Pred's Fantasy Football Forums - View Single Post

zdravko27 · May 14th, 2010, 05:39 PM

This may be a stupid newbie question - but which way does it influence the bidding, upwards or downwards?

On the one hand, you probably want to disincentivize the owner from matching, which would require you to bid a little higher than normal. If you know the owner isn't matching, you probably would bid lower than you would have otherwise. On the other hand, with ALL owners knowing there won't be a match, the player becomes more enticing to bid on relative to other players, thus spurring more of a bidding competition, thus ultimately raising the bid higher than what it might have been without the no-match announcement. I can see both scenarios happening just as easily, so I am wondering what is the presumed outcome?

Another possibly dumb newbie question - why is it considered wrong to influence the bidding?

May 14th, 2010, 05:39 PM	#5
zdravko27 Feeding Frenzy Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Miami, FL Posts: 916	Re: RFA Tenders This may be a stupid newbie question - but which way does it influence the bidding, upwards or downwards? On the one hand, you probably want to disincentivize the owner from matching, which would require you to bid a little higher than normal. If you know the owner isn't matching, you probably would bid lower than you would have otherwise. On the other hand, with ALL owners knowing there won't be a match, the player becomes more enticing to bid on relative to other players, thus spurring more of a bidding competition, thus ultimately raising the bid higher than what it might have been without the no-match announcement. I can see both scenarios happening just as easily, so I am wondering what is the presumed outcome? Another possibly dumb newbie question - why is it considered wrong to influence the bidding? Last edited by zdravko27; May 14th, 2010 at 05:46 PM.