Does chasing differential really work?

[NorthBankRedemption]

I’ve just read a piece touting Somerville rayan hill and m nunes

Hill and Nunez were strong considerations anyway but it’s a bit hard to bet on guys like Summerville and rayan to outscore prestige options like Bruno mbeumo Semenyo Roger’s wirtz over the remainder of the season

I can’t help but think that even if these chancier picks work out quite well you still won’t be getting the points that such a large percentage of people will

Do you think you’ll ultimately move up more by consolidating strong template picks or by taking the risky / rogue differential picks?

If you go differential you really need them to outperform premium options every week. And then you have options like Salah Palmer and saka looking better all the time

[zipnolan]

Imho you don't chase these as differentials, you buy them as enablers to move to pricier heavy-hitters elsewhere. Probably can only do that with stored transfers, or as part of a phased set of moves based around fixtures.

[SUZYKINS]

What about when differentials become premiums like Palmer last year

[blahblah]

Or premiums become differentials?

[NorthBankRedemption]

Which is better, candies and sweets or nuts and fruits?

[Smurphy Paw]

It’s the right question to ask. The response is a long exploration of FPL game theory. There are reams of this in Ruth’s old blog.
TBH I was typically making the same type of point you are - e.g. ‘Why would you not just have Salah?’. On the specific I was often right. But only later on did I start to understand the wider point.
There are times when you can go against the popular choice and buy ‘free risk’, where there is upside going against the pack and minimal downside. I thought no-Salah was not free risk, it was very high risk. My risk appetite was lower. I am now more likely to go against the pack.

Thinking of this for the whole squad is doable. Easier, first, is to think only of captaincy. When is or isn’t it a good idea to go against (perma captain) Haaland? There have been times recently when picking a Bruno or Palmer or whoever has been fine. You’d not lose much and have the chance to gain big against the field. These are the opportunities for big rank gains.

More broadly, there are often a bunch of players with similar overall predicted points projections. Some, like Anderson, pick them up consistently 4-4-4-4-4. Others, you have to hold because they will go (something like) 2-2-2-12-2. Recently there was a 6-week comparison of Anderson and Semenyo that showed exactly this. They’d both got about 32 points in completely different ways.
Plan well, hold your nerve, get a bit of luck and you may get the 12 pointer in this, without all of the 2’s.

Of course, taking the higher risk route also increases the chances of getting it wrong and losing rank. The week I went without Haaland on Free Hit I had the worst week I’ve had in years. That was a huge swing in variance. It happens. I am having a year where I am experiencing a lot of negative variance. Good, defendable calls before the deadline and less good outcomes. According to FPL Optimised I could reasonably expect 98 more points based on my picks (to be at break even, not to experience ‘good’ luck).

Last point for now, there is also a difference between looking for difference and chasing differentials. Chasing to me implies the out of control, looking to recover losses approach that gamblers take. The Hail Mary approach. This is about calculated risk not wild swings. I prefer cricket but, as you’re American I’ll try to remember my days coaching in upstate New York: Having an Arsenal defender does nothing to rank. Everyone has one. Having two gets you on base. Having three either gets you a home run or caught in centre field. Having thee Arsenal defenders is still defendable as an approach. Having three Wolves defenders is chasing extreme risk - but well done to those who had Sa last week. With hindsight that was free risk with a very positive outcome.

[NorthBankRedemption]

Thanks for the thoughtful post murph

A lot to consider, truly

I’ve been thinking of it as it’s unlikely I get in the top 1,000 so better to take more template sure things (the sort of steady rise a la Andersen) and come out in the top 50k or 100k rather than swing for the upper deck and flailing at a knuckle ball w Somerville and dango

[zipnolan]

Fwiw, I think the higher you are, the more sensible it is to go template to retain rank. The likelihood is that others around you are gambling, and going against the consensus is more likely to lose you rank. It's not true that all of the top teams are template, but it is true that they will have squads that score steadily.