he?

Post by Mashed Potatoes »

Mark is not as consistent as Ville- but he is a superb player,who is also on the receiving end of the "luck" jibe from the less talented.

User avatar
Archy
Grumpy Old Man
Posts: 3210
Joined: 22 Oct 2011, 10:09
FS Record: Maybe all is not lost after all

Re: Ville Rönkä is lucky, isn't he?

Post by Archy »

Ruth_NZ wrote:
Valeron wrote:Ville is a highly skilled manager. There's no doubt about that.
But there is. That's the point. And that's the root of my dissent about this argument.

What if no-one has achieved any standard above moderately competent in FPL? Then we are discussing which moderately competent (or mediocre) manager is the best or the luckiest. Seems pretty pointless. Like a bunch of yokels arguing about who is the cleverest. :shock:

Better would be to try to improve the way you play rather than assuming you already know it all - or that VR does, or that the HOF top 20 do, or that anyone does. If some people want to do that by looking at what one of the most successful managers so far does then good for them. It's positive. Whatever floats your boat.

If some on here think they are as good as VR but just not as lucky then why not come out and say so? :roll:
The key points we keep on repeating, but keep on getting ignored are:

1. Ville is recognised as a highly skilled manager.
2. We have tried to improve the way we play by analysing Ville. Is 2 years analysis on here not enough?
3. That analysis has shown there appears to be nothing special about the way he plays.

The challenge I keep on making but no-one seems able to answer is "what does Ville do that makes him better than other skilled managers"?? If you're going to argue his record is NOT in any way down to luck, please pinpoint some key decisions he's made that illustrate his superior skill. (I'm more than happy to learn, I just can't see what there is left to learn after all this analysis).

And if people can't think of any examples after the 2 years of analysis, how about simply putting their money where their mouths are instead? After analysing Ville this season and seeing nothing remarkable, I think my chances of beating him next season are quite reasonable (Happy Ruth? :wink: ). For those who think he is vastly superior, are you willing to offer odds on me succeeding in this monumentally hard challenge? Given how much more skilled he is, I can reasonably expect odds of AT LEAST 5-1 no? Is anyone confident enough in Ville's skill level to actually do this?

(Lets face it, it's a simple - and rather dull - argument to point at Ville's record and say: OF COURSE he's better than you. I want to know if anyone has the bollocks to actually back him in a FUTURE event, the outcome of which is not already determined. Any takers).



Ps Maverick you talk about this being "personal". On the other thread people who questioned the level of luck involved were directly called "losers" and "not fit to tie Ville's boots". THAT'S personal, which is why we have started this thread - so the discussion can continue without us coming under personal attack.
Last edited by Archy on 06 May 2017, 08:22, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Ruth_NZ
Grumpy Old Gorilla
Posts: 9156
Joined: 25 May 2015, 22:46

Re: Ville Rönkä is lucky, isn't he?

Post by Ruth_NZ »

Archy, you mistake me, really.

I'm not saying that he is, or isn't lucky. I'm saying that whether he's lucky or not is of very little import. I don't consider him to be especially highly skilled, I consider him to be moderately competent. And which moderately competent manager is more or less lucky is of little interest to me.

What makes me wonder, however, is what the psychology of all this is. I see people talking about "highly skilled managers" - they say that VR is and they imply that they are too, only less lucky. Which is a great excuse not to have to examine your own play and try to improve. I'll tell you what I think. I think you are all mediocre and by whingeing on about this matter as if it is significant you distract yourselves from trying to be better. :lol:

And now I think that's enough from me on the matter and I shall retire to my cave. :roll:

User avatar
Archy
Grumpy Old Man
Posts: 3210
Joined: 22 Oct 2011, 10:09
FS Record: Maybe all is not lost after all

Re: Ville Rönkä is lucky, isn't he?

Post by Archy »

Ruth you've again missed the points above (despite me listing them clearly :wink: ).

You know, the points about analysing Ville for 2 years and wanting to learn but finding nothing left to learn (from him).

And don't you think we all spend enough time on here trying improve our own games to allow a little distraction on this discussion? No Sigmund Freud needed, really - It's a rather lame argument to claim we are all burying our heads in the sand because we don't want to learn anything. I'm sure we could offer up plenty of your posts on the forum that have nothing to do with improving your game so making a connection here is a pretty bad attempt at amateur psychology!

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

Re: Ville Rönkä is lucky, isn't he?

Post by Carlos Kickaball »

It is probably true that psychologically some would like to not feel they are inferior to other managers, and thus find it appealing to be able to write it off as luck. The much more overwhelming desire on this forum however appear from the need for FPL to be considered skilled, important, and intellectually taxing. Whether this pushes us in to intransigence and incoherence is up to us.

Finisher1
Dumbledore
Posts: 7159
Joined: 05 Mar 2013, 10:10

Re: Ville Rönkä is lucky, isn't he?

Post by Finisher1 »

maddocio wrote: Come off it, we're not talking about a few or even a few dozen judgement calls here , we're talking about several hundred. The odds of him getting the requisite number of calls right to achieve his historic performance being purely due to good fortune are astronomic. One of the benefits of this game is that your performance is completely quantifiable - the points you get get is all that matters and Ville Ronka's numbers are on the record for all to see.
You are mixing things up.

The odds of some highly skilled manager having a few more lucky breaks than his rivals over eight seasons are very short. The odds are not astronomical, they are short.

If all the luck between highly skilled managers would completely even out during eight seasons, that would be astronomical odds.

You see, we are not saying Ville is a poor manager who buys a lottery ticket during eight years and just happens to get lucky. We are saying he is a highly skilled manager that has had a few more lucky breaks during eight years than other managers with similar skills. How is that so hard to realise? It is absolutely likely that some highly skilled manager has had a few more lucky breaks than others during eight years. The odds of all the highly skilled managers getting exactly the same amount of luck during eight seasons are astronomical.
Last edited by Finisher1 on 06 May 2017, 08:55, edited 2 times in total.

Finisher1
Dumbledore
Posts: 7159
Joined: 05 Mar 2013, 10:10

Re: Ville Rönkä is lucky, isn't he?

Post by Finisher1 »

Carlos Kickaball wrote:It is probably true that psychologically some would like to not feel they are inferior to other managers, and thus find it appealing to be able to write it off as luck. The much more overwhelming desire on this forum however appear from the need for FPL to be considered skilled, important, and intellectually taxing. Whether this pushes us in to intransigence and incoherence is up to us.
What do you think CK? I recall you are one who has always realised the major role of luck and randomness in this game?

User avatar
Tacalabala
FISO Knight
Posts: 19010
Joined: 07 Sep 2008, 01:03

Re: Ville Rönkä is lucky, isn't he?

Post by Tacalabala »

It's probably not possible to find this out, but historically speaking how good are his starting squad's on GW1 and his decisions in the first month or so?

I say this because so much of our season is determined by those decisions at the start. If anyone consistently gets that right, I can't see how you can argue that is luck given that you have only poor data to base your decisions on (preseason), you are having to make essentially 15 transfers in one go and you are having to weigh up the opening rounds of games without really having a clue how things are going to go.

Also, when we are talking about luck, we are really talking about making transfers or not. It might seem like there are only a narrow range of choices in any given week, but theoretically the number of possibilities is extremely large, even taking into consideration budget and Ville's reluctance to take hits. The choice to keep players is just as important as who to bring in.

He has had a poor season though by his standard, I think even he would admit that he could and should have got in Spurs players. Given that they went on a long run of wins and it was clear to most that they were in good form, it's not unlucky, it's just a bad decision. And that's the rub - if there is any luck, it's in making a choice to a) get rid of players before they drop out of form and b) bring in players just as they are about to hit a run of form. Just how pre-emptive is Ville?

User avatar
ZeroRemorse
Grumpy Old Man
Posts: 2181
Joined: 12 Aug 2016, 15:29

Re: Ville Rönkä is lucky, isn't he?

Post by ZeroRemorse »

Mashed Potatoes wrote:Mark is not as consistent as Ville- but he is a superb player,who is also on the receiving end of the "luck" jibe from the less talented.
Maybe not as consistent, but he's not far of, he's had a couple of very high finishes, a top 50 and a top 500. The 100,000 during the Suarez season being the one blip.

What's his current rank now? It was 217th the other GW.

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

Re: Ville Rönkä is lucky, isn't he?

Post by hancockjr »

Archy wrote:
The key points we keep on repeating, but keep on getting ignored are:

1. Ville is recognised as a highly skilled manager.
2. We have tried to improve the way we play by analysing Ville. Is 2 years analysis on here not enough?
3. That analysis has shown there appears to be nothing special about the way he plays.
2 thoughts then I'm done.

A) There have been many observations (I made some, as have others) about how Ville plays - conservative, Not TV focused. Simply making sound decisions without the number of mistakes other make would definitely be enough to mark you out from the crowd. IF there was a "best player" I'd never imagine a "silver bullet" being revealed.

B) assuming all variance (among the group selected arbitrarily as the "better players") is luck as you can't explain it is akin to ascribing unexplained real world phenomena to God, giving up on trying to find a scientific explanation. It's a cop out.

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

Re: Ville Rönkä is lucky, isn't he?

Post by Carlos Kickaball »

I've written at great length, much of it seems to have been read and affected some of the attitudes on the forum, though also misinterpreted by some who clearly struggled to grasp some of the points made.

I'll just state my opinion that skill (and I will include effort as part of skill) and luck matter in achievement in FPL, but once you're managing sensibly, as many on this forum do, the ability to make gains through skill becomes marginal. Luck however can affect you whatever your ability, and once this skill difference becomes marginal the role of luck becomes much more important. The easiest way of estimating the amount of luck is considering it to be a bell curve, it is easy to approximate how spread out this is by looking at the outliers, pick who you think are the most skilled managers and see how far off the top ten they are.

User avatar
Archy
Grumpy Old Man
Posts: 3210
Joined: 22 Oct 2011, 10:09
FS Record: Maybe all is not lost after all

Re: Ville Rönkä is lucky, isn't he?

Post by Archy »

hancockjr wrote:
Archy wrote:
The key points we keep on repeating, but keep on getting ignored are:

1. Ville is recognised as a highly skilled manager.
2. We have tried to improve the way we play by analysing Ville. Is 2 years analysis on here not enough?
3. That analysis has shown there appears to be nothing special about the way he plays.
2 thoughts then I'm done.

A) There have been many observations (I made some, as have others) about how Ville plays - conservative, Not TV focused. Simply making sound decisions without the number of mistakes other make would definitely be enough to mark you out from the crowd. IF there was a "best player" I'd never imagine a "silver bullet" being revealed.

B) assuming all variance (among the group selected arbitrarily as the "better players") is luck as you can't explain it is akin to ascribing unexplained real world phenomena to God, giving up on trying to find a scientific explanation. It's a cop out.

1. Yes, I have made a similar (much more comprehensive) list previously too.

2. Erm actually you assume all variance is down to skill but can't identify a "silver bullet". A scientific reason has been put forward to explain variance (not all variance) but you don't accept the mathematical analysis either. That to me sounds more like a person believing in some God given gift than those putting forward scientific arguments.

User avatar
Ruth_NZ
Grumpy Old Gorilla
Posts: 9156
Joined: 25 May 2015, 22:46

Re: Ville Rönkä is lucky, isn't he?

Post by Ruth_NZ »

Archy wrote:Ruth you've again missed the points above (despite me listing them clearly :wink: ).
I didn't think I had but for clarity my responses are in red:
Archy wrote:1. Ville is recognised as a highly skilled manager. Generally he may be. Personally I would question that (and did). I consider him to be competent.
2. We have tried to improve the way we play by analysing Ville. Is 2 years analysis on here not enough? Yes it is. If you have learned what you can (or want to), or have come to the view that there is nothing to learn then move on. That seems sensible.
3. That analysis has shown there appears to be nothing special about the way he plays. I won't argue with that either although it obviously depends how competent you were to start with. I'm sure you'd agree that his play demonstrates a number of good principles.
Personally I have never studied VR all that much but when I started in FPL I learned a lot from Triggerlips, stuff about squad structure and game theory and so on. I didn't take it hook line and sinker, I used it as a starting point to work from. Much of it I have developed a different take about but some of the principles appear good to me and are still part of my game. So I am indebted to him. But I seldom visit his blog now because there's nothing useful for me there any more. If I do have a look it's more to see how he is doing rather than anything else.

I think someone starting could learn from VR in a similar way if they wanted to. And if they want to then why argue with it? Learning is a positive thing isn't it?
Archy wrote:And don't you think we all spend enough time on here trying improve our own games to allow a little distraction on this discussion? No Sigmund Freud needed, really - It's a rather lame argument to claim we are all burying our heads in the sand because we don't want to learn anything. I'm sure we could offer up plenty of your posts on the forum that have nothing to do with improving your game so making a connection here is a pretty bad attempt at amateur psychology!
I guess. I like FISO because it has some characteristics of being a hive of "improvers" and learners (as well as being a place of humour and banter and somewhere you can let off a bit of steam when MacAuley scores yet again). :roll: But the question of motivation is valid, isn't it? Why is the issue of whether VR is lucky or not such a big deal? That's my question really. Because personally I'm not really bothered whether he is or he isn't. :?

What you refer to as amateur psychology (I'm not entirely an amateur but let's pass over that) is actually me talking about attitude. I'd rather have the attitude of "how can I improve" rather than assuming I'm as good as anyone else and if they beat me it's luck. I find that more beneficial. That's all.

User avatar
Archy
Grumpy Old Man
Posts: 3210
Joined: 22 Oct 2011, 10:09
FS Record: Maybe all is not lost after all

Re: Ville Rönkä is lucky, isn't he?

Post by Archy »

The problem Ruth comes with all the aspersions that are thrown at the people who believe that Ville has enjoyed more than a fair share of luck. I don't think the debate would continue so much if people just accepted others have this view without slinging mud at them.

The common theme of argument is that such people have a 'bad attitude' , a 'losers mentality, 'don't want to learn' and 'aren't fit to lace Ville's boots'. It is these sort of comments - which are lazy, ignorant, insulting and unfounded - which keep me coming back , because they need to be challenged and corrected.

The ironic thing is the people who have analysed Ville's play enough to draw these conclusions - and are interested enough to perform mathematic analysis - are the very people who are most likely to see self improvement because of the hard work they're prepared to put in to analysing the game.
Last edited by Archy on 06 May 2017, 11:19, edited 1 time 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: Ville Rönkä is lucky, isn't he?

Post by Mav3rick »

Archy wrote: Ps Maverick you talk about this being "personal". On the other thread people who questioned the level of luck involved were directly called "losers" and "not fit to tie Ville's boots". THAT'S personal, which is why we have started this thread - so the discussion can continue without us coming under personal attack.
And you have rights to recourse with the mods under the forum terms and conditions, where relevant action can be taken against those attacks. Ville doesn't (as far as I know). I don't think he should have special treatment I think he should have the same rights you do.

To be fair, the thread has taken a different route of late and has become more generic with some interesting insights, which I personally welcome.

On the actual subject at hand....

I do think that it's a good observation there's an element of psychology of the observer in this whole luck debate. People with good records have an interest in it being more ascribed to skill, and vice versa for those who have been unfortunate with their final ranking positions.

Ultimately, it doesn't really matter to me if any one person is lucky or not as I have no control and it doesn't affect my team. If there's anything I can learn from a lucky manager (or Archy, Finisher1, Mark Sutherns, almost anyone really), then I'd like to know about it, so the stalker threads are still well within the boundary of "useful" for me and shouldn't be dismissed as just the work of "disciples".

On that note, the two camp thing isn't helping really, I don't see myself as a disciple by any means, I've enjoyed reading about his season to see if I think I could learn anything from him but I'm not going to follow him over a cliff and I'm happy to take any good parts of his game and ignore the bits I think I can maybe do better.

I'm sure that the same is true of the other side. I don't think it's helpful to be labelled as sore losers or anything like that, even if you believe that you can't learn anything from others at least you know that know thanks to the effort of the stalkers and the time that you took to read it all :D

User avatar
Archy
Grumpy Old Man
Posts: 3210
Joined: 22 Oct 2011, 10:09
FS Record: Maybe all is not lost after all

Re: Ville Rönkä is lucky, isn't he?

Post by Archy »

Don't be silly Mav, Ville doesn't post here so, unlike me, can't be by offended by anything that is said. He is welcome to complain, like me, if he does read the forum and does happen to be offended.

If anything, the 'let's catch up with Ville' thread is a thread stalking the man, with no permission for doing so, so if there are to be any complaints then surely they should be directed at the thread as a whole. If you're concerned about his rights then the whole thread should be closed down.

Arguably it should be anyway because I've seen little this year to suggest that stalking him is actually achieving anything now we've seen and understood what he does (ie nothing out of the ordinary).

More useful would be if we had someone with a comparable record, like Hancock, running a thread EXPLAINING his decisions each week.....

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: Ville Rönkä is lucky, isn't he?

Post by Mav3rick »

You do, you have Triggerlips blog!

User avatar
gallus
Grumpy Old Man
Posts: 3921
Joined: 06 Sep 2014, 11:55

Re: Ville Rönkä is lucky, isn't he?

Post by gallus »

Archy wrote: More useful would be if we had someone with a comparable record, like Hancock, running a thread EXPLAINING his decisions each week.....
Explaining is tricky, we can't know why he made a particular transfer. That's why the Ville thread offers so little actual information, we don't really know the guy. We don't even know if he's one guy or a group of guys!

User avatar
Valeron
FISOhead
Posts: 754
Joined: 30 Dec 2011, 09:53

Re: Ville Rönkä is lucky, isn't he?

Post by Valeron »

Hancock and Trig have comparable records to Ronka?

If so they must be lucky as there's no way they're any better at FPL than some of the rest of us. :P

Anyone have a record of them or any other considered elite players?
Last edited by Valeron on 06 May 2017, 12:01, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
gallus
Grumpy Old Man
Posts: 3921
Joined: 06 Sep 2014, 11:55

Re: Ville Rönkä is lucky, isn't he?

Post by gallus »

Valeron wrote:Hancock and Trig have comparable records to Ronka?

If so they must be lucky as there's no way they're any better at FPL than some of the rest of us.

Anyone have a record of them or any other considered elite players?
IIRC hancock has a brilliant record. One of the best, if not the best, on fiso. Silkworm is another player with a great record. He got a top10 finish in his first year. :D

User avatar
ZeroRemorse
Grumpy Old Man
Posts: 2181
Joined: 12 Aug 2016, 15:29

Re: Ville Rönkä is lucky, isn't he?

Post by ZeroRemorse »

Wow, you guys really are FPL fanatics, I feel a lot better about the time I sink into this game sometimes. :lol:

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

Re: Ville Rönkä is lucky, isn't he?

Post by Sutter Kane »

FF scout Hall of Fame is where you can find many Valeron. There are some incredible records there but none so consistent as Ville's so far.

View Latest: 1 Day View Your posts
Post Reply

Return to “Fantasy PremierLeague.com (FPL)”