Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on [email protected] for help. Thanks :)
Private profiles - please note that profiles marked as private will soon be public. This will facilitate moderation so mods can view users' warning histories. All of your posts across the site will appear on your profile page (including PI, RI). Groups posts will remain private except to users who have access to the same Groups as you. Thread here
Some important site news, please read here. Thanks!

FPL Chips / Wildcard Strategy 2016/17

  • 22-07-2016 11:06pm
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 11,267 ✭✭✭✭ FHFC


    Been touched on a few times already and thought it was worth a thread. I'm on hols next week so won't be on here much (probably will) so starting the discussion hoping for loads of wisdom to catch up on next week.

    I'm including Wildcards here as when to play them is very related to when and how to play BB in particular.

    So. Are you setting up to wildcard early and saving the second one for DGWs? Are you set on keeping the BB for a DGW and combining with a WC the week before? There was plenty of discussion on this last season and already this one, with some, Busts in particular advocating BB early or in a SGW. Perhaps tied in with the first WC. A GW1 BB was also suggested but thats a bit mad for me.

    I was initially interested in the early BB of the back of an early WC until somebody rightly noted that the advantages of the BB are almost certainly better exploited when you have 103 or 104m to spend rather than 100m. I won't be tied to keeping it for a DGW but too early to rule it out. I did rather well out of the DGW BB last year with 190pts.

    Regarding the wildcards I reckon that I'll be planning on using mine by GW3 or 4. There are huge fluctuations in player prices in these early weeks and ignoring that can cost 1 to 2m (more so in terms of value lost than gained to some degree). Also with Euro / Copa late starters and new managers I know I won't get my GW1 team anywhere near the mark unless I'm lotto winner lucky. I wildcarded GW3 last season and it went very well for both points and value.

    I'm working on some data on price change trends with a view to publishing an article on it. I won't get it done till August too, but some interesting points already. But thats a slightly different topic for another thread perhaps.


«1345

Comments

  • Moderators, Computer Games Moderators Posts: 9,532 Mod ✭✭✭✭ F1ngers


    Why not have a re-read of last years thread - same chips, same discussions...


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,267 ✭✭✭✭ FHFC


    F1ngers wrote: »
    Why not have a re-read of last years thread - same chips, same discussions...

    Last year theory. This year from experience. The thinking changed massively from the start of the season for many of us. And already several new approaches suggested in passing on other threads this year.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,682 ✭✭✭ Benimar


    Thanks for getting this thread started, I was hoping to get something like this started myself, but 2 kids find a way of getting in the way of FF matters!!

    I'm definitely planning on an early WC (after GW3 most likely) so I'm very interested to see what others with a similar strategy are doing with their initial team.

    My reasons for planning an early WC are:
    - some big hitters might not start the season due to Euro 2016
    - the difficulty in judging how new entrants to the league will settle. For every Aguero there is a Memphis.
    - allows for changes to teams based on any major signings on or around deadline day.
    - team value can fluctuate relatively significantly in the early weeks.
    - the sheer unlikelihood of picking 15 players and they performing as expected over a period longer than a few weeks.
    - there is no chance of any DGWs in the first half of the season.

    The only reason to keep the 1st WC is for a 'rainy day' when injuries and suspensions kick in. However, with a solid squad you would need 6 injuries/bans before getting into points hit territory.

    I haven't really looked at who will be in my initial squad (bar Aguero), but I plan on avoiding all late returners from international duty (Ozil, Ramsey etc), injury doubts (Brunt, Sanchez etc) and new arrivals (Ibrahimovic etc). Also, any 4.0 defenders and 4.5 midfielders will be low owned to avoid price drops.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,682 ✭✭✭ Benimar


    F1ngers wrote: »
    Why not have a re-read of last years thread - same chips, same discussions...

    Totally different discussion. Last season players used chips with no previous data available. With a full years information available, people's strategy might (will) change.

    I used the WC to set my team up for a BB in a DGW last season, I'd be amazed if I was to go down the same route this season.


  • Moderators, Computer Games Moderators Posts: 9,532 Mod ✭✭✭✭ F1ngers


    Benimar wrote: »
    I used the WC to set my team up for a BB in a DGW last season, I'd be amazed if I was to go down the same route this season.

    That was the general consensus reached by posters here in last years thread.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 7,682 ✭✭✭ Benimar


    F1ngers wrote: »
    That was the general consensus reached by posters here in last years thread.

    Yeah, but things might change this year. A bad winter with multiple postponements would change everything, as would a DGW containing teams with something to actually play for (unlike last year when Leicester and Spurs had no DGW).

    There are so many potential variables that just going on last years consensus might be the incorrect strategy.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,267 ✭✭✭✭ FHFC


    F1ngers wrote: »
    That was the general consensus reached by posters here in last years thread.

    I'm still very open to which way to go re BB. Leaning toward a DGW but with a slightly different approach. Busts and a few others have already offered a few new perspectives and suggestions, eg a BB in the first few weeks as per my OP. There are also plenty of newcomers to the forum and to taking FPL seriously every year who may be interested.

    There are still a wide variety of views. I'm interested in those views. Maybe not everone is but I'm sure plenty of others are. If you have it all figured out and are not interested why not just unfollow the thread rather than being grumpy in it. :rolleyes:


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,022 ✭✭✭✭ Iused2likebusts


    I've always done an early wildcard not saying it's the right way to go about things but if I think I can get a better team and if it's gonna cost me anything over 8 pts in hits I'll play a wildcard no hesitation. In 7 years I've never made it past gw 4 in terms of wildcard and I always played the Jan one straightaway and last year played the 2nd one straightaway.
    With the chips I'd discount aoa it's useless and total luck.
    Tc has to be played in a dgw and I value it the most important chip.
    BB I don't subscribe to the has to be used in a dgw approach by all means it's an option however I don't think the 15dgw players wildcard plan is the be all and end all. It has drawbacks that need to be considered. You have to think you are wildcarding to set up a BB so why not try that in the first half of the season when you don't have to just limit yourself to 8 dgw teams. In otherwords you don't need to take out form players. The budget argument for later in the season has some merits but it depends how the season pans out. Last season I don't think budget was important with the amount of key cheap players. Even this year an aguero injury for a few weeks and you can get a strong 15 handy enough. Another problem with dgw BB is that you will probably end up playing it in the dgw that is best for TC.
    My plan is hope to hold the wildcard but use it as soon as I'm contemplating big hits. Strongly consider a BB in the first half of the season in a gw that has no European football either side of it. 2nd wildcard as with the 1st wildcard hold until I'm considering hits. TC definetly use in the dgw with the best captain option's .


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,747 Ziegler1988


    I wouldn't BB early because of poor TV and not knowing enough about nailed players and form. I think the best strategy last season ended up being TC34 WC36 BB37 so will probably stick to saving both chips for a DGW again. 2nd wildcard I wouldn't save to the detriment of my team, since I don't mind taking hits for DGWs


  • Registered Users Posts: 16,274 ✭✭✭✭ Mr.Prodston


    I feel I used my chips last year as well as I could. WC32, BB34, TC37 :cool:

    I went from about 200k to 16k in roughly that period which is quite frankly remarkable both by the jump and by the fact I was so far off the pace.

    My season usually follows the following script: Poor/average start, finds feet before going through a barren winter and early spring period before a moment of clarity as I finish strongly.

    I struggle early to find the rhythm of a season and then the monotony of form players maintaining form through the second third of a season leads me to go maverick too quickly.

    The players I decide upon in that lull usually start performing finally so end well.

    In relation to the chips then I see it as follows:

    I'm more confident of using the weapons when I feel I have more command of a season. DGWs are a double edged sword but I feel they're the best use of the chips and the fact they fall during a time I feel best equipped to use them reinforces my belief in using them later in a season.

    AOA is close to useless so can be used at any time, probably if a defensive crisis hits.

    Again due to early season uncertainty I don't give myself a week to use that first WC. Nobody knows how things will play out and ideally the transfer window and season rhythm is beginning to unfurl.

    There's no right or wrong way and the most important thing I could do is keep a steady ship during the second third of a season meaning I won't have to rely on the chips bailing me out :pac:


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 11,267 ✭✭✭✭ FHFC


    The reason I'm on the fence re BB is because I agree with most of Bust's arguments about this chip, yet I had an epic DGW34 BB last season which defined my season to a large degree. And that was even after getting hurt by Alli and others like everyone else.

    I think there's still merit in keeping the BB for one of the DGWs, but I'd be learning from the mistakes of last year. I think the 15 DGW players idea is a red herring. I think the benefit of the DGW BB would be that you can keep the form SGW players that we all foolishly shipped out last year, and then have 8 or 9 decent DGW players.

    The argument that BB is just 4 extra players is correct. But if you take it that the 5 or 6 SGW undroppables (like Alli and co last year) are starting no matter what then your 4 'extra' players can be DGW guys therefore you get 4x2 extra players from the chip - which you can't get in a SGW.

    AOA best use is for injuries at the back.

    TC definitely the most important but only just and has to be for DGW. But the approach all depends on the layout of the DGWs. Last year the biggest DGW in terms of numbers of DGW teams also had the best individual captain options in terms of individual players and their 2 fixtures. That may not be the case this year. A 'small" DGW with just 4 double teams could have the standout TC option.

    I think a return of 20 extra points from TC and 15 from BB would be decent.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,022 ✭✭✭✭ Iused2likebusts


    I wouldn't BB early because of poor TV and not knowing enough about nailed players and form. I think the best strategy last season ended up being TC34 WC36 BB37 so will probably stick to saving both chips for a DGW again. 2nd wildcard I wouldn't save to the detriment of my team, since I don't mind taking hits for DGWs

    The problem with keeping the BB and not the 2nd wildcard is there is a huge temptation to take a lot of hits and a lot of your transfers get used up focusing on getting in BB players. Trust me when I say that strategy is a nightmare. This is what happened me last year I reckon BB cost me points in the end.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,022 ✭✭✭✭ Iused2likebusts


    The big DGW this year is likely to be no more than 8 DGW teams. DGW 34 is going to have teams with doubles , teams with sgws and teams with blanks . Really complicated balancing act that I'm not sure I want to throw a BB into the mix.
    DGW 37 is very late in season and likely to have no more than a maximum of 8 DGW teams the teams that had a league match cancelled in 34.


  • Registered Users Posts: 28,710 Paully D


    I'll be setting up a team for 3 GW's and then wildcarding. I generally always wildcard early anyway, but that's after spending considerable time trying to develop a team with a long-term plan. This year I figured, what's the point? Why not try out just building for 3 weeks and then wildcarding when 100% of the time I have been playing the game I have wildcarded by GW4 anyway? These are my reasons, in no particular order:

    1) Not increasing value as the first international break is slow for this, but actually maintaining value. For example, last year I was big on Walcott and Ritchie but actually lost £0.2m on them straight away as both dropped early on and I had no access to the internet that time as I was away. This put me at an immediate disadvantage and it was only GW3!

    2) We spend weeks and weeks planning and making decisions, but despite this these decisions will go wrong through no fault of our own. Last year many of us had Sunderland defenders and it was clear after 3 weeks that they were poison. Walcott above is another example. Kane was woeful for a few months. 3 or 4 of these decisions and your team needs drastic surgery. There will also be players no-one expects to explode that become must haves early on, e.g. Mahrez.

    3) With City, United and Chelsea all having new managers we just don't know what players they will fancy or what personnel they will set up with. This becomes very clear after 3 GW's. It's not only the top sides. Koeman, Moyes, Puel and Mazzarri too.

    4) Finding the DEF's that will be clean sheet magnets. There's always going to be teams in the your initial side that you think will be solid options for clean sheets that end up leaking goals like mad and vice-versa. While 3 GW's doesn't seem like long enough to identify these sides, it gives us a much clearer idea in any case.

    5) Linking with point 3, with major tournaments having being played this summer some top players will be coming back into 90 minute action for GW4.

    6) The deadline will be closed at this stage.

    With regards to the chips, I'll 100% be using the TC during a DGW. It can be very annoying seeing someone use it early on and earn a mountain of points (i.e. Aguero v Newcastle last season) as it can take what feels like forever to catch them back, but patience is the key with this one. Sanchez was my TC for that DGW last season and it paid off massively. Even if there's only a few DGW teams in say GW34 this season, there's likely to be a nice TC option in there somewhere and I'd rather take my chances with using it in a DGW.

    My second wildcard generally goes early if I'm having a dip in January, but ideally I'll try to keep it for a little longer than that this year. That said, I'll use it when I feel I need to and won't be keeping it with plans in mind.

    No idea what I'll do with BB yet.

    I always play 3-4-3 with a cheap bench. Though I aim to have the bench full of guaranteed starters (with maybe the exeption of a £4m DEF if I'm £0.5m short of an ideal team), AOA doesn't even really register on my radar because I'd have to be lucky to make any points off it and could easily lose points from it. For example, playing someone like Darren Fletcher at home to Sunderland as opposed to a cheap £4.5m DEF away to a top side. Fletcher is likely to score 2 points max there while on their day the DEF could come out with 6. That said, if/when the cheaper midfield players start popping up I'll plan accordingly then. For example, I could have made a decent amount of points by utilising the chip on Dele Alli last year but never got it right and left points on the bench quite a few times. Ironically, this is actually the reason why I favour the cheapest bench possible of players that play.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,267 ✭✭✭✭ FHFC


    Paully D wrote: »
    1) Not increasing value as the first international break is slow for this, but actually maintaining value. For example, last year I was big on Walcott and Ritchie but actually lost £0.2m on them straight away as both dropped early on and I had no access to the internet that time as I was away. This put me at an immediate disadvantage and it was only GW3

    100% going the same WC strategy Paully.

    As I've mentioned before I'm crunching some stats on price change trends over the past 2 seasons (since the major changes in the system) and you are spot on.

    I'm turning it into an article and i really hope to get it done in the next week. While some of it confirms stuff we pretty well already knew the extent of the variability on the first few weeks is instructive.

    For example, and working from memory at the moment, after an always quiet GW2 for prices GWs3 to 7 last year were by far the highest for rises and especially falls. Over 100 drops each week. And the spread of falls is very wide, 200 players dropped by 0.2 or more over those 5 weeks. Several dropped 0.4 or even 0.5 (Theo). While only i think 40 odd rose 0.2 or more, but the concentration was higher on the bandwagoners with 10 or so rising 0.4 or more. Some went 0.6, 0.7 or 0.8 (Mahrez of course).

    Get stuck with a few of the former and miss a couple of the latter and you'll soon be 2m+ behind as well as haemorrhaging points.

    The number of 0.2 rises in a single GW is tiny. So while there is no great killing to be made in any particular week the point is that aligning your team to have the right set of players over that early period can have big impacts on value, as well as points.

    I really can't see a more advantageous time to play the first wildcard.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,666 ✭✭✭ ElTel


    Should be right up your street FHFC
    https://fpldiscovery.wordpress.com/category/research/

    I must admit that I've had a tendency to hold the WC as long as I've played the game. I'm not sure if I can say it was because the first WC did not have an expiry; (Am I remembering correctly?) but will fight this impulse this year. I guess the "use it or lose it" WC format doesn't suit my DNA makeup!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,224 SantryRed


    Due to experience, I will be doing the following:

    First WC: After GW3 unless I've hit a home run with my team. I generally always have a poor start and the early wildcard sorts my team out and I begin to climb the rankings. So this year, instead of having a long term view from GW1, I'm purely going to be looking at the first three GWs. A WC will then occur to reshuffle my team.

    TC/WC/BB will all be used near the end of the season for DGWs. I like the potential boost from it coming to the end and it can perk you up the rankings. I will not be TC-ing Lukaku though. He'll be lucky to ever find his way into my team this year.

    I couldn't care about AOA. I'll use it the first time I see value in all eight of my mid/fwd players.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,022 ✭✭✭✭ Iused2likebusts


    The big DGW this year is likely to be no more than 8 DGW teams. DGW 34 is going to have teams with doubles , teams with sgws and teams with blanks . Really complicated balancing act that I'm not sure I want to throw a BB into the mix.
    DGW 37 is very late in season and likely to have no more than a maximum of 8 DGW teams the teams that had a league match cancelled in 34.

    Just to expand on this. Last year 10 league games were cancelled . 2 because of the league cup and 8 because of the fa cup.
    We had dgw 33 palace Everton
    Dgw 34 Newcastle City
    West ham Watford
    Utd palace
    Liverpool Everton
    Arsenal wba
    Dgw 37 west ham man Utd
    Norwich Watford
    Everton Sunderland
    Liverpool chelsea
    This year the available midweeks for rescheduled games are gw 26,34,37
    The games that are going to get cancelled are gw26 lc final , gw28 fa cup qf, gw 34 fa cup sf. The key difference here is that the fa cup sf which causes a blank is the same gw when the dgws get rearranged. So in effect we have less doubles. Last year the fa cups sf was gw 35 so we had a load of doubles followed by some blanks in gw 35.
    If we apply last year's data to this year's changed circumstances it's quite possible that this happens.
    Gw26 Newcastle City and Liverpool Everton get cancelled due to carling cup. Newcastle and city can get rearranged for the midweek of gw 26 as both teams are out of fa cup. That midweek is also set for fa cup replays so Everton and Liverpool can't get refixed as Everton are still in the cup.
    Gw 34 Last year we had 10 dgw teams. This year we potentially lose Newcastle and city, Everton , Utd , Watford , and palace will not have a double as they would have an fa cup game on the weekend of 34 so just a sgw for them. West ham won't have a double as there weekend game against Utd gets called off due to utds fa cup sf. This leaves us with 3 dgw teams instead of 10 Liverpool arsenal and wba. You can say 5 best case scenario if city and Newcastle doesn't get refixed in gw26. The odd team will have a blank to make it more complicated.
    Gw 37 The doubles remain the same as above with a best case scenario of 8 dgws. Bear in mind it's the end of the season and rotation is rife.
    Barring postponements there is going to be less dgw teams this year and the bigger week is most likely going to be dgw37. As mentioned above the fa cup sf being the same gw as the doubles is what will reduce the doubles. As for every double you need a skinny week. We are only going to have 1 real skinny week this year gw 28 fa cup qf weekend.
    This is what would be pushing me towards a non dgw BB.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,267 ✭✭✭✭ FHFC


    FHFC wrote: »
    For example, and working from memory at the moment, after an always quiet GW2 for prices GWs3 to 7 last year were by far the highest for rises and especially falls. Over 100 drops each week. And the spread of falls is very wide, 200 players dropped by 0.2 or more over those 5 weeks. Several dropped 0.4 or even 0.5 (Theo). While only i think 40 odd rose 0.2 or more, but the concentration was higher on the bandwagoners with 10 or so rising 0.4 or more. Some went 0.6, 0.7 or 0.8 (Mahrez of course).

    Checked this as was working on it earlier.

    It was actually only 21 players that rose 0.2 or more (cumulatively) in the 5 week period.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,682 ✭✭✭ Benimar




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 17,022 ✭✭✭✭ Iused2likebusts


    Benimar wrote: »

    That article may have stole fhfcs thunder.


  • Registered Users Posts: 16,274 ✭✭✭✭ Mr.Prodston


    That article may have stole fhfcs thunder.

    *gathers the pitchforks*

    If I'm reading statistical analysis to better my team it had better be from a boardsie.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,022 ✭✭✭✭ Iused2likebusts


    *gathers the pitchforks*

    If I'm reading statistical analysis to better my team it had better be from a boardsie.

    Fhfc has been gathering price rise and falls data for years. The results of that data is expected imminently. The fsa world is on the edge of its collective seat.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,267 ✭✭✭✭ FHFC


    Fhfc has been gathering price rise and falls data for years. The results of that data is expected imminently. The fsa world is on the edge of its collective seat.

    Article written and sent to fplupdates.com who have given very positive feedback. Should be up Monday.

    As for the other article. I've been talking to the guy, a good article but his figures are wrong. He seemed to take the total values of players at the end of each GW from the FPL site player profiles, which didn't accurately assign them to the GW the rise/fall took place so his rise/fall per GW chart while giving a general idea of the trend is inaccurate.


    His figure for the overall loss of value is way low, around 150m nett reduction in the value of the FPL roster last year, I suspect because it didn't allow for players joining midway through season.

    So his graph and article are broadly saying the right thing, but inaccurately.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,022 ✭✭✭✭ Iused2likebusts


    FHFC wrote: »
    Article written and sent to fplupdates.com who have given very positive feedback. Should be up Monday.

    As for the other article. I've been talking to the guy, a good article but his figures are wrong. He seemed to take the total values of players at the end of each GW from the FPL site player profiles, which didn't accurately assign them to the GW the rise/fall took place so his rise/fall per GW chart while giving a general idea of the trend is inaccurate.


    His figure for the overall loss of value is way low, around 150m nett reduction in the value of the FPL roster last year, I suspect because it didn't allow for players joining midway through season.

    So his graph and article are broadly saying the right thing, but inaccurately.

    You'll never beat the fsa, you'll never beat the fsa.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,267 ✭✭✭✭ FHFC


    It's actually http://fantasyfootballpundits.com/ that will be publishing article.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,682 ✭✭✭ Benimar


    FHFC wrote: »
    His figure for the overall loss of value is way low, around 150m nett reduction in the value of the FPL roster last year, I suspect because it didn't allow for players joining midway through season.

    So his graph and article are broadly saying the right thing, but inaccurately.

    Yeah, he says in it that he's only using players that were active in the game on GW1.

    I agree that his figures are a bit rough and ready, but his conclusion is solid...or maybe we just agree with it:)

    The early WC is a cert for me anyway.

    Looking forward to seeing your article on it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,267 ✭✭✭✭ FHFC


    Benimar wrote: »
    Yeah, he says in it that he's only using players that were active in the game on GW1.

    I agree that his figures are a bit rough and ready, but his conclusion is solid...or maybe we just agree with it:)

    The early WC is a cert for me anyway.

    Looking forward to seeing your article on it.

    I'm not really pushing any particular strategy but looking to explode some myths and bring some facts to the table to inform decisions. For example the notion of building value by banking 0.2 rises when wildcarding is dead. It's been dead for 2 seasons now yet very few seem to have absorbed that fact. Still put forward as a strategy on a number of advise websites and twitter accounts.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,267 ✭✭✭✭ FHFC


    A little preview for my FSA stalwarts.

    2015/16 price rises and drops by gameweek:

    393087.jpg

    636 price rises. 2,133 price drops!! Over 30% of all the drops took place from GW3 to GW7.

    Full analysis of these figures, and more coming soon on http://fantasyfootballpundits.com/ @FFPundits


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,262 ✭✭✭ iroced


    @FHFC: Do you have the data from 3 seasons ago before FPL changed the rules regarding price changes?


    From last year's graph, the first (early) WC mainly allows to save your team value from the inevitable price drops one's team is gonna experience and in terms of rises there's very little to use during your WC bar getting several players you want before they rise without raking points hit(s).

    I guess the difference between the first and second international breaks lies in all the players who already used their WC from whom transfers are taken into account by then. But it looks very marginal.


Advertisement