Are you a chip miser?

[Billy Bongo]

I know there is luck involved, but the 'template' seemed to be wc 32, BB or TC in 34 then FH 35, the remaining chip in 37.

I played no chips and saved FH for 37.

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.

The 170 dgw from Sanchez cap we all got previously seems many have decided thats that, save the chips for the doubles. Thing is the 170 week was pointless, we all got it, whats the point in that?

Wildcards surely better played when you need it? Triple captain in any week you think will work ( i got 33 from Aguero in a sgw) and BB early so you can have cheap bench later. Arguements for and against that.

Anyway, pure luck? Who knows, but worth considering



Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

[Smurphy Paw]

Interesting points. Not necessarily about Chip use, we don’t know from that if those who used their Chips got a similar rise in rankings.
What does jump out is the question about taking or not taking hits. Adopted wisdom in these parts is that transfers should be valued and hits avoided. You’ve risen up the rankings doing the opposite

[Billy Bongo]

Yes, i need to say i did spend a lot of time planning through, they weren't hip shooters

To be honest i was tipped into madness when i didnt captain Salah for his 4 goals and rank went to 39k, probably would have been more conservative otherwise but its made me think, and will consider all options next year.

I will almost certainly use BB early though .

It seems that chips get saved for fear of missing out, particularly in fpl communities.

If you really think about them would you save them all always? Has herd mentality taken over the chips?

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

[Zimmerman]

What’s your angle, you didn’t use them and prospered ergo you don’t have to follow consensus?

Is there a bit of hindsight bias in force here?

I do agree that the herd mentality can perhaps cloud people’s judgement (but equally some people need the herd to show them the way).

There is sound reasoning behind playing a TC or BB on a DGW... surely the odds favour it rather than a SGW (that might not mean it’s guaranteed, but before a ball is kicked it’s got to be the safer option.

You mention the Sanchez haul ‘what was point’ there was plenty of point if you were one of the ones that didn’t benefit.

I thought ahead of this weekend that any gains I made from my FH team would be negated (because every team I saw had 7-8 players the same). Transpires that I still did really really well. Pretty par for the course in my mini leagues... but overall ranking took a real boost.

It’s the first season I’ve really paid any attention to this game, so I can’t profess to be an expert... but I’ll give my opinion anyway

One of the things I have noticed is that people bend over backwards for these BGW/DGW... that might be where people could get smarter.

People tearing up their sides to get 6 Spurs and West ham players. People doing the same for GW31, GW34 etc. I said it the other week, the chips are their to enhance our teams, not dictate them (obviously could be hindsight bias of my own at play).

[Billy Bongo]

The angle is to promote discussion, this is a discussion board after all.

As you rightly say

I do agree that the herd mentality can perhaps cloud people’s judgement (but equally some people need the herd to show them the way).

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

[Smurphy Paw]

I’m not disagreeing with you about chips. For comparison, here’s my GW31-35 stats.

6E848040-84F6-4104-86DE-6E22307EC5D0.jpeg

During that time I only used the Free Hit and maintained my ranking.
However, better judgement/better outcomes* around who to play and who to bench and the picture would be much better. Just imagining that I played the one best bench player in these weeks (Alli, Long, Hennessey) and I’d be in the top 800.
Therein lies madness, I played who I did for good reason at the time, but it does support the point that with careful planning the same or better outcomes can be achieved

However you did it, those are some impressive recent scores

[Billy Bongo]

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

[Smurphy Paw]

Not at all. Some may misinterpret as you saying that Chips have no value, but that’s not the case - either broadly speaking or the point you’re making.

Out of interest, do you think you wild carded too early? Did you go up or down the rankings in the following weeks? Lots of early wild carders seem to have put themselves behind the curve and in a position where they had to take a number of hits - imagine your ranking had you been able to make most of the above moves for free!

[Zimmerman]

Hopefully you didn’t think I was attacking you.

I havent actually followed the consensus myself (not completely anyway). Still have my WC and TC to play.

Some will no doubt argue that I’ve not maximised the value of my WC, I’ll argue that holding on to it has worked for me. In reality, there is no right answer.

[Billy Bongo]

On thw contrary, the chips represent free points, so have value, obviously. But i think they are exaggerated by some it terms of value and whole season's seem to be dictated by them. Perhaps a more balanced approach is required and some more detail in thinking

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

[Tacalabala]

Check out my free hit score this week and then tell me they aren't value.

[Billy Bongo]

Who has said they have no value? I scored 80 without a FH, perhaps you should read what's been typed before replying. Although you demonstrate my point somewhat, thinking is so ingrained managers cant believe they are wrong so stubbonly refuse to accept there might be different strategies to use.

Check out my score is perhaps the worst reply to anything ive read on the internet ever, thats perhaps a more apt response

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

[Stemania]

From what I've seen, the relative under-performance of the 32/33 wildcards (compared with the boost we'd usually see during popular wildcard times) has mainly been at the door of popular players at Chelsea, United and Leicester being under par and there having generally been more rotation than expected. Alonso's sending off, Christensen apparently losing his first team spot altogether, plus the likes of Valencia, Morgan, Alli, Sanchez, Lukaku etc all getting reasonably surprising rests. It's been a bit of a perfect storm for many 33/34 teams by the looks, especially in defence.

Not a complete disaster though, FPLS showed top 10k teams that BB'd in 34 got around 20 points more on average than those that did not, so even if not too useful a stat (as they'll be a correlation to consider) it does indicate it wasn't a complete flop in general. FH35 seems to have been quite successful.

There's always going to be routes that seem to work best for individual teams, and there's always going to be routes that seem best for most teams, and individual results in either direction doesn't tell us much about either.

[Billy Bongo]

Indeed they don't

As long as we constantly assess the information available and don't stick to a plan because everyone else does then we should be fine

I've long been an advocate of using the chips early if an opportunity came along, and have been in a minority.

Not saying im right, there is no right and wrong, only opportunities to learn. My rank gain was with no chips a captain fail in 34 and 32 points spent. Worth reflecting on for next year

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

[Ruth_NZ]

There is sound reasoning behind playing (the) BB in a DGW... surely the odds favour it rather than a SGW...

With all respect, this is the fundamental error that almost everyone makes.

What you say is true if all you are considering is how to maximise the BB and that alone. But that's the wrong target. What you should be trying to do is to maximise your score over 38 weeks. The apparent attractions of a DGW BB typically become a focal point in the late season and the costs (explicit and implicit) of doing that are mostly waved away or downplayed.

I figured out a while ago that it was essential to de-couple the 2nd wildcard and the BB. Using the 2nd wildcard as a set-up chip for the BB is a bad mistake 90%+ of the time. I also considered that playing the BB early was best but didn't do that this season because the opportunity didn't fall. Next season I will play it in GW1 come what may. It is a pest of a chip and causes untold problems in many cases. I'll happily take 12 points in GW1 and be done with the damned thing.

Doubtless some will want me to prove what I am saying here with data. My answer is "go and do the work yourself". I have presented the logic of the argument before in great detail and all I got was "limited sample size" and "it depends how the fixtures fall". Blah blah. The people that have said that have ended up wildcarding in 32/33 for BB34 or in 36 for BB37, just as it was blindingly obvious that they would, I could have told you that in GW1. "How the fixtures fall" has nothing to do with their decision because they inevitably wait until GW31/2 when the doubles and blanks are known and then it becomes a question of how best to use the chips in the remaining weeks. They are not keeping their options open; they are committing to the 2nd wildcard/BB combo by default right from the outset.

Good luck anyway, I'm not going to argue this case all over again. But Billy is right; the conventional view about the chips is totally debatable, especially the BB.

[Zimmerman]

I don’t disagree Ruth (that’s why I made the point about chips shouldn’t dictate our decisions ). It’s also why I played my BB despite only having 3 subs and 4/14 with a single game.

The chips (or certainly the BB) is only valuable in isolation if the benefit isn’t wiped out by the decisions used getting to that point (or the weeks after).

Same could be said of GW31 (some chose the FH) others chose to field XI players. Any value in their GW31 score could have been offset by a subpar team for weeks in advance of it or a team that needed ripping up post GW31 (or even being forced to play the WC as a clean up exercise).

Obviously it’s a conscious choice and some people may have elected that route as the best use of their chips. Only time will tell if it works out or not - and even then, we can’t really say which approach is best (due to the sheer volume of variables at play).

[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 (including BB, including DGW and, if the mood takes you BB in a DGW)

[Bixer]

People getting weirdly defensive and high and mighty about all this...

[blahblah]

Yep they are, the BB last DGW has shafted my Squad and I would be in a better position, for the rest of the season, if I had ignored it...

Adopted wisdom in these parts is that transfers should be valued and hits avoided. You’ve risen up the rankings doing the opposite

Maybe this should be challenged?

[Ruth_NZ]

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.

[blahblah]

'how to get the best from the BB' as if it is an end in itself. It isn't.

Totally agree, and I fell into the trap....

[Billy Bongo]

People get defensive when deeply held views are challenged.

The only arguement for saving chips is that there are more games in a dgw therefore better chance of success.

If you logically think it through you'll find significant advantages in doing the opposite.

Its similar to the over fixation with TV. Pricing is part of the game and good managers use it as part of a strategy to gain an edge, others just become consumed by it at all cost.

Im 11k, yet ive never captained Salah and even sold him for 3 games. I may be half that with different decisions, i may not be.

Just be flexible, sometimes it works sometimes it wont, but I'm with Ruth, the template idea of linking the chips to the wildcard and doubles is flawed at best, illogical at worst.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

[Ruth_NZ]

I don’t disagree Ruth (that’s why I made the point about chips shouldn’t dictate our decisions).

Yes. It was just that your comment started me off and there is history in this forum about this subject. If my response was a bit strident, please excuse me; it wasn't aimed at you.

[blahblah]

the template idea of linking the chips to the wildcard and doubles is flawed at best, illogical at worst.

Or even shifting the Squad for it (BB) - not sure about illogical though: more games means more points is logic, but it is certainly flawed as bench fodder can score any GW.....

[Billy Bongo]

Its only logical when looked at using one week, the double. The logic looks dodgy when looking at the whole season

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

[Bixer]

I'm one of the few who, this season, has saved their Wildcard for now with a view to using my Bench Boost in GW37, so I suppose I'll let you know in a couple of weeks if I regret doing so or not and if my team was better off as it was!

[blahblah]

But counter logic can be good

Like just after the BGW was set\closed for changes etc it occurred to me that Capt'ing Salah would make up for me being players "short" and they were at home to Watford..... Kane\Jesus have to go some in the DGW

[blahblah]

I'm one of the few who, this season, has saved their Wildcard for now with a view to using my Bench Boost in GW37, so I suppose I'll let you know in a couple of weeks if I regret doing so or not and if my team was better off as it was!

But in another season that may be an excellent plan ie when Relegation, CL spots and the title are not already settled. This season it looks rather weak?

[Stemania]

There is sound reasoning behind playing (the) BB in a DGW... surely the odds favour it rather than a SGW...

With all respect, this is the fundamental error that almost everyone makes.

What you say is true if all you are considering is how to maximise the BB and that alone. But that's the wrong target. What you should be trying to do is to maximise your score over 38 weeks. The apparent attractions of a DGW BB typically become a focal point in the late season and the costs (explicit and implicit) of doing that are mostly waved away or downplayed.

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?

I figured out a while ago that it was essential to de-couple the 2nd wildcard and the BB. Using the 2nd wildcard as a set-up chip for the BB is a bad mistake 90%+ of the time.

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.

In fact, didn't you yourself find this this season playing the WC 6-7 weeks ahead of the BB (and the other side of blanks) resulting in lots of hits. Would you have actually been better of playing the BBing close after your WC28 in 29-30 when you could be sure of 15 players no hits - so 'coupling' them?

The most popular 2nd wildcard this year has been GW32, and from what I've seen the reason for it was evidently that it signaled the week immediately after the blanks and before the DGWs, when suddenly the landscape of FPL changed entirely - from a one fixture deficit due to GW31, suddenly many choices had one or two fixture surplus to the end of the season - it allowed to shift the deadwood of Everton Huddersfield and Bournemouth who'd had an extra game but were poor longer term picks etc. BB in 34 was then a reasonably obvious BB chip place since the the consensus for the best TC in the DGW period seems to be it's strongest in GW37 (Kane/City). So, it's far from obvious that the main purpose of the WC was as a BB setup chip. Even that 'most popular' GW32 WC time was just 21.5% of the top 10k, and 11% in GW33, so in no way represents 'the mass thought'. Many made different choices.

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.

Doubtless some will want me to prove what I am saying here with data. My answer is "go and do the work yourself". I have presented the logic of the argument before in great detail and all I got was "limited sample size" and "it depends how the fixtures fall". Blah blah. The people that have said that have ended up wildcarding in 32/33 for BB34 or in 36 for BB37, just as it was blindingly obvious that they would, I could have told you that in GW1. "How the fixtures fall" has nothing to do with their decision because they inevitably wait until GW31/2 when the doubles and blanks are known and then it becomes a question of how best to use the chips in the remaining weeks. They are not keeping their options open; they are committing to the 2nd wildcard/BB combo by default right from the outset.

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 course it's questionable to redistribute lots of funds to the bench with a lot of the season to go, just for one DGW in order to maximise BB. But that's not what the majority of people do in my experience. It's a cheapo backup GK, very cheap defenders, and a very cheap 8th attacker I usually see. This year the more common BB34 benches I saw got a nice GW33 game in Ryan, a Leicester defender for the second double, and a Burnley defender for their good fixtures outside the doubles - so that bench was of benefit for the whole DGW spell rather than being of detriment.

And of course everyone should be encouraged to think about their own circumstances and play the game as they see benefits their team the most. This is what everyone agrees. Absolutely no forum or fantasy discussion site I've ever seen actively suggest you should just blindly follow a popular strategy regardless. But there are always going to be some strategies more popular than others so long as there are large communities and sites that aggregate such things. Next year might be back to the blanks-and-doubles in GW34 and no blank GW35 and everyone will have to rethink all again based on next seasons' circumstances.

[Bixer]

I'm one of the few who, this season, has saved their Wildcard for now with a view to using my Bench Boost in GW37, so I suppose I'll let you know in a couple of weeks if I regret doing so or not and if my team was better off as it was!

But in another season that may be an excellent plan ie when Relegation, CL spots and the title are not already settled. This season it looks rather weak?

Agreed. It's not actually been a 'deliberate' plan for a long time, it was more that I didn't want to rip up my team for GW31 and so as a result I was still pretty happy with my team for GW32 onwards etc and Wildcarding just for GW34 felt counterproductive.

I suppose in that regard I subconsciously realised that my already strong team was more valuable than using a chip just for the sake of it, but at the same time am I now using that same chip just for the sake of it and so it doesn't otherwise go to waste? Time will tell I suppose.