There's a discrepancy between SCGold breakevens and our breakevens here on TooSerious. It's one of the most often reported 'bugs' which is actually a feature.

This is the formula you see everywhere to explain how the breakeven number is derived.

((Price/5350) * 3) - Their last two scores.

So, we can run that through with Ablett last week to determine the breakeven from SCGold.

((681200/5350) * 3) - 131 - 112 = 139.

All good and fine.

BUT. Last week, Ablett scored a 160, 21 points above his SCGold predicted breakeven yet what did his salary do? It went DOWN $1,100. (You can see it on Abletts score chart here- He scored well above his 'Break even score'.

For the record, you can check out the TS prediction for Ablett last week here. A 165. Not too shabby, hey?

So why does TooSerious get it so right, and why does SCGold get it wrong?

Well, it all comes down to one important fact. In each individual week, the total salary of every player adds up to the exact same figure. Take a minute to think about that.

In a perfect world, where everybody was getting their averages, the above model would work a treat.

The problem is, that doesn't happen. AFL isn't a static game where week after week, players score their average otherwise this fantasy football lark would be easy.

What tends to happen is that rookies or mid priced players having a breakout year get better. They munch up more of the score and salary movements. You also have players who scored highly last year, who haven't played yet this year, further skewing the results of the total player salary pool.

It's all about educated guesses but SuperCoach Gold doesn't try to account for this variable at all which is why you see fairly innacurate breakevens which can mess with your team planning.

So what do we do here at TS?

Well, over the years, we've watched and refined our model to adjust for that discrepancy. We provide you extremely accurate breakevens, and can guarantee that a player scoring 21 points above their breakeven won't go down in price!