How risky is an early bench boost?
There has been lots of discussion recently about playing an early bench boost and the risk associated with it. We think risk should be an important factor in your decision-making process, so we want to write about how we define it and some things we think you should consider when creating your gameweek 1 team.
Put simply: risk describes how widely your possible outcomes are spread. In
#FPL, it can be useful to separate this into absolute risk and relative risk.
Absolute risk concerns the range of scores your team could produce on its own. Correlation between players is important here: positively correlated picks, such as a goalkeeper and defender from the same team, tend to succeed or fail together and therefore increase the potential size of your swings, giving you large absolute risk. Negatively correlated picks, such as an attacker and an opposing defender, tend to offset each other because if one succeeds, the other usually fails. This reduces the potential size of your swings, so reduces your absolute risk.
Relative risk concerns how your score may move relative to any given group of managers. Selecting or captaining players with high effective ownership (EO) in this sample makes your score more closely resemble the average and reduces the chance of a large rank movement in either direction. Owning players that have low EO in the sample creates greater relative risk: strong returns can produce larger rank gains, but poor returns can leave you behind managers who backed the more popular options.
Chip usage can have a large effect on both types of risk. Using a chip in the same gameweek as most other managers will usually produce a similar score profile to those managers, decreasing your chances of gaining or losing points relative to them and therefore decreasing your relative risk. Using a chip in a different gameweek separates your outcome from theirs, creating a greater chance of a large gain or loss, increasing your relative risk. For absolute risk, the effect depends on the chip. A bench boost adds four more assets, and a triple captain concentrates a larger share of your score in one player, both widening your range of outcomes and therefore increasing your absolute risk. A free hit or wildcard doesn't add players, but by removing the usual transfer constraints it lets you dial absolute risk up or down for that week (and beyond with the wildcard) - stacking correlated assets from one or two teams to increase absolute risk, or spreading them across many teams to reduce absolute risk.
Your preferred level of risk should depend on your play style and your goals. At the start of the season, a manager aiming for an extremely high overall rank should be more open to both absolute and relative risk, as larger swings create more opportunity to separate from the field. A manager whose main goal is a solid finish may prefer lower-risk decisions that keep their score closer to the average. Extra risk is most useful when it can be added without giving up too many projected points. Choosing between two similarly-priced defenders with comparable projections, the lower-EO option costs you almost nothing in expectation but gives you far more upside if he returns - that risk is close to free. Taking a hit to bring in a differential, or benching a premium to fit one, is not free.
So what does all of this mean when it comes to the early bench boost strategy?
An early bench boost is a strong strategy. It allows you to build your squad to play the chip without having to use free transfers or carry suboptimal players for a long period of time. There is no risk of rotation from European fixtures, and it takes one important chip decision out of your planning for the rest of the first half of the season. When paired with an early wildcard, the bench boost becomes even stronger - it allows you to aggressively target advantageous fixtures and players who are only projected to score well for a short window, without having to spend transfers removing them afterwards. Caused by late World Cup returns, transfers, injuries, and the way the fixtures have fallen, there are a handful of cheap players who are excellent for a couple of gameweeks and no longer.
However, what an early bench boost doesn't give you is separation. This strategy appears to be extremely popular among engaged and analytical managers this season, while much of the wider player base is probably going to hold it for later. So, against the group you are most likely to be racing come the end of the season, playing an early bench boost is closer to the template and holding the chip becomes the differential strategy. The consequences of this difference are not just confined to one week either. An early bench boost team will look very different to a gameweek 1 team that has been set up to last for many gameweeks, so the relative risk grows over time. It should also be noted that model projections are at their most uncertain in gameweek 1 as we don't have as much data to be able to build strong opinions about teams, their systems, and the players within those systems. This uncertainty is not evenly spread, as an early bench boost squad generally reaches further down the price list into players with uncertain minutes or less Premier League experience behind them, while a squad built to last will usually lean on established, known starters whose level we can predict with more confidence. With this in mind, assets that currently look good for an early bench boost might look like mistakes in hindsight.
Ultimately, the decision of whether to play an early bench boost comes down to four questions:
- how many projected points do you think an early bench boost gains over a later one?
- how confident are you in the current projections?
- what is it worth to you to take a chip decision off your plate for the rest of the first half of the season?
- how happy are you sitting close to most engaged managers to begin the season?
Your answers to these questions will push you in different directions, and there is no arrangement of them that is obviously right. Whichever strategy you choose, we hope you choose it because you've thought about these questions, and not because everyone else is doing it.