Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Patterns of Daily Fantasy Sport Play: Tackling the Issues

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Gambling Studies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Daily fantasy sports (DFS), a rapidly growing industry, allows players to create fantasy teams of real-life players and potentially win cash prizes, derived from entry fees. Some stakeholders have expressed concern that DFS’s accelerated nature and other features might promote excessive play and related harm. We conducted the first descriptive summary of actual DFS play using records from a cohort of subscribers to a dominant operator, DraftKings. Participants (N = 10,385) initially entered paid National Football League (NFL) contests. Across all participants, players entered a median of two contests per entry day and typically submitted a single entry for each contest they entered. Players paid a median of $87 in entry fees throughout the 2014 NFL season and experienced an overall median net loss of $30.7. However, we identified heavily involved sub-groups of players based on number of contests entered, total entry fees, and net loss. These top 1% groups were less likely to restrict themselves to NFL games, exhibited greater time involvement, but also won a greater percentage of the contests they entered than typical players. Our observations of typical and heavily involved players tend to mirror those generated in previous Internet sports gambling research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The N for this sample was determined based on a larger data export of three cohorts of DraftKings players who first deposited in 2013, 2014, and 2015. A total of 12,041 players first deposited money at DraftKings between August 1st and September 30th, 2013. The data export requested similar cohorts from 2014 and 2015 randomly selected from all players who first deposited between August 1st and September 30th during those years.

  2. Most of DraftKings' contests require some sort of entry fee to participate. These entry fees can be paid using a direct buy-in or a ticket (DraftKings' terms). Using a direct buy-in means paying for an entry using either U.S. dollars or "DraftKings dollars" (promotional currency given by DraftKings for use in their contests). The term "tickets" refers to vouchers that can only be used in contests with the specified entry fee. For example, a $3.00 ticket can only be used to pay for one entry into a contest with an entry fee of $3.00. We consider a contest a "paid contest" for a subscriber if (1) the contest was not free (i.e., entry fee greater than $0.00), and (2) that subscriber paid for at least one entry into that contest using a direct buy-in. We found that every subscriber in our sample was awarded three tickets for making their first deposit, which would make the first contest they pay for in tickets akin to a free contest.

  3. Some contests allow only one entry per subscriber, while other contests have a higher cap on the number of times a subscriber can enter. When a subscriber enters multiple times into the same contest, they can enter one or more lineups multiple times or build separate lineups for each entry. For example, if a subscriber entered a contest three times but used two distinct lineups, then two of the entries would have the same lineup, and the remaining entry would feature a different lineup.

  4. The members of the analytic sample participated in 819 free contests that awarded cash prizes during the 2014 NFL season. Of those, 712 contests had a $10 prize pool, awarding $2 each for first through fifth place. Although we do not have data on the actual number of entries into these contests, most of these contests (710, 86.7% of the 819) list the maximum number of entrants at 100,000. Contests with this payout structure that attracted the full 100,000 entries paid 0.5% of their fields.

  5. We compared our measures of player gambling behavior with and without free contests included and found that free contests did not drastically change the values of these measures (tables illustrating this comparison are available upon request).

  6. “Other” with respect to sports includes sports except NFL and NBA offered during the study period by DraftKings. These include Major League Baseball (MLB), College Football (CFB), National Hockey League (NHL), Golf (PGA), Soccer (SOCC), College Basketball (CBB), and Mixed Martial Arts (MMA).

  7. Specifically, to calculate contest risk, we worked from the payout structures for each contest in our data set, provided by DraftKings. The payout structure for a contest contains information on how the contest’s total prize pool will be distributed (e.g. $100 for the highest scoring lineup, $50 for the second-best through fifth-best, etc.). We multiplied the probability of winning in each category of a contest by the pay-off in that category minus the expected value of the contest squared—aggregating the latter statistics for all categories in the contest gives us the variance of the contest. We get the standard deviation of each contest from the variance, and then divide the standard deviation by the entry fee to get a measure of risk that is independent of entry fees. In other words, a 50–50 contest with a $2 entry fee will have the same risk as a 50–50 contest with $10 entry fee. The average of the entry-fee adjusted risk score for each contestant – depending on the portfolio of contests they participate in—gives us a risk score for each player.

  8. There were free contests that awarded cash prizes. They would generate nontrivial probability distributions and have non-zero risk scores. However, we believed that it would be more heuristically accurate to assume that free contests did not have any risk. Thus, we did not include them in these calculations.

  9. When a player enters multiple entries into a single contest, the total risk is not automatically a strict linear function of the number of entries. The payouts of two or more entries into the same contest are not independent. We did not have the data necessary to calculate correlations between the payouts of multiple entries. Thus, it was not possible to accurately account for this lack of independence when calculating players’ contest risk profile scores. As such, we chose to set aside the numbers of entries in each contest and limit our calculations to the risk scores of the contests themselves (i.e., the contribution to the risk score is the same whether the player entered multiple times or just once). We should note that, in our data, instances of players entering multiple entries or lineups into the same contest were rare. Therefore, we do not expect this choice of methodology to have a significant impact on our player contest risk scores.

  10. DraftKings only had birth year information available for 3,795 of the 10,385 subscribers in our sample. The average age and range are based on these 3,795 subscribers. (DraftKings had birth years available for 3990 of the 12,041 in the 2014 cohort.) Ten individuals in the sample were under age 18 at the time of the 2014 NFL season. The DraftKings tables to which we had access did not provide gender or race/ethnicity of their subscribers.

References

  • Billings, A., & Ruihley, B. (2013). Why we watch, why we play: The relationship between fantasy sport and fanship motivations. Mass Communication and Society, 16, 5–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braverman, J., Tom, M. A., & Shaffer, H. J. (2014). Accuracy of self-reported versus actual online gambling wins and losses. Psychological Assessment, 26(3), 865–877.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brener, N., Billy, J., & Grady, W. (2003). Assessment of factors affecting the validity of self-reported health-risk behavior among adolescents: Evidence from the scientific literature. Journal of Adolescent Health, 33, 436–457.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, N., Billings, A., & Ruihley, B. (2012). Exploring the change in motivations for fantasy sport participation during the life cycle of sports fan. Communication Research Reports, 29(4), 333–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charlton, J. P., & Danforth, I. D. W. (2007). Distinguishing addiction and high engagement in the context of online game playing. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 1531–1548.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crosby, S., Cameron, G., Macdonald, L., Stebbins, B., & Zuniga, E. (2016). White paper on daily fantasy sports. Boston, MA: Massachusetts Gaming Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deleuze, J., Long, J., Liu, T. Q., Maurage, P., & Billieux, J. (2018). Passion or addiction? Correlates of healthy versus problematic use of video games in a sample of French-speaking regular players. Addictive Behaviors, 82, 114–121.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Drayer, J., & Dwyer, B. (2013). Perception of fantasy is not always reality: An exploratory examination into Blacks’ lack of participation in fantasy sports. International Journal of Sport Management, 14, 81–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drayer, J., Dwyer, B., & Shapiro, S. (2013). Examining the impact of league entry fees on online fantasy sport participation and league consumption. European Sport Management Quarterly, 13(3), 339–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dwyer, B., Achen, R., & Lupinek, J. (2016). Fantasy vs. reality: Exploring the BIRGing and CORFing behavior of fantasy football participation. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 25(3), 152–165.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dwyer, B., & Weiner, J. (2018). Daily grind: A comparison of causality orientations, emotions, and fantasy sport participation. Journal of Gambling Studies, 34(1), 1–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gainsbury, S. M. (2013). Internet gaming and disordered gambling. In D. C. S. Richard, A. Blaszczynski, & L. Nower (Eds.), The Wiley-Blackwell handbook of disordered gambling (pp. 361–385). Chichester, GBR: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Gainsbury, S. M., Sadeque, S., Mizerski, R., & Blaszczynski, A. (2012a). Wagering in Australia: A retrospective behavioural analysis of betting patterns based on player account data. Journal of Gambling Business and Economics, 6(2), 50–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gainsbury, S. M., Wood, R., Russell, A., Hing, N., & Blaszczynski, A. (2012b). A digital revolution: Comparison of demographic profiles, attitudes and gambling behavior of internet and non-internet gamblers. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(4), 1388–1398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gebauer, L., LaBrie, R. A., & Shaffer, H. J. (2010). Optimizing DSM-IV classification accuracy: A brief bio-social screen for detecting current gambling disorders among gamblers in the general household population. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 55(2), 82–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gillies, T. (2016). Fantasy sports: The lucrative market that may be legal. On the Money, February 7. CNBC. Retrieved from https://www.cnbc.com/2016/02/05/fantasy-sports-the-lucrative-market-that-may-be-legal.html.

  • Gouker, D. (2015). New York AG to DraftKings, FanDuel: DFS is illegal gambling, cease and desist in NY. Legal sports report.

  • Gray, H. M., Jonsson, G. K., LaPlante, D. A., & Shaffer, H. J. (2015). Expanding the study of internet gambling behavior: Trends within the Icelandic lottery and sportsbetting platform. Journal of Gambling Studies, 31(2), 483–499. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-013-9427-0.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths, M. (2003). Internet gambling: Issues, concerns, and recommendations. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 6(6), 557–568.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LaBrie, R. A., Kaplan, S. A., LaPlante, D. A., Nelson, S. E., & Shaffer, H. J. (2008). Inside the virtual casino: A prospective longitudinal study of Internet casino gambling. European Journal of Public Health, 18(4), 410–416.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • LaBrie, R. A., LaPlante, D. A., Nelson, S. E., Schumann, A., & Shaffer, H. J. (2007). Assessing the playing field: A prospective longitudinal study of internet sports gambling behavior. Journal of Gambling Studies, 23(3), 347–362.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • LaPlante, D. A., Kleschinsky, J. H., LaBrie, R. A., Nelson, S. E., & Shaffer, H. J. (2009). Sitting at the virtual poker table: A prospective epidemiological study of actual Internet poker gambling behavior. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(3), 711–717.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larkin, B., & Fink, B. (2016). Fantasy sports, FoMO, and traditional fandom: How second-screen use of social media allows fans to accomodate multiple identities. Journal of Sport Management, 30, 643–655.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, J., Ruihley, B., Brown, N., & Billings, A. (2013a). The effects of fantasy football participation on team identification, team loyalty and NFL fandom. Journal of Sports Media, 8(1), 207–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S., Seo, W., & Green, C. (2013b). Understanding why people play fantasy sport: Development of the Fantasy Sport Motivation Inventory (FanSMI). European Sport Management Quarterly, 13(2), 166–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, W., Kwak, D., Lim, C., Pederson, P., & Miloch, K. (2011). Effects of personality and gender on fantasy sport participation: The moderating role of perceived knowledge. Journal of Gambling Studies, 27, 427–441.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mahan, J., Drayer, J., & Sparvero, E. (2012). Gambling and fantasy: An examination of the influence of money on fan attitudes and behaviors. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 21, 159–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marchica, L., & Derevensky, J. (2016). Fantasy sports: A growing concern among college student athletes. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 14, 635–645.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marchica, L., Zhao, Y., Derevensky, J., & Ivoska, L. (2017). Understanding the relationship between sports-relevant gambling and being at-risk for a gambling problem among American adolescents. Journal of Gambling Studies, 33(2), 437–448.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Marlatt, G., Baer, J., Kivlahan, D., Dimeff, L., Larimer, M., & Quigley, L. (1998). Screening and brief intervention for high-risk college student drinkers: Results from a two year follow-up assessment. Journal of Counseling and Clinical Psychology, 66, 604–615.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, R. J., & Nelson, S. (2014). Fantasy sports, real money: Exploration of the relationship between fantasy sports participation and gambling-related problems. Addictive Behaviors, 30, 1377–1382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, R. J., Nelson, S., & Gallucci, A. (2016). Game on: Past year gambling, gambling-related problems, and fantasy sports gambling among college athletes and non-athletes. Journal of Gambling Studies, 32, 567–579.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, R. J., Nelson, S. E., Gallucci, A. R., & Lee, J. (2017). Daily and season-long fantasy sports participation and gambling-related problems among a sample of college students at three universities. International Gambling Studies, 18(3), 395–407.

    Google Scholar 

  • Massachusetts Attorney General. (2016). 940 C.M.R. 34.00: Daily fantasy sports contest operators in Massachusetts. Boston: Massachusetts Attorney General.

    Google Scholar 

  • Midanik, L. (1988). Validity of self-reported alcohol use: A literature review and assessment. British Journal of Addiction, 83, 1019–1029.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • National Association of Theater Owners. (2018). Annual Average US Ticket Price. http://www.natoonline.org/data/ticket-price/.

  • Nelson, S. E., LaPlante, D. A., Peller, A. J., Schumann, A., LaBrie, R. A., & Shaffer, H. J. (2008). Real limits in the virtual world: Self-limiting behavior of Internet gamblers. Journal of Gambling Studies, 24(4), 463–477.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Przybylski, A. K., Weintstein, N., & Murayama, K. (2017). Internet gaming disorder: Investigating the clinical relevance of a new phenomenon. American Journal of Psychiatry, 174(3), 230–236.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • The trouble with fantasy sports gambling. (2015). New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/12/opinion/the-trouble-with-fantasy-sports-gambling.html.

  • Udland, M. (2015). Fantasy sports companies spend so much on commercials they’re moving the needle on TV ad spending. Business Insider. Retrieved from http://www.businessinsider.com/draftkings-fanduel-daily-fantasy-sports-advertising-2015-10.

  • Wood, R. T. A., Griffiths, M. D., & Parke, J. (2007). Acquisition, development, and maintenance of online poker playing in a student sample. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 10(3), 354–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wood, R. T. A., & Williams, R. J. (2007). Problem gambling on the internet: Implications for internet gambling policy in North America. New Media & Society, 9(3), 520–542.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woodward, C. (2016). DraftKings, FanDuel collected $3b in entry fees last year, analyst says. Boston Globe. Retrieved from https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2016/02/29/fantasy-sports-industry-hits-amid-legal-questions-analyst-says/NKw364kiLjv8XcD54vRr4H/story.html.

Download references

Acknowledgements

A project of this magnitude requires the support and involvement of many. The authors extend special thanks to Greg Karamitis, Robert McGeehan, and Jacob Sachs for responding swiftly and thoroughly to our data requests, and to Tasha Chandler, Vanessa Graham, Pat Williams, Rhiannon Wiley, Alec Conte, John Kleschinsky, and Scarvel Harris, for providing support for this project.

Funding

DraftKings provided primary support for this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division on Addiction, Cambridge Health Alliance, 101 Station Landing, Suite 2100, Medford, MA, 02155, USA

    Sarah E. Nelson, Timothy C. Edson, Pradeep Singh, Matthew Tom, Debi A. LaPlante, Heather M. Gray & Howard J. Shaffer

  2. Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA

    Sarah E. Nelson, Timothy C. Edson, Pradeep Singh, Matthew Tom, Debi A. LaPlante, Heather M. Gray & Howard J. Shaffer

  3. East Carolina University, Greenville, USA

    Ryan J. Martin

Authors
  1. Sarah E. Nelson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Timothy C. Edson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Pradeep Singh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Matthew Tom
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ryan J. Martin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Debi A. LaPlante
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Heather M. Gray
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Howard J. Shaffer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the concept and design of this study and the writing of this manuscript. Drs. Edson, Singh, and Tom contributed to the analyses, had full access to all of the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. All authors have approved the final article.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sarah E. Nelson.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors also receive funding from the Foundation for Advancing Alcohol Responsibility (FAAR), The Healing Lodge of the Seven Nations via NIH and Indian Health Services (IHS), the Integrated Centre on Addiction Prevention and Treatment of the Tung Wah Group of Hospitals, which receives funding from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust, the Massachusetts Gaming Commission, and the Massachusetts Department of Public Health.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nelson, S.E., Edson, T.C., Singh, P. et al. Patterns of Daily Fantasy Sport Play: Tackling the Issues. J Gambl Stud 35, 181–204 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-018-09817-w

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-018-09817-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation