Are you a chip miser?

[Billy Bongo]

It does look weak, disappointingly. I saved the FH for 37 thinking thay top 4 and relegation battles plus less teams in champs league amd cups would mean less rotation and therefore I could maxmise the FH. Not so sure now ( although at least i can dump Salah for Chelsea away)

We also need to look at the huge impact pf City losing to Liverpool in the CL. Most teams were loaded with Pool and the free hitters in 35 had to adjust across to city.

Those that simply transferred them in and now in a strong position , with City out and playing for records those 34 squads everyone has woken up to today dont look too great .

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

[blahblah]

Lucky you re strong Squad, mine went in GW26

[Ruth_NZ]

Time for our annual argument I guess.

The fundamental error is seeing lots of people play BB in a DGW every season and conclude they are simply trying to maximise that chip alone rather than play all the chips in the best distribution possible in order to maximise the score over the season. Of course everyone is trying to maximise BB, but everyone is also obviously trying to maximise WC, FH and TC at the same time too.
I'm sure it's a nice self-affirming thing to do to tar almost everyone with the same foolish brush, but having played FPL for the best part of a decade I can say with confidence that most serious players are highly competent and agonise a lot about what they are doing. How do you know what the thought process of all the DGWBBers (which include yourself) was? How do you know most weren't aware of the pros and cons but simply did not view it as an error, so just disagree with your conclusion?

That conclusion is drawn in general from the huge emphasis that can be found on FPL sites about the BB and the barely contested assumption that it is best played in a DGW. If you are fair you will acknowledge that to be the case. But if we take 25 points net as a high benchmark (and that was better than the top 12 averaged last season) then it represents 1% maximum of the overall score of a high-ranked team. It therefore seems plain that the general focus is wrong - that the wrong question is generally being asked - and this is given confirmation bias by those that did well with the DGW BB boasting about it and those that didn't keeping silent.

Specifically, if you want to make it personal, it is also drawn from your "keep your options open" approach by which you refuse to take a position until you have all the data. You have often said this and yes, when I wrote about "see how the fixtures fall" it was with that in mind. That means the BB gets pushed back into the late-season by default and then has a hand in dictating when the wildcard is played. Again, if you are fair, I don't see how that can be argued.

Self-affirmation by decrying others doesn't interest me much. I don't know if it interests you. It just seems to me that a lot of the conventional wisdoms about the BB are false and illogical and I have explained my reasons for that at length before (and won't do so again). But, again if we are being personal, it has never crossed my mind that you are anything other than competent and diligent and I don't think you are an idiot either, far from it. We differ in that you will tend to react to what is happening where I might try to predict what will happen. That's more risky; this season I have probably taken it too far and will need to adjust a bit in your direction next time. But not where the BB is concerned.

Another fundamental error imo is assuming people playing WC close before BB are prioritising the use of the WC as a BB setup chip. Wherever the 2nd wildcard is, the BB fundamentally benefits from being played very soon after to reduce the likelihood of injury/suspension denying you of 15 on the pitch without hits - the logic is that way round. We see lots of BBs after a WC precisely because wherever a WC is, a good candidate for the BB is soon after. If it gets you 2, 3, or 4 more games, all the better.
If there was no BB chip, most people would still play their 2nd WC around DGW time - evidenced by the fact that this is exactly what they did before BB was here. Besides, if WC was being played predominantly as a BB setup chip, then surely the logic is that the most popular would have been GW33 rather than 32 so far. The "90%" figure I assume is pulled from an orifice.

Basically that's all agreed over here. The tension is between 'prioritising' the use of the WC as a set-up and 'using' it that way. How much difference is there actually if they both amount to the same thing? The key point from my side is that when you must prepare 15 with it, it creates stresses that you could do without in DGW season and in addition, wouldn't you generally prefer to WC in a DGW rather than 1-2 weeks before? There is a compromise in that too, isn't there?

The 90% figure is completely unverifiable, of course. It was meant to be expressive of a firm opinion based on experience. I'm not a mathematician so you'll just need to accept that I use numbers as signifiers sometimes.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I did do the work and concluded that WC33 BB34 FH35 TC37 was best for my team. As far as I remember, the vague thought at the start of the season was that FH31 would probably end up be the most popular time for that chip. Still a fine FH time for many individuals I'm sure it was, but FH35 ended up being the most popular. Presumably it moved because people looked at how the fixtures fell and changed their minds based on that.

Of that I have no doubt. But you did that work before GW32 when all was known, right? So by default the question was how best to use your chips over the last 7 GWs. The topic of discussion here is whether all those chips are best used in the last 7 GWs at all. Not to do so would require a position to be taken before all the data is available. If you 'burn' the BB early (for example) then you are making a surmise that that will serve you better than later on. If you save it then you are making the surmise that it is best played late because by the time you have all the data it will be too late to go back and play it early. That's the essential problem here. And it isn't really team-specific either, that's another piece of FISO fudge in my view. It's something you need to take a position about before GW1, before you even have a team, otherwise you end up with a default situation in GW32. Essentially you have taken a position either way, like it or not.

[Billy Bongo]

Fact is ive just gone though the main chip phase with no chips and 32 spend. And made huge dent in my rank, I've even posted exactly what the transfers are.

Those here can either dismiss it as luck, or revaluate and see if there is anything new to learn . The fact no one is looking at my data, the transfers i made instead of playing chips, is rather odd. Can only assume its news some woukd rather not hear, dunno.

These arguements have been going round in circles and the 170 double we all had wheeled out as 'proof'. Well, ive tried the opposite, and done well. Luck, or something in it?

Its no fluke i chose to transfer in city players rather than free hit them in, and save the fh, that was a decision. I now have 2 Spurs inc Kane Salah and triple city with no spend for this weekend. My run could well continue, plus the fh in 37, and salah returning for 38. Lets see. Worthy of debate anyway

[Bixer]

The fact no one is looking at my data, the transfers i made instead of playing chips, is rather odd. Can only assume its news some woukd rather not hear, dunno.

I'm not saying I'm for or against either route and I think there definitely could be something in not over-emphasising double gameweeks, but how is one single person's anecdotal experience proof of anything at all?

[Smurphy Paw]

It’s not acknowledging and taking into consideration the associated costs and consequences of picking a certain set of players that is the fundamental error, not playing any chip in any given week...

Oh, come on SP, that's sophistry. The BB has a very specific and unique problem; you count 15 players that week. That causes significant stress and it is unlike any other chip in that regard. So the 'costs and consequences of picking a certain set of players' are particular to the BB in a way they cannot be at any other time.

What you say is therefore correct but general. I am pointing to a fundamental mistake that is very often made concerning the BB specifically and it is that "how do I maximise the BB?" is the wrong question to be starting with. But actually it's often where people do start, whether they realise it or not. FFS is full of stuff about 'how well did you do with the BB?' or 'how to get the best from the BB' as if it is an end in itself. It isn't.

Not at all. Sophistry is a cute insult about something being clever and false. Apologies if it looks clever and false to you, but, with a sense of deja vu, it’s the setup of your statement that allowed the false premise to creep in not my reply.

As for significant stress, not really. Unless you leave it a number of weeks carrying a full bench and keep taking hits to maintain a full playing squad. That was stressful to observe never mind manage through

[Billy Bongo]

The fact no one is looking at my data, the transfers i made instead of playing chips, is rather odd. Can only assume its news some woukd rather not hear, dunno.

I'm not saying I'm for or against either route and I think there definitely could be something in not over-emphasising double gameweeks, but how is one single person's anecdotal experience proof of anything at all?

Whats anecdote about it? No chips and 32 spend are facts, not anecdote.

Really interesting stat from Ruth. TC and BB is between 1 and 2% of a season, yet the whole season for so many managers is geared to towards maximising that 2%.

How much more is a wildcard worth going early and fixing a poor squad for example.

As I said earlier, you can dismiss alternatives as anecdotes and structure the season around 2 chips that arent actually worth much, or look to learn a different approach.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

[Ruth_NZ]

@SP

Sophistry is using language cleverly to circumvent the point originally made. That's what I saw you to be doing. If I could be bothered I'd look up which of Schopenhauer's stratagems it was - maybe the one about disproving a contention that was never intended - but never mind. Sophistry will do.

[Stemania]

That conclusion is drawn in general from the huge emphasis that can be found on FPL sites about the BB and the barely contested assumption that it is best played in a DGW. If you are fair you will acknowledge that to be the case. But if we take 25 points net as a high benchmark (and that was better than the top 12 averaged last season) then it represents 1% maximum of the overall score of a high-ranked team. It therefore seems plain that the general focus is wrong - that the wrong question is generally being asked - and this is given confirmation bias by those that did well with the DGW BB boasting about it and those that didn't keeping silent.

I disagree. On any FPL site a lot on emphasis/chatter will go on about chips/DGWs because they're the most interesting part of the season - it's suddenly different from the chug-chugging along of normal midseason play - it's not that they are the most important things. I don't recall on FISO any BB-is-incredibly-important claims. Clearly TC, BB etc aren't going to define many seasons in practice with 30 or so points between them.

Any maddening conclusion you want can be chosen by perusing the twitter-of-FPL FFS comments section and noticing a handful of comments that support a viewpoint, that's just as strong a confirmation bias. I'm sure you have seen a few people say the above, "ooh, look at the score last year on BB", but that in no way means that is how most people are determining their use of it.

So by default the question was how best to use your chips over the last 7 GWs. The topic of discussion here is whether all those chips are best used in the last 7 GWs at all. Not to do so would require a position to be taken before all the data is available. If you 'burn' the BB early (for example) then you are making a surmise that that will serve you better than later on. If you save it then you are making the surmise that it is best played late because by the time you have all the data it will be too late to go back and play it early. That's the essential problem here. And it isn't really team-specific either, that's another piece of FISO fudge in my view. It's something you need to take a position about before GW1, before you even have a team, otherwise you end up with a default situation in GW32. Essentially you have taken a position either way, like it or not.

If the topic of discussion is of whether saving the chips for the DGW period is advisable or not (rather than your point on whether a BB in a DGW is any good) then I unashamadly do think the best thing to do is plan to save them until the blank/DGW period and decide from there. The caveat being on the lookout for a potential TC in any midseason DGW, or an earlier wildcard in case of an injury crisis, or an amazing BB opportunity etc. I think the second wildcard will almost always be most powerful during the blank/DGW spell because of the massive changes of circumstance, same with the FH unless there's a very strong looking week that pops up organically. TC and BB clearly have the most points potential in a DGW in isolation, so it's just a case of seeing what if anything needs to give.

Of that I have no doubt. But you did that work before GW32 when all was known, right?

I'd certainly advise going through all the possible strategies as early as is reasonable, so yeah. Deciding a rough order is a slow process, but determining the specifics like the exact position of TC/BB couldn't be determined until precise fixtures were known. E.g., the DGW fixtures being in the opposite order to what seemed most likely was a reasonably big factor this year and we didn't find that out until after GW31.

if you want to make it personal....We differ in that you will tend to react to what is happening where I might try to predict what will happen.

I don't. And when FPLing, everyone clearly attempts to predict what will happen rather than react to it, myself included.

[Ruth_NZ]

If you want to make it personal....We differ in that you will tend to react to what is happening where I might try to predict what will happen.

I don't. And when FPLing, everyone clearly attempts to predict what will happen rather than react to it, myself included.

Then why react as if my original post was aimed at you? Chapter and verse about competence and planning and all the rest? The problem is that you and SP and others have a certain "frame" about the best way to play FPL and I don't go along with it. So often when we are in disagreement you revert to a frame that you see to be de facto whereas I don't. As a result we often find ourselves at cross-purposes. And as a result we don't talk much at all. Generally I avoid it because I find it to be a pointless exercise and my guess is that you feel the same.

The second part is more sophistry. You know as well as I do that many managers don't even react to what is happening, they chase what already happened. The transfer ins-and-outs in any particular week are clear evidence of that. What was intended was more nuanced; there is a sliding scale...

What has already happened What is the case right now What may/will happen next.

We make decisions from somewhere along that scale. All that was being said is that I believe myself to be further to the right than you - probably too much on the evidence of this season. There was no intent to denigrate. It's not an easy thing to get right, not for anyone.

[math!]

Btw im accutely aware when people don't like the message they will attack the messenger. Hopefully some will just consider there shouldn't be template, there is more than one way to play these chips.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

You're right there shouldn't be a template. Last season TC Kane was the popular plan just because he had a double. I wasn't convinced at all because of his form and the opposition so I went against it. He did poorly that DGW.

I think, despite not profiting this year, that FH can be used when you see a very strong 11 not merely to cover blanks. When I used it earlier in the season I had on paper such a team but in the end it was a GW when all the likely candidates blanked.

[Smurphy Paw]

@SP

Sophistry is using language cleverly to circumvent the point originally made. That's what I saw you to be doing. If I could be bothered I'd look up which of Schopenhauer's stratagems it was - maybe the one about disproving a contention that was never intended - but never mind. Sophistry will do.

I’ll do it for you:
‘the use of clever but false arguments, especially with the intention of deceiving’

That is insulting. The extrapolation, if that’s what you really believe, is that you think I’m on here trying to limit the chances of others getting a good score through deception. Presumably by now the mods are watching: you’re better than that and you know me better than that, but please don’t double down and raise the stakes on this, I don’t want to be distracted from planning my WC36 & BB37. Or BB38. Still deciding

[Billy Bongo]

If my FH works in 37 I'll be such a smart arse I'll probably get banned.

If it doesn't I'll just keep quiet

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

[Ruth_NZ]

Blimey, SP. I just told you what I mean by sophistry. I think you are doubling down on yourself.

"Presumably by now the mods are watching". What the hell is that supposed to mean? It's not my fault that you are turning a fairly innocuous word into a drama.

[Stemania]

Fact is ive just gone though the main chip phase with no chips and 32 spend. And made huge dent in my rank, I've even posted exactly what the transfers are.

Those here can either dismiss it as luck, or revaluate and see if there is anything new to learn . The fact no one is looking at my data, the transfers i made instead of playing chips, is rather odd. Can only assume its news some woukd rather not hear, dunno.

These arguements have been going round in circles and the 170 double we all had wheeled out as 'proof'. Well, ive tried the opposite, and done well. Luck, or something in it?

Its no fluke i chose to transfer in city players rather than free hit them in, and save the fh, that was a decision. I now have 2 Spurs inc Kane Salah and triple city with no spend for this weekend. My run could well continue, plus the fh in 37, and salah returning for 38. Lets see. Worthy of debate anyway

I do think it's fair to say you've done very well in the run-in with the strategy you chose, and have potentially made some wise calls bringing City in permanently in 35. Being able to navigate the DGW then the blank with just hits looks like it was hard work! I quite like FH37 actually, here's hoping you get up into the top 10k at least - I guess it's the 60-odd% of the current top 10k with TC37 left (or 40% BBers) that you're competing against.

It's hard to know how well you'd have fared if many of the secondary DGW players had been more successful is all I'd say, especially the non-Smalling defenders - clearly you maneuvered in the top end ones anyway. Perhaps you were wise to not trust the likes of Chelsea, or the Leicester defence, as much as many DGW chippers did, myself included.

[Billy Bongo]

I put faith in Saints and got rewarded

I remember everyone loading in Leicester and Arsenal in the last dgw when Leicester won the prem. The smart move was Sunderland, they needed 2 draws for survival and got two nil nils. My brother went triple Sunderland defence and won the league.

This fh I'll be double Swans and double Saints defence

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

[Bixer]

The fact no one is looking at my data, the transfers i made instead of playing chips, is rather odd. Can only assume its news some woukd rather not hear, dunno.

I'm not saying I'm for or against either route and I think there definitely could be something in not over-emphasising double gameweeks, but how is one single person's anecdotal experience proof of anything at all?

Whats anecdote about it? No chips and 32 spend are facts, not anecdote.

Really interesting stat from Ruth. TC and BB is between 1 and 2% of a season, yet the whole season for so many managers is geared to towards maximising that 2%.

How much more is a wildcard worth going early and fixing a poor squad for example.

As I said earlier, you can dismiss alternatives as anecdotes and structure the season around 2 chips that arent actually worth much, or look to learn a different approach.

Again, I’m not saying I disagree with the notion outright, but you’re acting like your sample size of literally 1, ie you and you alone, is somehow enough data to prove your point.

[Billy Bongo]

What point? I haven't made one.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

[Sutter Kane]

No posting a brag, just want to show there is always an alternative in this game and I'm in the camp that believes BB and TC are overrated chips better used early.

Well without nit-picking , I think the above was your point! This forum's all about opinions of course...

There is always an alternative of course but I think there's more examples of where BB and TC have been deployed late and succeeded. I think they are both overrated (unlike FH which I think it underrated) agreed. Just don't know therefore can't agree they are better used early, especially the TC.

[Billy Bongo]

Depends how you measure success, everyone keeps saying they succeeded, but hardly anyone tripled Salah in a sgw. Why is that? And how many tcs tanked in 34?

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

[mitsubachi]

I used my last chip FH on gw 35 and BB on gw 34. Wasted my triple cap on Kane in that first dgw. I believe that chips should not be used late like in gw 37 because there are a lot of uncertainties in the lineups. But I understand why pple are saving it because almost everyone have saved a chip for 37 which will make players with no chips to use in 37 uneasy. I guess it’s more of like an insurance policy now rather than a way to gain more points. I also learnt after my failed Kane dgw triple cap that I may consider a player with good odds for a strong sgw next season as a dgw player may be rested or not perform to his usual standards because of 2 games with minimal rest time.

[Bixer]

What point? I haven't made one.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

You literally started this thread

[From4corners]

I used my last chip FH on gw 35 and BB on gw 34. Wasted my triple cap on Kane in that first dgw. I believe that chips should not be used late like in gw 37 because there are a lot of uncertainties in the lineups.

Well, if a certain player or players are competing for the golden boot it's pretty tempting to throw the triple captain armband on one of them, even more so when a certain player has two relatively easy looking opponents. On the other hand, Kane has let us down all but too many times against the seemingly easy-to-fill-his-potentially-golden-boot opponents.

[mitsubachi]

I used my last chip FH on gw 35 and BB on gw 34. Wasted my triple cap on Kane in that first dgw. I believe that chips should not be used late like in gw 37 because there are a lot of uncertainties in the lineups.

Well, if a certain player or players are competing for the golden boot it's pretty tempting to throw the triple captain armband on one of them, even more so when a certain player has two relatively easy looking opponents. On the other hand, Kane has let us down all but too many times against the seemingly easy-to-fill-his-potentially-golden-boot opponents.

Yes agreed. Kane has let us down many times this season. I still think that Kane would be a good choice for gw 37 TC, but Spurs normally loses form around this time of the season which may impact his output too. For someone without chips left, I can only hope he doesn’t have a big haul in gw 37. Haha. I guess it’s that fear that leads to people hoarding chips and may cloud their judgement of playing it earlier in the season.

[Zimmerman]

It’s always a gamble.
Yes, Aguero v Newcastle or Salah v Watford seem like absolute no brainers.

Who’s to say (apart from Anfield Express) that they would even start with a nice plum easy home game. Who’s to say they wouldn’t have blanked?

So it’s always a gamble (appreciate Salah is currently exhibiting the sort of form where you don’t think it’s possible to blank). But it’s always a gamble, will they start, will they score.

So whilst a DGW and playing it late are also laden with risk... for me, the risk versus reward is probably justified.

Maybe we need some DGW points analysis (over several/many years) to see if the DGW week is a complete misconception.

[Billy Bongo]

What point? I haven't made one.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

You literally started this thread

Indeed, to promote discussion on the wildly held view the chips should all be saved and thus wedded to the late season doubles

Seems a good debate so far.

Personally i spent 32 in a 4 week period with no chips where many in here didn't spend anything amd used 3 chips. I thought that worthy of a thread.



Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

[Ruth_NZ]

I guess it’s that fear that leads to people hoarding chips and may cloud their judgement of playing it earlier in the season.

BillyB should change the title of this thread to "Are you a Chip Miser?".

[Billy Bongo]

Hoarding chips

Brilliant

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

[Ruth_NZ]

Hoarding chips.
Brilliant.

[mitsubachi]

I feel that if you have planned for and feel that using your chips earlier is the right choice, then you should go for it. Although I feel that bb in gw 37 is also a good choice, you really need everything to click, such as the city players u have in ur team to play, injuries, suspensions, motivations etc. if all these do not go to plan, you really only have gw 38 to fix whatever bad scores u have from ur chip not going to plan. If I used it in 34, I would still have 35-38 to try and catch up on lost points. Also, would you have the team value to actually execute the ideal team u want at this late stage is another problem. The problem with a few people I know who are still holding on to their chips at this point is that they still do not know when to use either of their chips. Although it is a good option to have at this stage I must say.