GW1 Bench Boost Team

[OldSkoolFPL]

No, the bloke who was number one in the World on Sat, someone would only play it for a fast start and you'll get none faster.

[Finisher1]

No, the bloke who was number one in the World on Sat, someone would only play it for a fast start and you'll get none faster.

Sure, if your goal is to be overall leader just for a second, then BB/TC in GW1 is a great decision. However, if your goal is to get the best possible overall rank after GW38, then a fast start doesn't really matter at all. Ten points earned in GW1 is worth the same as ten points earned in GW38.

[Sutter Kane]

It is the same in that particular week. You just have to be careful to not alter your second WC setup too much in order to facilitate the BB whenever it's played. If you're WC'ing a different team to the one you'd setup without a BB in hand, then it's probably hurt your points at some stage. So I fully understand why people have done it now - if I was offered 16 points for it, I'd take that now. Obviously if there exists 4mn defenders who have nice DGWs that's the optimum because your bench is then likely close to base price, so it probably won't affect your other GWs.

The problem, of course, with playing it early is that a better/securer opportunity may present itself later in the season (non-DGW) or some (otherwise hard to play all of them) outstanding prospects might raise their heads in a DGW.

[Finisher1]

It is the same in that particular week. You just have to be careful to not alter your second WC setup too much in order to facilitate the BB whenever it's played. If you're WC'ing a different team to the one you'd setup without a BB in hand, then it's probably hurt your points at some stage. So I fully understand why people have done it now - if I was offered 16 points for it, I'd take that now. Obviously if there exists 4mn defenders who have nice DGWs that's the optimum because your bench is then likely close to base price, so it probably won't affect your other GWs.

The problem, of course, with playing it early is that a better/securer opportunity may present itself later in the season (non-DGW) or some (otherwise hard to play all of them) outstanding prospects might raise their heads in a DGW.

Of course, but that's totally another matter. That's not what I commented. I simply said that "getting a fast start" is not a reasonable argument for playing BB in GW1 if your goal is to get the best possible overall rank after GW38.

[Sutter Kane]

Indeed. You did also say afterwards that 10 points earned (presumably in a BB otherwise no point saying it straight after!) is the same wherever you earn in, which is of course very obvious - however there are sacrifices using it late and sacrifices using it early so simply pointing out 10 is the same whenever you earn in doesn't do the complexity justice imo.

Finisher, I feel one requires a moderating solicitor to be so preciously exact with any of your/others comments! (Yes I meant preciously) I think FISO should be a more relaxed vibe...

[Finisher1]

Indeed. You did also say afterwards that 10 points earned (presumably in a BB otherwise no point saying it straight after!) is the same wherever you earn in, which is of course very obvious - however there are sacrifices using it late and sacrifices using it early so simply pointing out 10 is the same whenever you earn in doesn't do the complexity justice imo.

Nope, that's not what I said. Obviously the accurate BB score is the total net score after all the compromises you have made, not just what your bench players have scored. I just said it doesn't matter when you earn your points if your goal is to get the best possible overall rank after GW38. So to put it simply, "a fast start" is nothing to consider in BB decision.

[Sutter Kane]

Are you saying you didn't say this? (don't think we need a lawyer for this one)

Ten points earned in GW1 is worth the same as ten points earned in GW38.

That's what I was referring to. What you have said that is far too simplistic when referring to the topic of this thread. That is my opinion - it's too simplistic so you should have expanded on it more than you did so I thought I would.

No really, lawyer anywhere? Anyone...(litigious is the word I am looking for! I have to say, I don't enjoy the odd litigious discussion here and there)

However so we can close this, I do agree with you that the comment about a fast start you made, in isolation, is one I agree with. I've appeared to accidentally add more litigious meat to the bones of that.

[MoSe]

parsing the Forum League for GW1 BB usage, and PB for those who didn't, I noticed a -3p bench, and stumbled on this
https://fantasy.premierleague.com/a/tea ... 70/event/1

FISO 201819 GW1 ALL BLUES.png

LOL, seriously?

of the 1273 Fiso League entrants, 20 played GW1 BB
the average PB of all others was 13.28
we had a wide range of bench points tho, ranging from 0p to 40+ (6 teams)

Fiso-Leaguer who left most Points on Bench without playing GW1 was Bestpay with 43p
https://fantasy.premierleague.com/a/tea ... 78/event/1
he still got a Fiso-average 71p, starting the the top 600k,
but had he played BB he'd have been tied with RNZ at 114p

[Finisher1]

Sutter Kane: it was a general comment that it doesn't matter when you earn your points if you are aiming for the best possible overall rank after GW38. I made that comment because someone had suggested that BB in GW1 is good because you get a fast start.

[MoSe]

PB #teams
  0   70
  1   52
  2   64
  3   58
  4   39
  5   21
  6   20
  7   22
  8   36
  9   27
10   28
11   21
12   46
13 119
14 138
15 105
16   60
17   33
18   27
19   32
20   35
21   32
22   25
23   15
24   20
25   16
26   15
27   19
28   16
29   20
30     9
31   14
32     3
33     1
34     -
35     2
36     3
37     2
38     2
39     -
40     2
41     1
42     1
43     2

the 70 who got 0 PB include the 20 BBs
if you take them out, in the remaining 1253 teams there were
28.9% leaving 13-14-15p on their benches
37.35 (almost 3/8) if we widen the range to 12-16p
but also 21% who'd have got just 0-4p from their benchers
(that's post autosubs of course, those numbers include those who had 1 or 2 who did not play in their XI, and autosubs "took out" pts from their PB)

[Sutter Kane]

Sutter Kane: it was a general comment that it doesn't matter when you earn your points if you are aiming for the best possible overall rank after GW38. I made that comment because someone had suggested that BB in GW1 is good because you get a fast start.

I just already pointed out that I agree with the above. I then added to your second comment in the context of the thread title (again not disagreeing), trying to be more specific to the BB because as you've just said, yours was a general comment. None of it was a disagreement, just an addition of mine with personal opinion. Feel free to disagree with anything I've said because it was in no way attempting to disagree with ANYTHING (nope, nothing at all) you'd said. These are fun, aren't they.

[MoSe]

Here's some last season data (sorry, I realise I didn't store GW2 individual data... )

I purged those who played BB, as FPL shows PB=0 for them in the GW history,
to separate them from those who didn't play BB and actually got 0p on their bench

you see that apart 4 end-of season GWs around the DGW time,
GW1 was already the GW with most BBs played in the Forum League (although we were talking of 1% teams at most in a GW)

It could seem puzzling that DGW34 & 37 also got high PB avg, in teams who did NOT play BB there
For sure they did not seek to place Doublers on their benches when they didn't use them (unless they wanted a Doubler sub too in case of a starter dobule miss?)
Maybe, they were in preparation for the following DGW BB, or remains from the previous one, as many teams had both DGW.
More likely, they benched strong SGWers (who turned out to score decently) to have Doublers in their XI

Remember
- these are figures for teams who did NOT play BB. We don't have data for PBs from those who did, and it would also be hard to tell which had "genuine" benches
- Last season had poor returns from the DGWS. BB yields from DGWs were much higher two seasons ago

FISO 201717 Points on Bench per GW.png

[OldSkoolFPL]

No, the bloke who was number one in the World on Sat, someone would only play it for a fast start and you'll get none faster.

Sure, if your goal is to be overall leader just for a second, then BB/TC in GW1 is a great decision. However, if your goal is to get the best possible overall rank after GW38, then a fast start doesn't really matter at all. Ten points earned in GW1 is worth the same as ten points earned in GW38.

No, the aim for whoever used it is to get a fast start and work from the front, there's no grey area and it's quite a simple concept to understand.

[Finisher1]

No, the bloke who was number one in the World on Sat, someone would only play it for a fast start and you'll get none faster.

Sure, if your goal is to be overall leader just for a second, then BB/TC in GW1 is a great decision. However, if your goal is to get the best possible overall rank after GW38, then a fast start doesn't really matter at all. Ten points earned in GW1 is worth the same as ten points earned in GW38.

No, the aim for whoever used it is to get a fast start and work from the front, there's no grey area and it's quite a simple concept to understand.

What do you mean by "work from the front"? Are you suggesting they now have some kind of advantage over us because they have more points? To me this concept of "a fast start" sounds like they just want to be overall leaders for a moment.

[Ruth_NZ]

No, the aim for whoever used it is to get a fast start and work from the front, there's no grey area and it's quite a simple concept to understand.

Sorry, mate, it isn't. Playing BB for me has nothing to do with a fast start. It's because I think GW1 is the best week to play it.

The apparent score you get from a chip isn't the whole story. You also have to consider the effects of preparing for it and then unwinding from it, including the effect on other chips (notably the 2nd wildcard) and any hits that may be taken either side.

The BB is unique in that respect. The TC requires no preparation, just for you to decide in which of 38 weeks your captain pick has the best prospects. So there are no hidden negatives to it as a chip. The FH also requires no preparation although it does need a little forethought because it contains the hidden negative of losing you a FT (or 2 FTs if you didn't plan well) to your underlying team when you play it. But the BB has the unique challenge that you field 15 players that week; it is unlike every other week of the season and by far the most demanding chip to set up.

With no bench to fall back on you are terribly vulnerable to injuries and/or suspensions that week, especially if you used a wildcard a week or two before in preparation. You can then be faced with taking a hit or hits or fielding 14 or 13 players. In addition, the intention to play the BB can cause you to bend your wildcard team out of shape to set it up, meaning you have to correct afterwards. You might get a better BB that way but there's an hidden cost. And then there's the fact that there are probably one too many chips for the DGW season now so one of them at least will need to be compromised. Often that will mean playing the TC at a sub-optimal time and/or bending the 2nd wildcard to serve multiple aims.

I don't think it is possible to quantify this exactly but most managers would accept 24 points as a good BB score in a DGW and I think that's optimistic. The top 12 finishers last season averaged 16 points with it and the season before it was 20. For the top 20k the averages were 14 and 16. And those are top-line numbers, they do not factor in any hidden costs or compromises. I would therefore say that if you can get 12-14 points with it in GW1 and have done with it then you are at worst going to be 6-8 points short of par but with a much clearer run at DGW time, all the other chips free to fall into their best slots and no hidden costs.

The other factor is that GW1 is the only week in the season when you can effectively wildcard and BB in the same week. The team can be adjusted right up to deadline in the case of late team news. People have said that it's hard to be confident of having 15 starters in GW1 but I don't find that to stand up really. The one thing it will stop you from doing is to include 4.0m non-players in your initial squad but to me that's no loss as I usually don't do that anyway (although for 4-4-2 you might have to accept a non-playing 4.5m forward). If you set the team up to be good in the first 4 weeks then unwinding to a preferred structure will be relatively painless and the 1st wildcard is typically used in the first 6-8 weeks by most managers anyway.

I think the GW1 BB eliminates a lot of the potential negatives and gives you a clearer run come DGW time. It may score a few points less on the top line but I think that is more than compensated for by the hidden costs and compromises avoided. I therefore played BB in GW1 because I think that offers the best net benefit of all the options. It is true that things could fall perfectly for a DGW BB but they seldom seem to and even if they do the loss won't be that great. AR referred to the BB as a "poisoned chalice" last season and I agree with him. I am very happy to have the thing done and dusted and would be even if I had scored 8 points less with it than the 20 I actually managed.

[LamebrainEddy]

What do you mean by "work from the front"? Are you suggesting they now have some kind of advantage over us because they have more points? To me this concept of "a fast start" sounds like they just want to be overall leaders for a moment.

Psychologically it is a benefit. If you are ahead early you are more likely to roll transfers and be patient which generally is a better trait for fpl. Plus in this case, you have a larger squad to select from GW2

If you are behind early, then how likely are you to ship out a player for the GW1 bandwagons? Much more likely to, and as a result may miss out on the benefits of your original selection.

10 points now is technically the same as 10 points in GW38, but it's a human operating this ship - not a robot.

[Finisher1]

Psychologically it is a benefit. If you are ahead early you are more likely to roll transfers and be patient which generally is a better trait for fpl.

Well if it works for someone then great. I just think many (perhaps most) members here are very rational managers anyway, so that doesn't matter.

Plus in this case, you have a larger squad to select from GW2

Maybe, but again that's totally another matter. It has nothing to do with your "fast start" in terms of points achieved. Besides, I think what you say is not true really. For example Ruth said he had 'a genuine bench', so if I understand it right he means he would have had a similar bench even without BB.

If you are behind early, then how likely are you to ship out a player for the GW1 bandwagons? Much more likely to, and as a result may miss out on the benefits of your original selection.

Again, many (perhaps most) managers here are far too rational to behave that way. But if it works for someone, then great.

[OldSkoolFPL]

No, the bloke who was number one in the World on Sat, someone would only play it for a fast start and you'll get none faster.

Sure, if your goal is to be overall leader just for a second, then BB/TC in GW1 is a great decision. However, if your goal is to get the best possible overall rank after GW38, then a fast start doesn't really matter at all. Ten points earned in GW1 is worth the same as ten points earned in GW38.

No, the aim for whoever used it is to get a fast start and work from the front, there's no grey area and it's quite a simple concept to understand.

What do you mean by "work from the front"? Are you suggesting they now have some kind of advantage over us because they have more points? To me this concept of "a fast start" sounds like they just want to be overall leaders for a moment.

What part is it you find difficult to understand? Work from the front means attack the game from a higher starting point rather than start around 2m and spend 5 weeks trying to cut through it.

Your concept is your business.

[OldSkoolFPL]

No, the aim for whoever used it is to get a fast start and work from the front, there's no grey area and it's quite a simple concept to understand.

Sorry, mate, it isn't. Playing BB for me has nothing to do with a fast start. It's because I think GW1 is the best week to play it.

The apparent score you get from a chip isn't the whole story. You also have to consider the effects of preparing for it and then unwinding from it, including the effect on other chips (notably the 2nd wildcard) and any hits that may be taken either side.

The BB is unique in that respect. The TC requires no preparation, just for you to decide in which of 38 weeks your captain pick has the best prospects. So there are no hidden negatives to it as a chip. The FH also requires no preparation although it does need a little forethought because it contains the hidden negative of losing you a FT (or 2 FTs if you didn't plan well) to your underlying team when you play it. But the BB has the unique challenge that you field 15 players that week; it is unlike every other week of the season and by far the most demanding chip to set up.

With no bench to fall back on you are terribly vulnerable to injuries and/or suspensions that week, especially if you used a wildcard a week or two before in preparation. You can then be faced with taking a hit or hits or fielding 14 or 13 players. In addition, the intention to play the BB can cause you to bend your wildcard team out of shape to set it up, meaning you have to correct afterwards. You might get a better BB that way but there's an hidden cost. And then there's the fact that there are probably one too many chips for the DGW season now so one of them at least will need to be compromised. Often that will mean playing the TC at a sub-optimal time and/or bending the 2nd wildcard to serve multiple aims.

I don't think it is possible to quantify this exactly but most managers would accept 24 points as a good BB score in a DGW and I think that's optimistic. The top 12 finishers last season averaged 16 points with it and the season before it was 20. For the top 20k the averages were 14 and 16. And those are top-line numbers, they do not factor in any hidden costs or compromises. I would therefore say that if you can get 12-14 points with it in GW1 and have done with it then you are at worst going to be 6-8 points short of par but with a much clearer run at DGW time, all the other chips free to fall into their best slots and no hidden costs.

The other factor is that GW1 is the only week in the season when you can effectively wildcard and BB in the same week. The team can be adjusted right up to deadline in the case of late team news. People have said that it's hard to be confident of having 15 starters in GW1 but I don't find that to stand up really. The one thing it will stop you from doing is to include 4.0m non-players in your initial squad but to me that's no loss as I usually don't do that anyway (although for 4-4-2 you might have to accept a non-playing 4.5m forward). If you set the team up to be good in the first 4 weeks then unwinding to a preferred structure will be relatively painless and the 1st wildcard is typically used in the first 6-8 weeks by most managers anyway.

I think the GW1 BB eliminates a lot of the potential negatives and gives you a clearer run come DGW time. It may score a few points less on the top line but I think that is more than compensated for by the hidden costs and compromises avoided. I therefore played BB in GW1 because I think that offers the best net benefit of all the options. It is true that things could fall perfectly for a DGW BB but they seldom seem to and even if they do the loss won't be that great. AR referred to the BB as a "poisoned chalice" last season and I agree with him. I am very happy to have the thing done and dusted and would be even if I had scored 8 points less with it than the 20 I actually managed.

Yes, that's fair enough and everything you say about the hits & reasoning behind it I agree with, said the same myself many times, if you remember, I was one of the people who was planning to do it before stumbling on a Salah team I liked, it is a good time to play it but I don't believe anyone would use it to play it to get it out of the way without the intention to have a strong (fast) start ie maximising it and scoring more than those who didnt.

Well done on the 20 points, that's a good return.

[Ruth_NZ]

...before stumbling on a Salah team I liked...

Yeah, I'm just catching up with everyone I guess because I did literally nothing pre-season except set my team up in an hour. I put Salah in because he looked a good GW1 captain and I fancied Liverpool to start the season well with the fixtures they have. But long-term, is Salah really going to be worth 13m? GW5-8 don't look at all easy for Liverpool and I can't see I'd captain him more than once in those 4 weeks. 13m is a lot to have invested in a player you'll hardly captain and who has tricky fixtures to navigate.

Don't know what I'll do and it probably belongs in another thread but it's an open question for me, at least.

[Finisher1]

What part is it you find difficult to understand? Work from the front means attack the game from a higher starting point rather than start around 2m and spend 5 weeks trying to cut through it.

That doesn't make sense at all. Your current total points or your current overall rank don't affect your future gameweek prospects at all. Whichever amount of points you already have or whichever your current overall rank is, they are totally irrelevant regarding your future prospects. You are not better positioned for future gameweeks regardless of your current overall rank. That's because you can't utilise your current points or current overall rank to improve your future gameweek prospects.

What really affects your future prospects are the 15 players you have, the free transfers you have, the team value you have and the chips you still have or have played. That's all really. Points you already have don't affect your future gameweek prospects at all.

Those who already played BB might say they are greatly positioned because they played their BB in the most effective way. That's a fine opinion. But I'm sure no sensible manager says he is now better positioned for future gameweeks because of his current overall rank.

[OldSkoolFPL]

It makes perfect sense but you being you can only see what you want to see.

Someone who wanted to use the BB clearly did it to get off to a stronger start than normal so they can A) Lose the pressure of the chip or B) Get off to a good start and be more relaxed in their play due to being better placed.

Whether they have 10 points now or 10 in 38 makes no difference.

Those who have held it clearly aren't driven by one of those reasons.

We are not talking about how they approach the next 37 weeks or how those play out, we are talking about the initial entry point into the ranks and the mental advantage that brings.

[OldSkoolFPL]

...before stumbling on a Salah team I liked...

Yeah, I'm just catching up with everyone I guess because I did literally nothing pre-season except set my team up in an hour. I put Salah in because he looked a good GW1 captain and I fancied Liverpool to start the season well with the fixtures they have. But long-term, is Salah really going to be worth 13m? GW5-8 don't look at all easy for Liverpool and I can't see I'd captain him more than once in those 4 weeks. 13m is a lot to have invested in a player you'll hardly captain and who has tricky fixtures to navigate.

Don't know what I'll do and it probably belongs in another thread but it's an open question for me, at least.

Another advantage of using that chip IMO and getting off to a strong start, if you can maintain it to that point, you'll be in a nice position to be able to take the risk & sell him, if you're around 1m- 800k trying to cut through, you'll be more reluctant to go against his huge ownership.

It's much easier to find your balls and be on the front foot when you're doing well.

[Finisher1]

B) Get off to a good start and be more relaxed in their play due to being better placed.

Well if you would play poorly with a poor current OR then fine. But sensible managers play just their own game regardless of overall rank, so a strong or weak start doesn't affect sensible managers.

Whether they have 10 points now or 10 in 38 makes no difference.

Yes, that's exactly why "working from the front" doesn't make sense.

We are not talking about how they approach the next 37 weeks or how they play out, we are talking about the initial entry point into the ranks.

But your whole point is based on the idea that managers approach the next 37 gameweeks differently based on the current OR, as you speak about 'mental advantage' and that they can 'be more relaxed in their play'. While I said that sensible managers are not affected by 'mental advantage' because they play similarly regardless of the current standings and all that matters is what our overall rank is after 38 gameweeks so it's totally irrelevant whether you get your points late or early.

[OldSkoolFPL]

Fantasy football is as much about confidence as it is stratergy, you have to have the confidence to implement your stratergy, if you get off to a flyer you will have the confidence to play your own game and lead from the front, if you get off to a bad start you are almost dictated to by certain parts of the template to not slip further into trouble.

Each to their own but to me, the importance of a good start dictates how the next few months are approached, I think that's quite simple to understand.

[Finisher1]

Fantasy football is as much about confidence as it is stratergy, you have to have the confidence to implement your stratergy, if you get off to a flyer you will have the confidence to play your own game and lead from the front, if you get off to a bad start you are almost dictated to by certain parts of the template to not slip further into trouble.

Each to their own but to me, the importance of a good start dictates how the next few months are approached, I think that's quite simple to understand.

I think this is not true to most people here. 'Confidence' and 'mental advantage' are a factor for example in live poker where you have to make quite fast decisions amid peer pressure. However, FPL is very different because you have the whole week's time to make just a couple of decisions at your own home in front of your computer, so I really think 'confidence' and 'mental advantage' are not a factor for rational managers.

[LamebrainEddy]

I think this is not true to most people here. 'Confidence' and 'mental advantage' are a factor for example in live poker where you have to make quite fast decisions amid peer pressure. However, FPL is very different because you have the whole week's time to make just a couple of decisions at your own home in front of your computer, so I really think 'confidence' and 'mental advantage' are not a factor for rational managers.

You imply here that someone playing FPL who fears falling behind is irrational. It's a valid fear.

On the contrary I think anyone who frequents these forums at least on some level has some amount of that fear, maybe more than most casual users. If you believe so wholly in yourself then what do you gain from coming here?

[Finisher1]

You imply here that someone playing FPL who fears falling behind is irrational. It's a valid fear.

I just said I think it doesn't affect most people here.

On the contrary I think anyone who frequents these forums at least on some level has some amount of that fear, maybe more than most casual users. If you believe so wholly in yourself then what do you gain from coming here?

Because this is an excellent source of information for my decision making process and because I like chatting about FPL. I think those are the reasons for most people here.

[Ruth_NZ]

Fantasy football is as much about confidence as it is strategy...

I think there's some truth in that. But it ought to be said that the OR after 1 week is fairly meaningless, there will be significant churn for some weeks when one team has a good week and then another does. The gaps between the rankings in points terms are still very small.

I always think that you don't much look at OR before around GW8; even after a successful GW1 I'm more interested in how things will be looking in GW8 than right now, that will give me a better guide to how my team is doing. So if OR affects your approach (sorry Finisher1, but I think it does in subtle and not-so-subtle ways) then that probably applies more as the season wears on than it does after 1 week.

[Finisher1]

Each to their own. To my approach OR doesn't affect at all. If I could buy better players with my overall rank, get an additional chip or free transfer with my overall rank or earn an additional 1.0m with my overall rank, then I'd pay some attention to it.