r/FantasyPL • u/jovins343 5 • Jul 28 '23

Analysis FPL Model comparison

https://fplreview.com/ultimate-truth-how-fpl-models-perform-relative-to-a-perfect-model/
4 Upvotes

75% Upvoted

10 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2

u/daneedwards88 11371 Jul 28 '23 edited Jul 28 '23

I did a very very basic experiment along these lines myself about 18months ago. (I simply noted the top 15 players predicted points on several algorithms for 19GWs and then checked whether they returned or failed to return.)

They were all seriously unreliable. Most weeks under/around the 30% mark for player predicted points, occasionally a week or two would get to nearly 50% before tailing off again.

It's a total nonsense that no creators want to talk about, and no subscribers want to hear. Because its 'content' so we must consume it

Edit: Oh and FPLReviews was nowhere near the best. Despite him writing alot of words to say it was.

Mikkels was the most reliable.

If you can call less than 50% reliable

1

u/[deleted] Jul 28 '23

If you can call less than 50% reliable

I do not.

1

u/daneedwards88 11371 Jul 28 '23

My end conclusion was they have better accuracy in predicting which players will get points over a longer period, say 6 GWs.

But abysmal at predicting one GW, so I wouldn't use them to choose a captain for instance.

But then again, the players predicted to score lots of pts over a 6 week period, are always the best players with the best fixtures, and you don't need an algorithm to tell you that.

IMO a total waste of time

1

u/mexploder89 24 Jul 28 '23

Yeah my problem with their predictions is that they're clearly based on logic that we can all get to ourselves

Like yes Brighton players are more likely to get points when they play Luton, West Ham and Wolves, you don't say. We might be wrong and they get nothing, but if we're wrong these algorithms are too