Change Veteran Criteria
When the "veteran" criteria was initiated it was 1) Enter 1,000 contests in a year; 2) Enter 250 in a year with 65% payout; or 3) Win prize of $1,000 3 times in a year.
It is now Enter 1,000 contests or win $1,000 3 times.
It seems you are punishing players that joined early with no time frame on the 1,000 entries. I guess I've entered 1,000 contests, but 95% of them are $1 and $2 50/50 tournaments. I enter 3 to 6 lineups in each available slate of NFL games each week. That's maybe 20-30 lineups per week. In my mind the intent of the "veteran" label is to let you know if you're playing against "pros" or true advantage players. When I'm entering the lowest stake contests, with the broadest payout structure (I'm winning $0.80 or $1.60), I have a hard time being classified as a "veteran".
I think your original criteria were a lot better versus a 1,000 entry criteria with no timeline or criteria on contest type or winnings.
Matthew Call
shared this idea
2 comments
-
TIM FAGERHAUGH
commented
I agree! There really needs to be a third level, a "PRO" Level. The top players are swarming every $1 and $2 cash games. Even the .25¢ contests are ruined for the average sports fan like me. I can't compete with the top 20% of the players, who use computers, max out every available spots per contest, and Play Daily Fantasy for a living! So PLEASE come up with a ranking that's in between Beginner and Veteran and add some contests that exclude the Top Tier, aka SHARKS! I guarantee you that will make thousands of players very happy 👍🙂
-
Anonymous
commented
Or add a "Pro" tier for large bankroll/pro players. Intermediate players who play a lot of low stakes contests are disincentivized by the current "Veteran" system.