Is maxing out Footstock entries actually an advantage?

December 23, 2020
FF Thinker


Is maxing out Footstock entries actually an advantage?

An often much-discussed topic in Slack is the perceived advantage bigger collections have in contests over those of a more modest value.

I decided to dig a bit more into the details surrounding the Xmas Virtuals on the 21st December, where Footstock users could enter a maximum of 10 teams at a cost of £5 per team.

The Stats

Total teams entered: 1049
Total unique players: 385
Players with no returns: 265
Players who cashed but overall loss: 49
Players in profit: 71

So overall, 18.4% of players ended up in profit, and those 71 were split among the following entries:

The Analysis

The biggest question remains: if you max enter a tournament, does it equate to more profit at the end of it? As a user of FanTeam also, I can confirm that leaderboards are usually littered with multiple entries from the same player. But in that case I am talking nearly 100, whereas Footstock does have a limit (usually 5, but in this case 10) to presumably negate this advantage to an extent.

In this tournament, a total of 31 players maxed out entries to have the full 10, in the hope of maximising their chances. As one of those 31 (and one who ended with a slight loss), I can speak from experience that multiple entries does lead you to try to cover as many angles as possible, and in doing so does take away the focus from what you think the actual result will be.

Digging into those 31 players who maxed out, only 10 (as we can see in the top image) made a profit, and of those 10 only 3 ended with a profit of £25 or more. Now one of those 3 was the winner of the contest, shown above, so they did end up with a very sizeable ROI, but it is by no means a given that entering the maximum guarantees big profits – even more so in real-life football, as we know the Virtuals only give certain players a chance of scoring/assisting, etc.

To take it one step further, if we look at those users with the best ROI vs their initial outlay, we can see the majority are players who entered either one or two teams.

In Summary

Virtuals by their nature have static data that everyone has access to, and therefore the outcomes are easier to predict. Yet even with that knowledge and perceived fewer players to ‘cover’, we can see there is no direct correlation between volume of entries and profit.

For any competition you have to buy a ticket, and it only takes one to win. The perceived “same old names at the top” argument always reminds me of a quote I heard growing up:

“One quality all successful people have is persistence” – Dr Joyce Brothers

Put in the work, understand the product, learn from your mistakes and the rewards should come.

FF Thinker

A Footstock player since February 2020, he is keen on anything to take his mind off the rollercoaster of life as a Blackburn Rovers fan! Looking for any statistical edge on trading, tournaments etc., he also can't get resist a 30p bargain!