Contents 1 The story, in a nutshell 
 
 2 Why the question of access to insider data is a critical one 2.1 The threat of “insider trading” 2.2 Do employees of DFS sites play at other DFS sites? 2.3 How much does it happen? 
 
 3 Where the story intersects with the issue of regulation 3.1 The role of the Fantasy Sports Trade Association 
 
 4 Official statements from key stakeholders 4.1 DraftKings, FanDuel, and the Fantasy Sports Trade Association 4.2 The NBA 4.3 Major League Baseball 4.4 Policymakers 
 
 5 How does access to ownership data provide an edge? 
 
 6 Did Haskell have access to data that facilitated his win at FanDuel? 
 
 The leaking of player lineup data at daily fantasy sports site DraftKings has sparked a nationwide conversation spanning employee access to sensitive player data, game integrity, and the effectiveness of operators self-policing in the DFS industry. 
 
 DFS Report was first to report on the issue, which was originally noted in a Rotogrinders thread. 
 
 The employee in question was cleared of any wrongdoing in a third-party review that was released on October 19. 
 
 The story, in a nutshell 
 
 Here are the broad strokes of #DKLeak: 
 
 Why the question of access to insider data is a critical one 
 
 Haskell’s apparent ability to readily access valuable data raises questions about DraftKings’ internal controls. As DFS Report put it: 
 
 If this sort of information is stored in advance like this who is to say that the data isn’t available to someone 5 minutes before kickoff of games or 10 minutes before the kickoff or even an hour before the initial kickoff. My point is if the data can be accessed in advance then it is not hard to see it could easily be accessed at other points in advance even before the tournament is live. 
 
 If the data is made available, the questions looming over DraftKings – and all operators – include: 
 
 Which staff members , and how many, are seeing data like this or have access to it? 
 
 , and how many, are seeing data like this or have access to it? What other data could these employees access that would be of use in setting lineups? 
 
 could these employees access that would be of use in setting lineups? What precautions are being taken to keep the data from leaking? 
 
 The threat of “insider trading” 
 
 Even if a DFS site employee is not playing DFS (at his or her site, or elsewhere) lineup data and other internal operator data would be extremely valuable to DFS players. 
 
 Combine that significant value with an environment where internal controls on data access are lax and you risk the functional equivalent of insider trading on the stock market, argued sports and gaming attorney Daniel Wallach: 
 
 With too many employees presumably having access to this inside information, it raises the specter of insiders using this non-public information to gain an edge when they play similar contests for big money on other sites. At a minimum, DFS employees and insiders should be restricted from playing on any site (not just their own), and access to this type of information should be limited only to the most essential of personnel. If it’s too easily accessible to most employees, the risk and suspicion of insider profiteering will not go away anytime soon. 
 
 Do employees of DFS sites play at other DFS sites? 
 
 Absolutely. 
 
 We are not aware of any DFS company that had a blanket policy prohibiting employees from playing on other DFS sites at the time of the incident. 
 
 Following the incident, FanDuel and DraftKings announced they were restricting the ability of their employees to play DFS at other sites, and that employees of other DFS sites would be prohibited from playing on DraftKings and FanDuel. Several other operators have followed with similar policies. 
 
 How much does it happen? 
 
 Anecdotally, the amount of cross-site play by operator employees is substantial. 
 
 DraftKings founder Paul Liberman commented in September that the company employs “some people who make significantly more money off of our competitors’ sites than they do working for DraftKings.” 
 
 One industry insider who wished to remain anonymous told LSR that “a significant number of the whales at the top DFS sites are employees – often executives – of other sites.” 
 
 (From a DFS operator’s point of view, a “whale” is simply a high-volume player that generates significant revenue, not necessarily a winning or losing player.) 
 
 Where the story intersects with the issue of regulation 
 
 Daily fantasy sports currently occupies a legal space in the U.S. that has allowed the industry to exist outside of the regulatory umbrella that covers conceptually similar products like parimutuel horse wagering, poker, and sports betting. 
 
 Operators of DFS sites do not submit to oversight by state gaming regulators, a situation that has generated numerous objections from within the commercial casino industry. 
 
 As a result of that status quo: 
 
 There are no formal, industry-wide rules governing this particular situation. 
 
 this particular situation. There is no transparency surrounding the critical questions related to the incident. 
 
 surrounding the critical questions related to the incident. There is no guarantee of accountability – DraftKings is effectively conducting its own investigation. 
 
 – DraftKings is effectively conducting its own investigation. There is no body actively working to craft enforceable policy that would prevent future conflicts from arising. 
 
 As Seth Young, COO of daily fantasy sports site Star Fantasy Leagues, noted to LSR, “brick and mortar groups in a regulated environment have tight controls on who can access what data. We always talk about how we have been built to address things like this, and other concerns of gaming regulators, etc. There’s a reason this stuff doesn’t come out of our camp, and it’s not because of player numbers.” 
 
 “This is, however, another case in point why we license and control our technology,” Young added. “Knowing what I know, I’m not sure how this sort of thing happens by accident, or how deep this integrity issue goes.” 
 
 In the absence of an external oversight function, here are some critical questions stemming from the data leak issue that we’ll never have complete certainty regarding: 
 
 How have sites enforced policies that prohibit employees from playing at their home site, using internal data to gain an advantage at other sites, or transferring internal data to individuals outside of the company? 
 
 that prohibit employees from playing at their home site, using internal data to gain an advantage at other sites, or transferring internal data to individuals outside of the company? How many instances have there been where those policies were violated? How many accusations or investigations? 
 
 have there been where those policies were violated? How many accusations or investigations? What was the investigative process for determining whether a policy violation took place? 
 
 for determining whether a policy violation took place? How many people have access to competitively sensitive data? How many times has that level of data been accessed by employees? Could employees access data anonymously or through proxy accounts? How difficult would it have been for an employee to share data? 
 
 to competitively sensitive data? How many times has that level of data been accessed by employees? Could employees access data anonymously or through proxy accounts? How difficult would it have been for an employee to share data? What percentage of employees / executives from one site have active accounts at other sites? 
 
 from one site have active accounts at other sites? When a player hits a big score at a DFS site, does the site investigate him or her for links to employees at the site where the win took place? 
 
 at a DFS site, does the site investigate him or her for links to employees at the site where the win took place? What systems, if any, do DFS operators have for cooperating in order to advance fraud investigations? 
 
 In contrast, the regulated NJ online casino industry exists in an environment where state regulators have on-demand access to any and all data related to game play, comprehensive transaction history, and employees. 
 
 DraftKings was required to apply for the same type of licensure in the United Kingdom as sports betting operators bet365 and betfair, as daily fantasy sports falls under the purview of the UK Gambling Commission. 
 
 The role of the Fantasy Sports Trade Association 
 
 The FSTA – the primary trade group for the DFS industry – does have a “Paid Entry Contest Operator Charter” that serves as the only external guidelines for DFS operators. FSTA board members include the CEOs of DraftKings and FanDuel; FanDuel CEO Nigel Eccles was an author of the charter. 
 
 The charter includes a section dedicated to game integrity: 
 
 Player Protection The signatory company will ensure employees or other persons connected to the company with access to confidential player information (such as line-ups) will not: Play on their own games (apart from for testing purposes or in private leagues) 
 
 Use confidential player information to gain an advantage playing against players on a different site 
 
 Share confidential player information (such as win rate) to anyone outside of the company 
 
 Note that the FSTA considers lineups to be “confidential player information” and that the leak appears to be a clear violation of the FSTA charter. 
 
 But what’s actually behind the policy? The FSTA itself makes it clear that the body isn’t meant to serve as an enforcement apparatus. From the charter: 
 
 Conforming with the above should not be viewed as compliance with the law, and the FSTA is in no way certifying such compliance of member companies. Companies should procure and adhere to legal advice regarding their games from skilled, experienced counsel of their choice The FSTA is not undertaking to audit or regulate member companies. Rather, this code is designed to foster proper behavior and allow the FSTA to exercise discretion and take action if it so chooses should it learn that a member company is not adhering to the principles set forth above. 
 
 Also, if you violate the charter, the only penalty would be no longer having membership in the FSTA, which is nowhere near what the penalty would be for an infraction regarding game integrity that would result under regulation. 
 
 Official statements from key stakeholders 
 
 DraftKings, FanDuel, and the Fantasy Sports Trade Association 
 
 Here is a complete timeline of responses from DraftKings, FanDuel, and the FSTA. 
 
 The NBA 
 
 NBA on DFS: "We have been advised all appropriate actions are being taken to maintain the highest level of integrity for fantasy players." — David Payne Purdum (@DavidPurdum) October 6, 2015 
 
 Major League Baseball 
 
 Via ESPN: 
 
 “Major League Baseball has a policy that prohibits players and employees from participating in fantasy baseball games in which prize money or other things of value are available to participants,” MLB said in its statement. “We were surprised to learn that DraftKings allowed its employees to participate in daily fantasy games. We have reached out and discussed this matter with them.” 
 
 Policymakers 
 
 How does access to ownership data provide an edge? 
 
 Ed Miller, an independent games consultant who has written frequently about DFS, says that it’s difficult to overstate the value of lineup data. 
 
 “If you knew beforehand which players would be most used, in the major sports you can build +EV (positive expected value) cash game and GPP lineups based almost solely on that knowledge,” Miller told Legal Sports Report. 
 
 Ownership percentage is one piece of the puzzle that can be useful in skillfully setting DFS lineups, especially in guaranteed prize pool contests. Top players try to predict ownership percentages, and data about past ownership percentages can be dissected for information. 
 
 Because of the massive number of entries in the biggest contests at DraftKings and FanDuel — hundreds of thousands — it’s usually difficult to win a contest with a lot of players that are commonly owned. 
 
 Additional resources on this question: 
 
 Did Haskell have access to data that facilitated his win at FanDuel? 
 
 We have seen no compelling evidence or credible accusations that Haskell’s FanDuel win was in any way connected to the data leak in question. 
 
 DraftKings has categorically denied that Haskell had access at a time that would have impacted his entry in the FanDuel contest in question: 
 
 DraftKings has put out a new statement insisting its employee locked in his FanDuel lineup before seeing the data. pic.twitter.com/rLuFzJLzVG — Daniel Roberts (@readDanwrite) October 6, 2015 
 
 RotoGrinders founder Cal Spears reported that Haskell did not have access to the data before setting his lineup at FanDuel. Here is his post from the RG thread, which included an update from Saturday: 
 
 There is a narrative running on Twitter that Ethan had access to this data before lineups locked and used it to play on Fanduel. From what I’m told he received the ownership report well after lineups locked on Fanduel. There is plenty of merit in a debate about site employees playing on different sites, but we need to base that debate in reality. Ethan was not using this data to pick his week 3 teams on Fanduel, he was writing about this data for DK Playbook after his week 3 teams on Fanduel had already locked. 
 
 Spears said he also confirmed with DraftKings co-founder Matt Kalish that the data that Haskell had access to was issued too late to be of use at FanDuel. 
 
 Photo by Eric Norris used under license CC BY 2.0. ||||| In the continued debate on whether the daily fantasy sports industry would benefit from some form of regulation the two major players in DFS (FanDuel and DraftKings) both had issues this week showing why regulation may be beneficial for DFS players. 
 
 ***Disclaimer: I have no direct affiliation with either FanDuel or DraftKings so I can say what I think and will do so below. Although this has hurt my own bottom line in the past certain things need to be said that are going to or are currently negatively affecting DFS players. I have not shied away from this in the past and will continue to say what needs to be said in the future. If you would like to chime in with your thoughts please use our comments section below.*** 
 
 DraftKings 
 
 ****Update: Investigation performed by an outside law firm for DraftKings concluded that this information was not used to help Ethans lineup on FanDuel.**** 
 
 We will start with the issue that happened at DraftKings last weekend. According to a Rotogrinders forum thread, RG member colinwdrew pointed out that an article was posted on the DraftKings playbook at 2:30 PM which showed player percentage owned for the DraftKings Millionaire Maker for week 3 NFL. This wouldn’t be a big deal on FanDuel or sites that are not late swap, but for DraftKings when that information is (supposedly) locked for everyone in case late swaps do occur. It is extremely unsettling and worrisome that not only can a mistake like this happen but that some people even have access to this information in the first place. If this sort of information is stored in advance like this who is to say that the data isn’t available to someone 5 minutes before kickoff of games or 10 minutes before the kickoff or even an hour before the initial kickoff. My point is if the data can be accessed in advance then it is possible it could be accessed at other points in advance even before the tournament is live. In the Rotogrinders thread we were given an explanation from Ethan himself. 
 
 If we take his response at face value we can safely assume Ethan was the only employee with access to this information. Should we rest easy knowing that he cannot play on DraftKings site? Hardly, especially if you played at FanDuel last weekend. Because Ethan does play DFS at FanDuel and actually had a pretty good week. In fact he took 2nd place in the biggest GPP on FanDuel for $350,000. That is a life changing score. I am not questioning Ethans skill at DFS, but if we argue that DFS is a game of skill then that skill really is about gathering the most relevant and useful data and information and using that to construct our lineups. If Ethan is the only one with access to this data at DraftKings how valuable is it for him to be able to use it on a site like FanDuel? It is extremely valuable if he has the information before lineups lock on FanDuel. In fact it could be the most valuable data available which is why it is kept so under wraps and why this is such a big deal. The edge that can be created by having access to this data is 2nd to none. No other data comes close to being as valuable as having a complete understanding of exactly what way the DFS crowd is leaning in any given week. That is why our FanDuel Thursday ownership piece is so popular. It is because it gives a small glimpse into the key ownership levels for that week. 
 
 I am not saying outright that Ethan used this data to build his FanDuel lineup. Early reports from others indicate that he was sent the file after roster lock of lineups on FanDuel. But with no transparency for the industry in place, similar situations like this could easily occur. And with no regulatory board or anything in place to police this sort of activity, we as players are left in the dark. 
 
 Now before it can be argued that DraftKings data isn’t relevant to FanDuel data I took a look at the team that Ethan constructed to finish 2nd and put in the FanDuel ownership and then the DraftKings milly maker ownership and the percentages are incredibly close. 
 
 Player FanDuel % DraftKings % Andy Dalton 2.3 2.5 Adrian Peterson 18.6 22.4 Devonta Freeman 6.7 8 Randall Cobb 8.2 12.3 A.J. Green 4.4 6 Allen Hurns 2 2.1 Greg Olsen 10.5 8.3 Stephen Gostkowski 10.8 N/A Seattle D 22.6 30.7 
 
 Incredibly similar numbers. Now even before this situation was brought to light that DraftKings employees had access to pre locked percentage owned for players, it could be argued that employees of one site who participate in DFS on another site have valuable data and information available to them that the general public does not have. Even having an understanding of the pricing algorithm implored by one site would be beneficial when playing at another. Now is it possible to simply state that all DFS Site employees should not be able to participate in DFS contests at other sites with the general public? No, probably not, but this is again where a regulator would be beneficial to the general DFS Player. Right now we are playing in the wild west for DFS. Anything goes and nothing is in place to protect players. The DFS sites already are having issues supposedly policing themselves. Can we continue to trust that they are doing everything in their power to protect us players? That question is scary to answer and is one of the reasons I am in favor of seeing some kind of regulation or governing body policing the activities of DFS sites. The fact of the matter is any DFS employee with the capabilities to access this type of data at any time really shouldn’t be playing on any DFS site. We have millions of dollars changing hands on a weekly basis and anytime that kind of money can be won, people will do anything they can to get their hands on it. 
 
 Thank you to everyone. So grateful for all the ways #dfs and the amazing people within it have changed my life. — Ethan Haskell (@EthanHaskellDFS) September 29, 2015 
 
 ****Editors Note: A previous version of this story sited the rotogrinders thread as being locked. That is not the case. If you would like to leave comments or discussions in that thread as well please feel free to do so. I apologize for any confusion this created.**** 
 
 FanDuel 
 
 Yesterday, FanDuel had a $100 entry fee 6K guaranteed tournament advertised as a single entry event start. Shortly after roster lock some DFS players who entered this tournament noticed that others somehow had multiple entries into this tournament. 
 
 Ok @FanDuel, you guys are getting sketchier by the day. How do people have multi entries in a single entry app? pic.twitter.com/l8N96vGYZS  Prince Of Darkness (@TheEndIsNir) October 2, 2015 
 
 This has happened on a much smaller scale in the past but has not drawn the publicity that this instance has. This is mainly due to the players that were involved and the initial discovery on twitter. The response FanDuel has given on twitter is below. 
 
 @IamLegendDFS This was titled wrong. Apologies. All users in the contest have been emailed and given the option to join a free $100 contest.  FanDuel (@FanDuel) October 2, 2015 
 
 I also reached out to FanDuel to get some further information from them. Below is their response. 
 
 Although titled as a Single Entry contest FanDuel is stating that this was incorrectly labeled which is why users who attempted to were able to add additional entries into this contest. Frustrating for users? Yes, but it has happened before but hopefully will not continue to happen in the future. The response from FanDuel to simply throw free tickets at the players affected is the real issue. At some point DFS players need reassurances that issues will not continue to happen. I maybe in the minority and I maybe delusional but hopefully some form of regulation would actually benefit players in this way. Standards would need to be met in order to offer DFS contests and penalties would be enforced if issues like this happened. We would also have standards in place for how situations like this are handled. ||||| Much has been said about the initial piece that I wrote discussing DraftKings and FanDuel mishaps from the past week. A lot of discussion has been focused on DFS employee’s playing on other sites. To be 100% transparent this was my entire goal with the piece written about DraftKings. For a long time I have stood on the sidelines and wondered what info and data was available and to whom behind closed doors. The situation with Ethan Haskell releasing data early and also winning big on FanDuel was the scenario to get the ball rolling with this discussion. I may have focused too much on Ethan’s win and not enough on the discussion of all site employees having access to valuable information. Off the top of my head I can list four pieces of data that would be extremely valuable to all DFS players that only site employees currently have access to: 
 
 -Understanding of Player pricing algorithms and all data points that go into determining salaries 
 
 – Win/Loss records and how individual DFS players are actually performing 
 
 – Info regarding what is really winning each type of contest and the lineup construction that goes into it 
 
 – Player ownership information 
 
 The original story could have just as easily been about Matt Boccio who works in Product Operations at FanDuel. 
 
 By day Matt works at FanDuel where he does any number of activities on the product operations side. From those in the know it sounds like Matt is involved with the day to day pricing of players and the inputs that are used to determine salaries on FanDuel. Some have said he is the player pricing expert at FanDuel. By night, Matt uses his vast DFS knowledge to clean up on DraftKings under the screen name PetrGibbons. In fact, he is currently a top 50 overall DFS player by Rotogrinders rankings while only being able to play on one site. He has also amassed this ranking in the short time frame of June 16th to October 3rd. Giving almost all other grinders a 6 month headstart before beginning his winning ways on DraftKings for the year. Impressive to say the least. 
 
 The connection from Matt Boccio to PetrGibbons is easy to make but for those who are curious how the connection can be made… 
 
 Matt Boccio does not have access to player percentage data on FanDuel. I have been assured of that by FanDuel representatives. Matt also has done nothing wrong to cause any sort of red flags with regards to his day to day activities at FanDuel. In fact, from all reports Matt is a model employee at FanDuel who works very hard at his job. The issue that I am raising is if his knowledge and access of player pricing gives him a distinct edge when he plays at DraftKings. That is up for debate as to the extent of an edge this could provide to him. The major difference between Matt Boccio and Ethan Haskell is that there was no data breach Matt was at fault for. No admission of guilt or info given to the public which would have highlighted the data and information that is available to him. But the winnings that both employees have amassed over the beginning of the NFL football season are very comparable. 
 
 Now I bring up Matt Boccio only to show that this isn’t just a DraftKings issue. This is a DFS industry wide issue. Gone are the days where there was very little incentive for any employee to step outside of his own boundaries. The scary thing is that nothing appears to be in place to stop any employee from obtaining data that is not available to the every day player. That is what has to change. Something needs to be in place to police the data that DFS employees have access to or they simply should not be allowed to play DFS at other sites. 
 
 Now I do not want to turn this into a witch hunt but it is incredibly hard to have anyone care or get the discussion on employee data rolling without showing real world examples of this possibly occurring. Getting back to Ethan at DraftKings, my intent was never to call into question his win. I did make one assumption in the initial article. That assumption was that if Ethan had access to this sort of data before players locked he could easily have it before roster lock occurred on FanDuel. The whole problem and reason I wanted to bring this to light in the first place is because we have no way of proving one way or the other when Ethan had this data or even when he was capable of getting this data. And the scary part is we can never really know. We are left to take the word of DraftKings and Ethan and just believe it and move on with our lives. Again this is the case because we have absolutely no policing, absolutely no way of verifying any of the information that can be accessed by employees. Right now we are waiting on an official statement from DraftKings. So all we have to base our questions off of are the two statements that we have received so far. One of those was from Ethan initially in the Rotogrinders forum. 
 
 The other was from Cal Spears (Co Founder and CEO of Rotogrinders) as a comment on our initial post when he said he did speak to Ethan directly. 
 
 Its scary to look at Ethans initial response in the RotoGrinders forum saying that he is the only person with this data. But Cals comment on our previous article says that Ethan cannot access the database himself but he has to put in a request for a query. This would mean that at least one other DraftKings employee had to access the data and then give it to Ethan. Obviously, this would call into question Ethans original claim that he was the only person to access the data. With the story changing, red flags are already being raised as far as who has access to the data and at what point in time. And with the story changing already without an official announcement from DraftKings even taking place yet, how can we possibly believe that what we are being told is the truth? The small statements we have already been given don’t align. 
 
 Three major questions need to be answered in all of this and not just at DraftKings but at FanDuel as well. 
 
 What data do employees have access to? 
 
 When can they access this data? 
 
 Who has access to it? 
 
 Before all three of those questions can be answered and verified by some sort of governing board no DFS employee should be playing at any site. ||||| Main content is all webpages of www.oxy.edu which includes course catalog, athletics, academic and library depts., libguides and OxyScholar.
– Two big fantasy sports companies are in damage-control mode after an employee leaked vital data and won big bucks in the same week—stirring fears of corruption in a multibillion-dollar industry, the New York Times reports. Ethan Haskell, who works at DraftKings, admits he mistakenly released information about player lineups that could be used to gain the upper hand in fantasy sports games. He then managed to win $350,000 playing at the site FanDuel. Many employees at such companies also play the games, so if they have crucial data ahead of time, well, you get the idea. "The scary thing is that nothing appears to be in place to stop any employee from obtaining data that is not available to the [everyday] player," writes Ben Brown at DFS Report. "That is what has to change." (Brown also broke the story at DFS Report.) Now industry analysts and lawmakers are talking about regulating fantasy sports. "If the industry is unwilling to undertake these reforms voluntarily, it will be imposed on them involuntarily," says a sports and gambling lawyer. The companies are allowed to operate under a 2006 federal law that bans online gambling but considers fantasy games contests of skill rather than chance. Yet "if they had to justify themselves at a hearing they wouldn't be able to," says Rep. Frank Pallone Jr. of New Jersey. DraftKings and FanDuel, which told workers to stop playing games for now, say that "nothing is more important ... than the integrity of the games." There's no evidence of abuse, they add, but they still "plan to work with the entire fantasy sports industry on this specific issue." (See a breakdown of the facts at Legal Sports Report.)