Playing GW31

[The Username]

Going to play the week and think I’m just going to field 9 with no hits, rather have the players I think will score well and hold the City, Utd, Wolves players I have value built up on for the DGW. With many taking hits, I’m hoping some won’t strike gold and loose value on the likes of Aguero, Pogba, Rashford, Sterling and Jimenez. My strategy is what I loose on the swings GW 31, I’ll gain on the roundabouts in the DGW’s.

[Stemania]

Currently have 10:

Most likely I will settle for that and have 2 FTs going into GW32 but it's also possible that I may decide to add an 11th GW31 player and then FH in GW32. Though I'd rather keep GW32 for the TC really.

Surely you've got to FH32 from there, no?

Something like only 5-7 DGWers with the two frees used (depending on when Chelsea's DGW is), plus three Liverpool with a tough Spurs home single. You'd easily have a full team for GW33 as things stand, so aren't you essentially thinking of missing out on 4-6 doublers (plus an extra GW31 player) just to have an slightly better TC chance than in GW35 (arguable if City rotate) and an ever so slightly different GW33 team?!!

[Stemania]

I’m hoping some won’t strike gold and loose value on the likes of Aguero, Pogba,

This is indeed the cost I for one have decided to pay for the chance of, basically, Chelsea returns - I reckon I'll lose nearly 1m if I get those two back in GW34 (0.6m on Pog alone!).



By the looks many FH32ers are hedging by keeping at least Pogba though.

[Ruth_NZ]

Surely you've got to FH32 from there, no? Something like only 5-7 DGWers with the two frees used (depending on when Chelsea's DGW is), plus three Liverpool with a tough Spurs home single. You'd easily have a full team for GW33 as things stand, so aren't you essentially thinking of missing out on 4-6 doublers (plus an extra GW31 player) just to have an slightly better TC chance than in GW35 (arguable if City rotate) and an ever so slightly different GW33 team?!!

Maybe, I have had to shed more GW32 doublers than expected for various reasons. But I think Chelsea are very likely to have a good double and would plan to make 3 transfers in GW32 for a -4. The Liverpool issue isn't one because Salah would leave and probably Robertson too. I'd be perfectly happy with 8 doublers seeing that Leicester have BOU and West Ham have EVE that week. Playing a couple of those won't disturb me any if it is allowing me to TC Aguero or Sterling for ful CAR.

I don't think GW32 is slightly better for the TC than GW35, I think it's very much better. The title race is tight so why would City rotate too much when the CL is not in play and the following weekend is FAC? Just about the only thing that might change that would be City drawing United in the FAC SF (which is a 25% chance at most) but even then I think Pep would prioritise the PL beforehand and the CL immediately afterwards. Anyway, I made a survey of City's schedule a while back and came to the conclusion that GW28 (when Pep rested Walker, Sterling & B.Silva) and GW34 were the big pressure points. Not DGW32.

This all relies on City beating Swansea of course but I'm happy to bet on that. After which City's DGW32 would be in no doubt, it will 100% be ful CAR as you are doubtless aware.

It may be that an injury or two will edge me the other way but the attraction of TC32 is extremely strong for me.

Oh, and just to add, ful CAR would very likely be Saturday-Wednesday for City because I imagine the midweek game would be televised and it couldn't therefore be Tuesday. That would make rotation even less likely as long as City don't have to face United in the FAC SF. Unless you think I have analysed this wrongly?

[Stemania]

Yes, I ask with the knowledge of the DGW situation and schedule as a given - what the fixtures will be is known as much as it can be.

My point was really a question of points expectation. What's the expected points of a City captain in GW32, maybe 16-20 if they play both (or at best 150 mins or so)? Aguero even with a hattrick only got 19 in GW25. The points expectation of a relatively mediocre GW35 captain will be nearer, what 12-16? So we're only talking about an extra 5 xP or so by choosing the earlier DGW for TC.

A hit (which is what you'd take) plus 3 or 4 fewer doublers (so 3 or 4 extra games from a mediocre player), plus an extra GW31 player, is surely worth way more than 5 points, no? Enough to also trump any slight wiggles for GW33 you'd make with FH I'd have thought. Isn't it a case of prioritizing a low-priority chip (TC) over one of the really powerful ones (FH)? Or is it the Hail Mary aspect that wins out?

[Billy Bongo]

Currently have 11 after a -4 this week

Leaves me two transfers for an injury and to bring in Salah if needed

7.5m itb FH 32

Heaton
VVD Robertson Chillwell 
Mane Almiron Anderson Maddison 
Wilson Higuin Vardy


Foster  Redmond Bednarek Duffy



Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

[Ruth_NZ]

A hit (which is what you'd take) plus 3 or 4 fewer doublers (so 3 or 4 extra games from a mediocre player), plus an extra GW31 player, is surely worth way more than 5 points, no? Enough to also trump any slight wiggles for GW33 you'd make with FH I'd have thought. Isn't it a case of prioritizing a low-priority chip (TC) over one of the really powerful ones (FH)? Or is it the Hail Mary aspect that wins out?

Look, I do see your point and it might be best that way, I'll decide next week. Both options are still open as I said in the first place. But I don't agree that the expectation from, say, Sterling in GW32 would only be 5 points better than Aubameyang in GW35 (probably the best option but with EL, Arsenal will have to play Thursday-Sunday-Wednesday, the last 2 being the DGW). And seeing that my team is at 216k I am more interested in the ceiling than the average points expectation anyway (I guess that's what you mean by "hail Mary"). In terms of games which have haul potential then ful CAR would have to be close to ideal.

In addition, I don't necessarily see that the FH would be wasted, because I could well use it in DGW35.

Just checked the detail:
Field 10 in GW31 (no hits);
Field 8 doublers and 3 good singlers in GW32 for -4;
Field 10 in GW33 (no hits).
That would allow WC34 FH35 and TC32 of course. It's not at all a bad route through if the fixtures come out as I suspect they will.

[Smurphy Paw]

Ruth, just looking at your WC34 FH35 outline. I’m interested to know who you’d need to bring in for 35 that you couldn’t get on the wildcard the game week before?

[Resonare]

Imo, the TC inherently carries too much luck/variance to be sacrificing the potential of more skill-based chips for it.

[Ruth_NZ]

Ruth, just looking at your WC34 FH35 outline. I’m interested to know who you’d need to bring in for 35 that you couldn’t get on the wildcard the game week before?

Who knows? We'll have to see the fixtures. But there are scenarios, for example, where I might want a heavy Spurs contingent in 34 & 36-38 but not in 35, when they have City away and that may be it, they may have no double that week. Or, City similarly, their GW35 double is TOT mun (so not great) and they will quite likely be playing 3 games in 7 days at that time in-between the CL QF and SF. There is a lot of potential for trouble in GW35 - I'd hate to be using the BB that week - and having the FH then could be invaluable.

OK, so that answers your question and now I want to make some general comments. Stemania has said before that he approaches FPL with a fence-sitting outlook and that he considers that the bulk of good decisions in FPL are made quite close to the fence. I could probably find the quote but hopefully don't need to.

I don't do FPL that way and am not interested in doing so - especially (of all times) when my team is at 216k. But I wouldn't be that inclined to play that way if it were at 216 in the OR. I play to maximise opportunity in general and that means an increased risk that decisions I make will produce exaggerated negative consequences. I'm OK with that, thanks. But it does seem to cause consternation in Stemania, always has done, because he is so convinced of the efficacy and 'rightness' of his approach that it bewilders him that someone wouldn't subscribe to it. This exchange has been an example of that. If you look at my OP...

Currently have 10:
Fabianski
TAA Rüdiger Maguire Robertson
Salah Bacuna Maddison
Vardy Higuain
Most likely I will settle for that and have 2 FTs going into GW32 but it's also possible that I may decide to add an 11th GW31 player and then FH in GW32. Though I'd rather keep GW32 for the TC really.

...it is clearly holding open both options and is quite mild. But the calculation behind it appears to - bemuse? offend? - Stemania, who sees it (I think) as poor play to diverge so much from the safe middle ground. He therefore commented that it surely had to be a GW32FH, based on his idea of 'expected points' and 'hail Mary' passes, and so the conversation began. It is always a fundamental clash when that happens because I consider that kind of safe play to be mediocre and don't like being told that's the way to do things. Even though it probably is, if what you want is a safe high finish (say a reliable top 10k/20k finish).

Right, so I offered some explanation (maybe I should have just thanked him for his input and left it at that?) and then you (SP) ask me about 'my' GW34/35 outline. It isn't my GW34/35 outline at all, I'm not advocating it or suggesting it to anyone else, it's just an option that is in my consideration. But what it amounts to is that I am asked to justify even considering something different to the standard route. Why? Do I have to prove to the satisfaction of others that I am entitled to even consider it?

All of which inclines me to just keep my thoughts to myself if I can't mention them in a very innocuous way without having to justify them to the satisfaction of others and on their terms.

Now, I'm a bit of a bear with a sore head this morning, so excuse me if this response is over the top. But it's a track I have been down before on FISO and it annoys the hell out of me sometimes.

[zipnolan]

Just a rather obvious point, though might be worth saying. For many of us planning for week 31 is effectively the same as planning for week 33, so player selection should take into account both sets of fixtures (almost like a double game week with half the benefit) when deciding the balance of the squad, teamwise. The reason I still advocate fh32 and wc34 (if available) is that 31 and 33 seem to dovetail pretty nicely.

[Stemania]

@R_NZ

Er....OK.

I thought we were just talking about the team you posted and whether it was best for you to FH32 from there or not. Wasn't expecting a weird diatribe about rightness and me being bewildered. Why try to make it personal and start talking about me in a reply to someone else? Don't worry, I'm not 'offended' by your approach. Of course I understand the pursuit of increasing variance at the cost of points expectation fine - though as it happens I do subscribe to the law of large numbers so don't see it as a particularly sensible season-long philosophy. Towards the very tail end of the season if chasing (specifically a mini-league rial or a certain rank) then sure, raise the variance, I've always been a proponent of that.

If your main issue with the point I raised is that you're not interested in maximising points expectancy so it doesn't apply, then fine, but that's all it is - all the stuff about efficacy and rightness and what I apparently think about broad unspecific philosophical notions of FPL strategy, I find quite bizarre. Same with the 'do I have prove to the satisfaction of others that I am entitled to consider' something stuff. Besides, what is considered the 'standard route' or 'safe play' isn't really a thing imho - everyone makes individual decisions based on their unique circumstances and teams - so certainly those concepts are not something I particularly care about; I think they are fluffy and broadly meaningless phrases - I put it all in the category of the old lazy 'maverick' vs 'dullard' type stuff that gets trotted out from time to time in the community. I don't think that maximising eP is a particularly 'standard' approach as it happens, with so much talk of ownership and the worst word in FPL..."differential"...that goes on. Making slightly less optimal choices in order to try and get lucky, or fear of not sticking with some imagined crowd, are far more 'standard' and are not the same thing as maximising xP I would say.

[raoul]

Just a rather obvious point, though might be worth saying. For many of us planning for week 31 is effectively the same as planning for week 33, so player selection should take into account both sets of fixtures (almost like a double game week with half the benefit) when deciding the balance of the squad, teamwise. The reason I still advocate fh32 and wc34 (if available) is that 31 and 33 seem to dovetail pretty nicely.

as it currently stands yes they do, and I am certainly following that approach.

In retrospect I do feel like I have overdone the analysis of this. If the QF go as expected then DGW32 looks to have FH potential or perhaps TC potential, GW33 will remain tough for those who have not prepared for it and may force them to burn a chip. On the other hand, if we get shocks in the Cup then there may be only a few doublers worth chasing in GW32, meaning my GW31 mob might be able to ride the week with only a small number of transfers used, meaning I can retain the FH chip for later. Although on the other other hand, that may mean GW35 is bland and the FH chip is less valuable.

Maybe everything is going to even out and all strategies will prove to be equal?

[Finisher1]

I don't think that maximising eP is a particularly 'standard' approach as it happens, with so much talk of ownership and the worst word in FPL..."differential"...that goes on.

And there has been me thinking all these years that I'm the only one here who hates words 'differential' and 'coverage'!

What about another old classic "I'm tempted to take player X from team Y but I already have one other player from team Y and I don't want to double-up on that team", does that make sense to you? For me that's another argument I have never really understood.

[Ruth_NZ]

Fair enough, Stemania. Let's put it down to over-sensitivity on my part, then. Excuse me if you think I went off on a tangent but what I described is how it sometimes appears to me, rightly or wrongly.

[Kuchi]

Fabi
VVD TAA Chilwell Digne
Anderson Salah
Vardy Rondon

Hazard in for some (probably) might have a punt on someone for -4 who knows. Running out of weeks.

[Sutter Kane]

I don't think that maximising eP is a particularly 'standard' approach as it happens, with so much talk of ownership and the worst word in FPL..."differential"...that goes on.

And there has been me thinking all these years that I'm the only one here who hates words 'differential' and 'coverage'!

What about another old classic "I'm tempted to take player X from team Y but I already have one other player from team Y and I don't want to double-up on that team", does that make sense to you? For me that's another argument I have never really understood.

There has been plenty of discussion on these phrases. I think if you are for pure expected points (which gives you a close to zero chance of winning FPL) then yes those phrases have been debunked! But if you are one who plays in different ways, then these phrases can be considered safe or it can be considered focusing on a best player from one team, in order to 'get ahead' [perhaps with a 49% chance of doing so, but nevertherless it's an effort to 'get ahead'] This is all without even considering MLeagues which can cause extreme patterns of decision making for various reasons. Also, not mentioned some people ludirously playing the game for 'fun'. (what nonsense!! )

[Stu255]

This has been an interesting thread to follow.

But I am left thinking that there is too much focus on addressing the expected pts shortfall for specific game weeks and too little focus on the run of game weeks.

Also... having a robust captain pick is much more important than fielding the 10th and 11th man.
For GW31 I would be far far more concerned about getting Salah into my team than filling the 9th, 10th and 11th shirt.

Also... Not all GW are equal, some GW simply do not offer very many points (e.g. GW31) and are therefore much less important in the big scheme of things.
It's vastly more important to do well in those GW's where the average is 70pts than in those GW's where the average is 35pts.

I just think there is a bit too much of a tic-toc mindset. Yes some of these upcoming GW's look very challenging and many of us are seeing low xP forecast for our teams and so we naturally panic, but that low xP is because there are very few points available. These BGW's weeks are actually less important, they have less opportunity for positive delta (fewer points available, fewer goals, fewer CS) and are therefore more forgiving of any mistakes you might make (it's harder for other players to punish your low score).


GW31 is not that important. It does not have the same opportunity for points as GW32 and therefore it will probably not contribute as much to your end of season total as GW32.


Burning chips such as FH in GW31 (or any BGW) seems like madness to me. It's better to use the more powerful chips in the GW's where there is likely to be a wider bell curve of points distribution among all FPL players.

But hey, I'm a newbie still and happy to be corrected.
Had a challenging start to my season but I think I'm doing pretty well now (I've had a stable pts gap to OR#1 since GW17, and taking this as evidence I am beginning to learn the game).

[zipnolan]

In retrospect I do feel like I have overdone the analysis of this.

Overanalysis is the bane of our lives, but it’s so enjoyable, isn’t it? In the end I think we are best served by going with the percentages, and personally I can’t see a set of fa cup results that will cause me to deviate from the chosen strategy.

On the other hand, I’ve no idea what best strategy is in the draft game, where zigzagging between game weeks can easily screw the end of season.

As always when everything is done, the winning strategy will seem obvious. It takes the most acute analysts to differentiate bad decisions from unlucky ones with the benefit of hindsight.

As for all strategies being equal.... uh, I don’t think so.

[Finisher1]

There has been plenty of discussion on these phrases. I think if you are for pure expected points (which gives you a close to zero chance of winning FPL) then yes those phrases have been debunked! But if you are one who plays in different ways, then these phrases can be considered safe or it can be considered focusing on a best player from one team, in order to 'get ahead' [perhaps with a 49% chance of doing so, but nevertherless it's an effort to 'get ahead'] This is all without even considering MLeagues which can cause extreme patterns of decision making for various reasons. Also, not mentioned some people ludirously playing the game for 'fun'. (what nonsense!! )

So, are you suggesting Stemania has a close to zero chance of winning FPL? He literally just said he focuses on maximizing expected points.

Also, I'm not sure why you think avoiding double-ups and triple-ups is an effort to get ahead. You can just as well get ahead by owning a double-up or a triple-up from a team that gets a golden winning streak. For example Bournemouth and West Ham this season. I think avoiding double-ups and triple-ups is usually an effort to be risk-averse rather than a risk taker (even though in fact it doesn't work for any of those purposes).

[raoul]

With 6 million players everybody has a close to zero chance of winning.

And if everyone near the top is doing very similar things you either have to do those things better, have above average luck, or do something others don't that works.

Calculating expected points sounds like something a lot of leading managers are likely to be doing ... But then they must do it well or they wouldn't be leading.

[Finisher1]

With 6 million players everybody has a close to zero chance of winning.

I thought we were talking about methods rather than individuals. Perhaps I should have written 'someone like Stemania'. That's what I meant anyway. I don't think it's close to zero chance that 'someone like Stemania' would win FPL.

[Sutter Kane]

Yes I think it is close to zero at season start. Someone like Stemania has a high (comparatively) chance of a top 1000 finish (just like Ville for eg) but there are a host of managers out there (look at FFS HOF for eg) with the dearth of info available, who play for expected points in the most robotic way they can. It's the best method imo, for securing a high rank and challenging the top end of the HOF. Winning FPL requires epic scales of unrelenting good luck (whereas many managers have shown top 10k's don't require any), you can make your own luck swings (good or bad) by not playing optimally occasionally. (whatever that means) - I think Dod (or another) calls this volatility, or at least it is related. Anyway I think this sort of belongs in STC thread.

What I'm trying to say is that it's almost certain worse managers than Stem will win FPL. About 1/2 million managers worse than Jay Egersorff are beating him! 'Worse' of course is just my opinion and not fact [disclaimer chucked in for any over-sensitive people]. We can't deal in facts on this one unfortunately. I congratulate winners/risktakers of FPL in a single season but congratulate players like Stem more for not relying on luck to get his excellent consistency.

[Sutter Kane]

Also, I'm not sure why you think avoiding double-ups and triple-ups is an effort to get ahead.

I didn't say that. I said someone might look at it that way or they may look at it as safe - remember we're not talking expected max points here. Finisher you must know by now, I dislike all those phrases you mentioned as I am a robotic player looking for ExPoints, who takes little pleasure in playing FPL - I just want a high rank! Some are better than others at this, and some go down a different route because they've realised that's what best for their persona. (e.g. gambler)

[Sutter Kane]

I'll happily continue this in the STC Finisher as it's derailing this topic (it'll derail that one instead ); I'll check in later.

My GW31 play is going safe route that most people are! Going to have a 2-5-2 formation for no hits as I'm not convinced the -4 is worth it for a defender [will keep an eye on the Palace cup match prior to GW31 and call that one late]. I'll have xi in GW33 anyway. Oh, and I'm keeping hold of Jimenez and Doherty as I think they'll be in plans right through til GW37, too much value would be lost. Rashford will be a goner though! And probably Pogba too, as not losing much on either player.

[Finisher1]

Yes I think it is close to zero at season start. Someone like Stemania has a high (comparatively) chance of a top 1000 finish (just like Ville for eg) but there are a host of managers out there (look at FFS HOF for eg) with the dearth of info available, who play for expected points in the most robotic way they can. It's the best method imo, for securing a high rank and challenging the top end of the HOF. Winning FPL requires epic scales of unrelenting good luck (whereas many managers have shown top 10k's don't require any), you can make your own luck swings (good or bad) by not playing optimally occasionally. (whatever that means) - I think Dod (or another) calls this volatility, or at least it is related. Anyway I think this sort of belongs in STC thread.

Yes, I think you are pretty much spot on here, I can agree.

Personally I'm a big advocate of always maximizing expected points, but I do think that whenever a decision is basically a coin toss, I'd always pick the option that includes a higher variance. So, if we assumed captain option A would score 100% certainly 10 points while captain option B would score 50% certainly 0 points and 50% certainly 20 points, I'd always pick captain option B. Or, if both A and B are equally likely to score well but A is owned by 100% in top 10k while B is owned by 0.1% in top 10k, I'd always pick B.

What I'm trying to say is that it's almost certain worse managers than Stem will win FPL.

This on the other hand is mostly explained by the fact that there are just so much more casuals than good managers in this game. It's been a recent trend that some casual wins FPL title each season, it's a long time since 2012-13 when an actually good manager Matthew Martyniak won FPL.

I didn't say that. I said someone might look at it that way or they may look at it as safe - remember we're not talking expected max points here.

Well I think the fact that one takes it as a safe play while another takes it as gambling literally explains why it's actually neither.

[xJosh-]

It may be that an injury or two will edge me the other way but the attraction of TC32 is extremely strong for me.

As my plan is similar and essentially riding on the city DGW32 to TC Aguero I'm curious when are you thinking about using the FH? I could field 8-9 players this blank TC Aguero DGW32 but then I'm thinking when is best to use the FH as currently several teams don't have their DGW scheduled and the next blank doesn't seem bad right now

[Ruth_NZ]

GW35 could well be quite awkward, may well use it then. Or possibly GW33. We'll see. I didn't entirely rule out GW32 either, though my preference is to use that for the TC. It could well come down to injuries that may or may not occur over the International Break prior to GW32 (and my confidence about potential TC candidates starting twice), so I doubt my final decision will happen until just before the GW32 deadline.

[xJosh-]

GW35 could well be quite awkward, may well use it then. Or possibly GW33. We'll see. I didn't entirely rule out GW32 either, though my preference is to use that for the TC. It could well come down to injuries that may or may not occur over the International Break prior to GW32 (and my confidence about potential TC candidates starting twice), so I doubt my final decision will happen until just before the GW32 deadline.
[/quote]

Keep me posted haha its wrecking my brain atm. If City get an "Easy" FA cup draw and the DGW is Fulham Cardiff I might even TC Sterling. I think he's likely to play both and then be rested for a full week and Aguero & Jesus to be rotated. Cardiff at the Etihad could be absolutely ruthless let alone throwing Fulham in too

[Ruth_NZ]

Yep. To all intents and purposes it will be ful CAR if City get past Swansea. I don't see DGW32 as being an especially high rotation risk for them either as long as they don't draw United in the FAC SF. But it is also fairly likely that Chelsea will have a tidy DGW32 of car BHA, also without a great deal of rotation pressure. That could provide a feasible TC option as well.