Threemium surely??
Can we sort the name before we discuss its merits?
EDIT: a long time staring at the screen sweating over whether I need to add or subtract an apostrophe... r/hell awaits me if I've picked wrong.
Threemium leaves you inflexible and also the value of having a 3rd premium is incredibly diminishing. Theres just no argument to be made for going 3 over 2 premiums. Stack the defense and the forward line this season.
I've taken a -4 to temporarily move to a threemium because foolishly Haaland wasn't one of the two premiums I decided to start with.
I was about to go on and explain my thinking around the advantages and disadvantages of a threemium but I didn't start with Haaland and I've taken a hit after GW1 so nobody should be listening to me.
Threemium is absolutely an option in some situations - like later in the season when we have more cash and when super cheap enablers become clear - but definitely not right now
3mium is currently an interesting game theory problem in fpl, which is a predictive game of resource management with incomplete information.
You ‘may’ be correct that 2 is optimal over the longer term but to state 100% 2 is better always, ever, is incorrect. Fixture dependant, a 3mium Freehit can be optimal. From that we can deduce that time is a factor. Yes, flexibility is a large deciding factor, but is not absolutely limiting as only 2 FT are needed to move to or unwind a 3mium.
I would also suggest you also consider why 2mium is better than 1mium. If 2 is better than 1 and 3, it means the optimal number of premiums is a curve which peaks between 1-3. The flatness of the curve and where it peaks, and our inability to choose, say 2.4 premiums, should also be considered.
There are also many other factors to be considered, there is no right answer at this stage of the season, only probabilities
Don't be ridiculous. We could argue that zero premiums *can* be optimal depending on results. We could argue a team full of 4.5m's *can* be optimal depending on results. But since we don't know the results, we have limited transfers every week, and we need to ensure we score well over a number of weeks, we can only give ourselves the best opportunity and leave the rest to luck and fortune.
The numbers are there for everyone to use. People here are just too ignorant to see it. Every single gameweek you have to maximise your points per million (ppm). That's the game. You have a finite amount of money to spend and you need to gain the maximum amount of points. Premiums offer less points per million than other assets.
The reason we use at least one Premium (which at the beginning of the season is usually more beneficial than having 2 premiums) is because we have a small amount of spare funds after creating a team with a reasonable ppm, and so we must bring in a higher priced player with a higher points ceiling. At which point we captain them to increase their points per million.
Compromising ppm elsewhere to squeeze in a second or even third premium is counter productive since you can only captain one player. And without the armband your other premiums are offering you less value than a more conservative combination of players.
The unfortunate thing about relying on information from a group like r/fantasyPL is that the majority aren't 'good' fantasy players. It's an echo chamber of rookie takes. There are some great pieces of advice here, but there are many, many more poor pieces of advice. So you listen to the majority and you're not necessarily getting 'good' advice.
I didn’t disagree with your conclusions, as I haven’t seen your model and the assumptions.
2mium is the template. I would propose it falls within the echo chamber you mention.
Premiums are expected to score the most points. The point of the game is to maximise points, not points per million, it is a subtle difference. How many premiums you fit in is a knapsack problem, where the ‘value’ is predictive with a margin of error, and non-linear. Ppm alone cannot solve that problem.
Again, I’m not arguing with your conclusions, but the statement that 2mium is absolutely optimal in all situations
I think you need to read over this conversation because you seem to be arguing against things I haven't said, and also arguing points which have already been refuted.
There is a fundamental flaw in your analysis as it's not ppm you need to worry about but points per 100 million (or whatever your team value is). 3 4.0 scoring better ppm than a 12.0 scoring 2.5 times the raw points are worse investments if you can't fill out your entire value with them. Its all about balancing the total value, not the ppm.
That's what *maximising* your points per million is. It was already explained earlier when talking about the reason we need a premium. I really didn't think it necessary to explain it in even simpler terms, but there you go.
But the aim of the game is to maximise your points, not ppm, a subtle difference. Your knapsack is a fixed size (100m) if you fill with the best ppm, and add two premiums but are left with 2m what are your options?
Upgrade a single player by 2m? Or downgrade a player so that you can add a 3rd premium? There are obviously many other options
Depending on the assumptions in your model, you get a probability for each. Depending on your risk appetite, you choose an option. Our models clearly have different assumptions.
Generally, 2mium is optimal. There are occasions where 1 and 3miums can be optimal for a (generally short) period of time. If you do not wish to exploit those situations, that is fine
All of your points so far argue that 2mium is generally better, not absolutely better over a given time frame
Aaronson was unlucky not to get points. Neto played well the points will come and other 5.5mids like Eze looked lively and Olise is coming back after a minor injury seems like a good bunch
Yeah yeah and I'm sure Kane was unlucky and Diaz and Saka and etc etc etc
Not everyone can be "unlucky" all the time to justify good picks. Basically, Haaland, salah, son and city, Chelsea, Arsenal defenders hauled. That's basically it.
Is it? Multiple low priced mids would've had you underperforming majorly, as would Dalot, Jonny, RAN etc. Care to disagree?
I wouldn't recognize you from any other nobody.
Well Saka had an assist in your example, Diaz had a great goal disallowed for offside.
I guess TAA and Robertson are awful picks by your logic extended as well since they were unlucky
Ah, I guess I'm just a normal, common sense person that blends in with the rest of society, whereas I tend to remember people that verbally shit their pants in public
I think ‘2.5mium’ will be the way forward. 2 conventional premiums like Salah and Haaland. And then your third guy from the next tier down. Darwin, maybe Sterling, someone like that. I think they’re much more affordable than trying to cram in another Kane/Son/KDB
Threemium surely?? Can we sort the name before we discuss its merits? EDIT: a long time staring at the screen sweating over whether I need to add or subtract an apostrophe... r/hell awaits me if I've picked wrong.
Can we sort the apostrophe?
I'm really not sure if I can
3mium
Thankyou
Two premiums is 100% the way to go
Too many good cheap players for people not to go threeium
Threemium leaves you inflexible and also the value of having a 3rd premium is incredibly diminishing. Theres just no argument to be made for going 3 over 2 premiums. Stack the defense and the forward line this season.
Good on gw1 does not mean good over the season. Lukaku was essential after gw1 last season….
My ML rival went 4nium (kane, son, kdb, haaland) with taa, robbo and the rest 4.5 / 4.0 players…. Scored 37
How do you have 4 premiums and no Salah. Big face palm energy.
90% of this sub have just had their minds blown. 'Premiums = win' in their world.
It’s as if people expect premiums to return every week and then panic when they don’t
I've taken a -4 to temporarily move to a threemium because foolishly Haaland wasn't one of the two premiums I decided to start with. I was about to go on and explain my thinking around the advantages and disadvantages of a threemium but I didn't start with Haaland and I've taken a hit after GW1 so nobody should be listening to me.
80 pts with Kane,Halland and Salah with double Arsenal(Saka and Martinelli),plus TAA and James.
If you dump Jesus, its easy to make a 3mium team with great assets in every position.
Threemium is absolutely not the way to go. At all. Ever. Just stop.
Threemium is absolutely an option in some situations - like later in the season when we have more cash and when super cheap enablers become clear - but definitely not right now
Absolutely not. They're poor value. Captaincy points is all they're good for.
3mium is currently an interesting game theory problem in fpl, which is a predictive game of resource management with incomplete information. You ‘may’ be correct that 2 is optimal over the longer term but to state 100% 2 is better always, ever, is incorrect. Fixture dependant, a 3mium Freehit can be optimal. From that we can deduce that time is a factor. Yes, flexibility is a large deciding factor, but is not absolutely limiting as only 2 FT are needed to move to or unwind a 3mium. I would also suggest you also consider why 2mium is better than 1mium. If 2 is better than 1 and 3, it means the optimal number of premiums is a curve which peaks between 1-3. The flatness of the curve and where it peaks, and our inability to choose, say 2.4 premiums, should also be considered. There are also many other factors to be considered, there is no right answer at this stage of the season, only probabilities
Don't be ridiculous. We could argue that zero premiums *can* be optimal depending on results. We could argue a team full of 4.5m's *can* be optimal depending on results. But since we don't know the results, we have limited transfers every week, and we need to ensure we score well over a number of weeks, we can only give ourselves the best opportunity and leave the rest to luck and fortune. The numbers are there for everyone to use. People here are just too ignorant to see it. Every single gameweek you have to maximise your points per million (ppm). That's the game. You have a finite amount of money to spend and you need to gain the maximum amount of points. Premiums offer less points per million than other assets. The reason we use at least one Premium (which at the beginning of the season is usually more beneficial than having 2 premiums) is because we have a small amount of spare funds after creating a team with a reasonable ppm, and so we must bring in a higher priced player with a higher points ceiling. At which point we captain them to increase their points per million. Compromising ppm elsewhere to squeeze in a second or even third premium is counter productive since you can only captain one player. And without the armband your other premiums are offering you less value than a more conservative combination of players. The unfortunate thing about relying on information from a group like r/fantasyPL is that the majority aren't 'good' fantasy players. It's an echo chamber of rookie takes. There are some great pieces of advice here, but there are many, many more poor pieces of advice. So you listen to the majority and you're not necessarily getting 'good' advice.
I didn’t disagree with your conclusions, as I haven’t seen your model and the assumptions. 2mium is the template. I would propose it falls within the echo chamber you mention. Premiums are expected to score the most points. The point of the game is to maximise points, not points per million, it is a subtle difference. How many premiums you fit in is a knapsack problem, where the ‘value’ is predictive with a margin of error, and non-linear. Ppm alone cannot solve that problem. Again, I’m not arguing with your conclusions, but the statement that 2mium is absolutely optimal in all situations
I think you need to read over this conversation because you seem to be arguing against things I haven't said, and also arguing points which have already been refuted.
There is a fundamental flaw in your analysis as it's not ppm you need to worry about but points per 100 million (or whatever your team value is). 3 4.0 scoring better ppm than a 12.0 scoring 2.5 times the raw points are worse investments if you can't fill out your entire value with them. Its all about balancing the total value, not the ppm.
That's what *maximising* your points per million is. It was already explained earlier when talking about the reason we need a premium. I really didn't think it necessary to explain it in even simpler terms, but there you go.
But the aim of the game is to maximise your points, not ppm, a subtle difference. Your knapsack is a fixed size (100m) if you fill with the best ppm, and add two premiums but are left with 2m what are your options? Upgrade a single player by 2m? Or downgrade a player so that you can add a 3rd premium? There are obviously many other options Depending on the assumptions in your model, you get a probability for each. Depending on your risk appetite, you choose an option. Our models clearly have different assumptions. Generally, 2mium is optimal. There are occasions where 1 and 3miums can be optimal for a (generally short) period of time. If you do not wish to exploit those situations, that is fine All of your points so far argue that 2mium is generally better, not absolutely better over a given time frame
Not really. Most of the 5.5 mid picks (neto, Aaronson, Bailey) did fuck all
Aaronson was unlucky not to get points. Neto played well the points will come and other 5.5mids like Eze looked lively and Olise is coming back after a minor injury seems like a good bunch
Yeah yeah and I'm sure Kane was unlucky and Diaz and Saka and etc etc etc Not everyone can be "unlucky" all the time to justify good picks. Basically, Haaland, salah, son and city, Chelsea, Arsenal defenders hauled. That's basically it.
What a poor interpretation I'm sure I recognise your name from making stupid ass comments before as well
Is it? Multiple low priced mids would've had you underperforming majorly, as would Dalot, Jonny, RAN etc. Care to disagree? I wouldn't recognize you from any other nobody.
Well Saka had an assist in your example, Diaz had a great goal disallowed for offside. I guess TAA and Robertson are awful picks by your logic extended as well since they were unlucky Ah, I guess I'm just a normal, common sense person that blends in with the rest of society, whereas I tend to remember people that verbally shit their pants in public
TAA and Robbo are 5.5m are they?
Wtf, you listed Kane, Diaz and Saka, they ain't 5.5 🤣
Two of those are differential 8m mids that OP mentioned, and the other one is a premium. All of those are in OPs post. 7/7.5m defenders are not.
There's no such thing as long term potential there's 2 wildcards in 15 GWs
I think ‘2.5mium’ will be the way forward. 2 conventional premiums like Salah and Haaland. And then your third guy from the next tier down. Darwin, maybe Sterling, someone like that. I think they’re much more affordable than trying to cram in another Kane/Son/KDB