We have got a loaded field for this week for PGA DFS heading out to Riviera Country Club for the Genesis Invitational. The top 10 golfers in the world are all present for this event, which means there is a lot to break down, a lot to discuss to get you set for your PGA DFS contest. Let's dive on in and break down this field. Welcome on into the heat check fantasy podcast powered by Number Fire. That's right here on the FanDual Podcast Network and NumberFire.com. My name is Jim Sonnis. I am a senior writer and analyst for NumberFire.com. Joined here as always by Brandon Gedula. He is the managing editor of NumberFire.com. Brandon, fantastic field on tap for this week for the Genesis Invitational. How are you doing today? I am good. It is a great field. It's a great event and I'm getting from a DFS standpoint some like major vibes because of lineup construction. We have some pretty big names at lower salaries just by default and I think that's going to lead to a lot of discussion because joining, I think, joining John Rom for just like a stone lock is Patrick Cantley with like how consistent these guys are. So like do you try to jam in John Rom and Patrick Cantley and feel like you're guaranteed for two top 15s? I mean it's one route but if you're going to do that, you're going to be glossing over a lot of names in that 10,000 range on FanDual. So I think we're going to have a lot to talk about from a construction standpoint this week. I think that saying it has a major feel is appropriate and probably the way that I'm seeing it too because like we have, I mean Scottie Schaeffler obviously just won, he's 10-9. Will's Valatoris is 10-6. We've got like legit, legit names in the mid at 10,000 range, not just the 10,000 range in general. The mid 10,000 range which means we do have a choice to make because obviously Rom, Cantley, or Cowice here, DJ is amazing at Riviera. Like we had to decide, we want to jam in two of those guys. Can we settle for one? Can we go more balanced? And it's a tough decision. We'll talk about that plenty there at the podcast for today to get you set for what should be a glorious event. But first, if you find yourself ordering DoorDash more than twice per month, if so, it's time to talk about DashPass. DashPass is a membership that offers unlimited $0 delivery fees from thousands of restaurants, grocery stores, and convenience stores. With your membership, you can save an average of four to five dollars on each order you place for delivery or pickup. Flowers, pet supplies, groceries. DoorDash has so much more than just restaurants, however, you enjoy DoorDash. Additional savings await you with unlimited $0 delivery fees with DashPass. If you're ready to save money on your DoorDash orders, use promo code FD50POT, FD50POT for 50% off your first order of $12 or more after you sign up for DashPass. That's 50% off your first DashPass order up to $15 value with promo code FD50POT. Stayed by to delivery fees, get DashPass from DoorDash today using promo code FD50POT. When you've got zero delivery fees, you're free to get more because you can. Start your free month trial today. Limited time offer through February 20th, again, the promo code there is FD50POT. Let's dive in here to the Genesis Invitational and Riviera Country Club. It is 7,322 yards in a par 71. It is an Invitational, which means it is not a huge, huge field for this week. It's 120 golfers around the field. The top 65 plus ties will make the cut after the first two rounds. It is easier to make the cut here from a percentage perspective, but also you're fighting with some 6,6 sickos at the top who are also fighting to make the cut. A lot to break down here, Brandon. Luckily, we do have a lot of history from Riviera Country Club to dive into and help us decide which golfers should grade out well here. When you look at that data, what does it say about Riviera Country Club? Well, you said this was an Invitational, which means and then you tell it off and I was just going to say that means that people forgot to tell me, which is usually my experience with invite-only events. But you're here anyway. What does that say? What does that say? Okay, so Riviera, a lot of history and I'll just start as I sort of have shaped this key stats, kind of talking a little bit more about the course rather than just distance and par. But the greens here, average 7,500 square feet, which is around 125% larger than the average PGA tour greens. So we're looking at some bigger greens, but these greens are Pella, which is a pretty rare surface, all things considered. If you look at putting splits and historically we have, and I think it's still in play this week, just be mindful not to treat everyone's putting splits on Pella the same. Maybe do something like regress them out, which sounds kind of maybe difficult, but if you just take someone, maybe say 50 rounds is the bare threat, like the threshold you want. Anyone over 50 rounds, you just look at per round. Anything below 50 rounds, just divide their total by 50, at least kind of regress that out.  You can kind of at least even that out a little bit. That's one thing that I would recommend to consider this week with the putting surface. But winning scores, I think are really interesting this week because this is right in a sweet spot with the type of event that I love. Past five winning scores, 12 under, 11 under, 14, 12 and 17 under. That 17 under did come when Dustin Johnson basically just dusted everyone and the runner-ups were 12 under. So basically we're looking at a dozen under par rather than 20 under par, 25 under, which is the lower the scores go, the more variance there is at tougher tracks, the better golfers tend to separate, which is very good for me. We've got, it's just, it's how I like to play things, it's a little less volatile. And I think there's just more value in looking at sort of that one number. And that feels a lot like, again, a major, and those tend to be, I think, where I can separate because we can look at the long term and not necessarily look at proximity from a certain range, that kind of stuff that we're trying to get into. We've got the Coyer Ruff. So I think that it's going to be a little bit, again, just more of a unique setup with Poha, Coyu. And that is historically shown an emphasis on around the green play. So there's a de-emphasis on driving accuracy and emphasis on distance. And all that kind of points me to is I want distance, I want irons, I want wedges, and I want potting. So I basically want the best golfers for this week in course history here, which we'll dig into for some specific golfers. It's actually pretty predictive this week, according to data golf. So a pretty interesting setup, not necessarily just your swing season. You want approach play, stroke scan off the tee, and you want birdie or better rate, a little bit more to it this week. And again, I think that's something I'm looking forward to. So a couple of things there. The first one is the putting. I'm going with like a weighted, weighted ranking of putting where it's like four, I think it's 45% Poha and 55% overall putting. So I get some Poha in there and get an adjustment for that, but it's still broadening the sample to include other stuff as well. So just kind of trying to balance out the lack of Poha data there via that method. As far as the other stats go, I have around the green play in mine because I just want to go for what you were talking about, where you want the good all around golfers. And I think we're probably going to need that. Also, because of the tougher event, avoiding guys, we're going to just totally bottom out, I think is important. And you can hang with guys who have few blenders in their games. I think that's for me, having the blended putting stuff. So when I say putting throughout the show, it'll be referring to that number and just making sure I have guys who can hang and have the ability to not mess up basically and give it all away if they do score well. Yeah, it's like, you know, sometimes saving par is like crucial. And that's awesome to me to watch because that's more of how I play golf rather than just putting it to three feet from 175 yards out. Yeah, so courses that are too easy are not Brandon's thing, you know. Yeah, I mean, it's got to make a challenge.  We know that they like to say that stuff. So maybe like saving par, maybe when a birdies a really good score as opposed to like expectation, that's kind of fun. I feel like I'm in the minority with like golf fans. I think a lot of people like when people just are putting for eagle all the time. But I don't know, I think a birdie on a par five and a par on a par four is more exciting than eagle birdie. But you know, another thing I didn't mention, data golf says that these are the hardest to hit fairways on tour, but it's the least penal to miss the fairway across like any shot length measured event. So we can sell out for distance this week. Love it. Fully in. Very okay with that, which means just another reason that I can indulge in Lucas later on. We'll talk about him in a bit. But first, let's go to the studs at Riviera. Guys who have done well here in the past. You have a lot of guys who've had quality history here, but I think the key one is typically Dustin Johnson. He is 11,500 for this week and DJ, you know, has struggled a bit. But going to a course where he has not struggled, what do you see with DJ, both at Riviera and recently, and how can we reconcile those two things? Yeah. So DJ's salary of 11,500, again, just kind of speaks to like the depth of this field. You know, he could be 12,000. He could be like 11,200. And I think it'd be, yeah, this makes sense. It's just that some golfers have to fall different places because that's how the salary structure works on Fandall. But DJ is pretty much dominated at Riviera since 2008. He's got 14 starts, six top four finishes, 10 top tens with two missed cuts. When he lost strokes with his combined short game in those putting, he gained in one, but lost with the around the green play in both. But this is just really an elite setup for DJ. Again, distance matters, accuracy doesn't least penal misses on, you know, I think it's 74 courses in data golf's database with that, that metric. It's, you know, that's awesome. It's a tougher setup. It just makes sense that DJ should play well here. I mean, he hasn't had a whole lot though, to get us too excited. But if you take a closer look in terms of the recent form, he's gained strokes in all three T-degree facets of the farmers, and then was eighth at the Saudi international, traveled back, playing at a course, it's familiar. DJ has been someone I've been watching. He played well to end the 2021 season. A lot of that was fueled by putting, but here's the thing, like DJ is a good putter. People, like people kind of forget that with like Rom and DJ and Bryson is like, just because they hit it far doesn't mean they're, they have bad short games. And a lot of the times I think you see any time Rom doesn't win, it's because people think he doesn't pot well. And it's like, he hits it far, but doesn't have a short game. But a DJ, I think sets up really well. It's a reasonable salary. You know, we'll talk about John Rom and Patrick Kennedy specifically, but if I couldn't start my lineups with them, I think DJ is in the conversation to be my anchor this week. So what about you? Yeah, I think that that makes sense. And too, like we were talking about how we don't have a lot of POA samples and a lot of guys, we have a large POA sample on DJ and he's electric on POA. So like from that perspective, honestly, I'd say it's a boost for him to be on this type of surface. Like you said, the numbers recently are pretty good on the stats we emphasize the most. I think there's enough there where if you told me, like you said, where you're taking away Rom and can't lay, I might not put him first, but he would be first or second, I guess is probably what I'd say. He'd be probably top three, but he's not third. I think it's probably the way that I'd be looking at that from that perspective. So I've seen enough to say he's not broken. And if DJ is not broken and going to a course where he dominates on a putting surface, he dominates, it's pretty hard for me to not be interested. Again, I think I might like one guy more. We'll talk about him later on. But I think DJ is probably top two in the non-rom, non-can't lay discussion. Yeah, I mean, if you look through the salaries, we have Rom at 12-1, can't lay at 12-1,000. And then Justin Thomas, Colin Mora-Kawa, Xander Shafley, Dustin Hedeky, Rory Hovland. If you give me the peak of all those guys, DJs is winning this thing by a few shots. As much as I love everyone else. More Kawa can do it as long as he puts well, but I'm going to have a hard time picking between the 11,000 range and not prioritizing Dustin. The only caveat would be Cameron Smith at 11-1, just because the salary is barely in the 11,000 range. So I think DJ is the first place I would look outside of Rom and can't lay. Yeah, I think he's, we'll talk about why I had someone else potentially ranked higher later on, but DJ is firmly up there as well. Let's talk about Adam Scott. He is a two-time winner of the era. He has two other runner-ups to his credit here as well, which makes Scott very worthy of discussion at $9,900. The most recent win for Scott was back in 2020. So very recent. He thesis on an approach there. He won, even without being an outlier on the greens. Other win for Scott was back in 2005, but more recently, he was runner-up in 2016. He was seventh in 2019, finished 38th last year. Scott has played three events since January 1st. He was top 10 in both the Abu Dhabi HSBC and the Dubai Desert Classic. So that high 9,000, low 10,000 range is pretty good. There are a lot of good names in that range, but I still have interest in Adam Scott here at 9-9, despite the fact there are a lot of good guys here. What about you? What's your favorite Adam Scott for this week? 9-9. 9-9? I like Scott a lot. He is going to be one of my favorite plays, honestly. Again, speaking to that major vibe, you get Adam Scott at 9-9 instead of 10-9. That speaks a lot to the depth of this field. I'm not really worried about any sort of layoffs with him because that's just how he plays golf. Again, he's not been dormant since the fall, but he's not going to be playing a lot of rounds. He has gone on record saying that there are only a few events throughout the year that really matter. He knows that this is going to be one of them because it's just such a prestigious event. His best putting surface is on Pella. I have no issues with Scott. I'm looking for ways to build around Adam Scott, honestly. Again, we're dancing around it. Rahm and Kaleir are such lock-level plays in terms of justification to be made for them. I don't want to forgo them. I don't think I can play both of them in many lineups and feel comfortable, but if I'm going to play Rahm and I just pair him with Adam Scott and I combine that salary and divide it by two, I'm going to feel good with what that number is. I think Adam Scott's under salary. He's going to be a core player for me. One of the ways you could potentially cancel out some salary or maybe even get to Rahm can't raise by going into the 7,000 range, that may seem daunting. We did a guy down there, Wyndham Clark, who is $7,900 and two really good showings of Riviera for him in his past. What do you see with Clark here at a 7,000 range salary? Wyndham Clark is going to be the key for me. I got to figure out whether I want to take the risk here. 7,900 is the salary, opens up a lot. I just did this. I think if you go Rahm can't lay Wyndham, you have 93,33 left, which is a bit low. There are plenty of names in that low 9,000 range that you can round out a lineup with though. There is some appeal, but for Clark specifically, he's finished 17th and eighth the past two years here, doing so with some big putting weeks, which isn't really what you want to look for, but he does have a 40 round sample on Poa according to fantasynational.com and he's been phenomenal on Poa with his putter. If you look at the iron play, which is basically a must for the both of us, he doesn't have it. However, he is over the past 50 rounds and he 96 percentile in this field and driving distance gained. These fairways are not, you don't have to hit the fairways here, according to the data. You can hit it far in Putwell and that's basically what he can do. There's a lot of risk because if he doesn't have the putting, he might not have the iron play or the wedge play necessarily to get him out of trouble, but there is some temptation and we're not really advocating a lot of $7,000 golfers in any events, especially ones that resemble majors that have a lot of studs in them, even at lower salaries. In the low $9,000 range, we have plenty of names. I'm considering Wyndham Clark to get me back up to another name. I don't know if I'm going to end up there, but I really wanted to cover him in a little bit more detail. Do you see enough that you would want to chase that or do you think that I'm being a little bit too cute here? I think that the overall thought process of looking at guys in the low $8,000, high $7,000 range is good. I think that there are names down there I'd be comfortable with maybe tossing out there. I think that Clark serves a bigger purpose of giving us that springboard for talking about some guys in that range. I'm not totally opposed to Mito Pereira. He is 82, kind of of a similar role where he's not potter. He's not as long like he has some distance, has some good approach play. I could see maybe checking out Mito, I think against my better judgment, I could see myself going to Aaron Wise again. I know it was really, really, really, really, really, really bad last week. It did not feel good, but hey, maybe I could see myself going there. He's 84. I'm not opposed to stuff like that. Pat Perez doesn't have a distance, but I think he's a good enough golfer where I could potentially consider him too. I think the overall thought process of there are some guys down here who are okay and I'd be okay checking out. I think that Clark fits that because he doesn't check every box, but he checks two important boxes with the distance and the putting. I think that that's enough where I'd consider him. Is he the primary guy turned to below 85? Potentially not, but I think that it's worth talking about him and considering him at least, especially given how well he's done here. Sure. Yeah, also just looking at a camp champ who we know has the distance, but he has missed all three cuts. He's been rough recently too. Again, it's something that I'm cognizant of that we don't really talk about a lot of really low salary golfers very frequently. I think Clark fits if you're willing to take on that risk in order to get. I wouldn't really do it unless I was saying I'm going to play ROM and can't lie together. I don't want to guarantee like two top 10s from those guys, but with the way that they're playing. ROM was great last week, just didn't pot well, and I think backdoor top 10s anyway. He was floating around there. I didn't see where he ended up because he had something else going on towards the end of that. What would that be? I can't catch it. Yeah, so I think that it's a great conversation to have because you're either saying I'm open to that or you're not, and then you got to figure out how balanced you're willing to go. I think it's worth it here. It's worth it to be open to it, even though it might put you in a tough spot. I think it's worth it to at least discuss it and be open to it. Let's talk here about Max Homa. He is $9,800 on the same range as Adam Scott. Didn't get juiced up as much as you might expect for a former winner at this event, but Homa won last year. He gained 3.71 true strokes per round according to data golf. He was awesome across the board. The year before that, Homa finished fifth. He was also 37 back in 2019, so three really good events for Homa at Riviera. He enters this event off a 14th at the Waste Management. He crushed it off the tee, but the overall numbers, especially around the green, are rough for his salary tier. Good course history via the win, some good recent form, but also he's in a tough tier in a very tough field. Between him and Scott, I prefer Scott by a wide margin. I like Max Homa in general a lot, but tough for me to use him above the other guys in this range. Are you higher on Homa than I am entering this week? It sounds like I am, however, that doesn't mean I can actually see myself using a lot of him because this is the range. If you go like 9.5 to 10.5, you say you could build a six-golf for lineup here and feel great about all six, I think realistically. You're not going to feel as good with any of these names as you would with the roms and cantles. If I go 9.5 to 10.5, the only golfer in my win sims with better than a 2% win chance is Sam Burns at 10.3, and for some context, Rahm and Cantlay are at about 9% give or take. Again, I'm not comparing some GM to John Rahm because it's not the same, but in terms of sheer win expectation, that win juice, you are, if you go strictly completely balanced, you're giving up a lot, which is why Rahm and Cantlay are so appealing relative to the rest of the field, even the guys right below them, like a JT. I'm probably not going to get to Homa, but it does sound like I'm a little bit higher on him than you are, but I'm fine missing out because I can root for Homa, so that's kind of a cop-up. But statistically, I think that there are better plays in this range, so I would go Adam Scott over Max Homa virtually all the time. And I think that just in general, like there are other guys here, I'd be okay, but like Taylor Gooch is 10-1, I'd probably go Gooch over Homa as well. It's a $300 gap, and that does matter a lot in this field, but I still think I'd rather get to Gooch at 10-1. Sergio Garcia is here, Tony Finau is 10,000, so I like Homa, but it's hard for me to put him above those guys, and that's not a bad thing for Homa, it's just that they're really good. And I think that's all Casey too. I don't know, man. I don't know, maybe. Maybe we'll talk about that. Yeah. I don't know. I've ridden the Casey train too many times. We'll worry at this point, but we'll see. Let's move into the current forum discussion and talk about some guys who are stroking it right now. One of those is Will Zalatoris. He checks in at $10,600, and Zalatoris is playing really good golf right now. Did it against not the best fields, but also he's playing good golf? So what do you see with Will Zalatoris at 10-6? I would say kind of the final guy before things start to fall off a bit. Yeah. So again, this is all the context you need. If you told me two weeks ago, hey, you can get Zalatoris next time he's in a field for 10-6, you're like, I'm just going to lock him in no matter what. But within his field, it's a little bit different for sure. So that's because the near win at the farmers, that's got to still be in the back of his mind a little bit, was T-6 at the American Express before that. And he lost strokes putting in each of those, but those did not have four rounds of shot link data. Although if I were willing to bet, I don't think he would have gotten over zero with extra rounds. He needs fewer rounds to get over. Reduce that sample. Yeah. You want that variance for sure, if you're putting the way that Zalatoris is. But he led the farmers in strokes game tier green. He was fifth at the American Express. We know that the ball striking is there. And now the salary again, really reasonable at 10-6 because of this field being what it is. He's in the 91st percentile and driving distance gained over the past 50 rounds. Again, that one's according to Fantasy National. He should set up well for what Riviera offers, what the challenges are. I think that it's very easy to buy into really small samples with particular golfer specifically Zalatoris because every time you see a highlight of him, he's really hitting, sticking it to the flag, whether he makes the putt is kind of its own conversation. But it feels like the fear of missing out is really great with someone who's a fantastic ball striker. But the long-term data does say that there are other better golfers around him. So I thought I'd be higher on Zalatoris because of the current form, but I don't really want to chase it from a fear of missing out standpoint. If I saw a little bit more, I'd go there. But I think that I prefer some other names right around him like Sam Burns is golfing extremely well and has been doing so for a lot longer than Zalatoris. And it can be easy to forget that. So I'm probably not going to get to Zalatoris myself. What about you? Yeah, I think that I probably will not either in part because of Sam Burns below him, but also I would say there is kind of a drop off in front of Zalatoris. I think that he is the final guy in that tier before it actually drops off. But you could also argue maybe like Schaeffler's above that, Hovland at 11-2, Kansman at 11-1, Rory's 11-3. I think we're probably going to disagree on Rory. So maybe we'll have that discussion later on. But I think that if I have a $700 gap in Zalatoris to Rory, I'm probably trying to get back up to Rory, I guess. I kind of think that that's where I wind up. And also DJ's at 11-5. That's a big difference. 900 is a big difference. But if we're talking across four golfers, it's 200 or so per golfer. And I can probably tolerate that given the gap between them. So I think there are enough red flags that Zalatoris would rather get to the other guys above him or go to like Burns below him. And this is kind of what I expected. But according to fansharesports.com, they track how active certain golfers are or all golfers are not certain. But when they're referenced and Zalatoris is currently tied for first in tags to start the week, I would imagine he'll be a little bit popular because of the salary, the super recent form. And look, it's really nitpicky. But in a field like this, we can be nitpicky. If Zalatoris were 10-6, in some of these fields we've had recently, I'm all in. I'll play 100%, even if he's 90% roster. But it's different this week. So I think we're both probably lower on Zalatoris. And part of the reason we may be lower is because we want to prioritize the top, top, top studs. So let's have that discussion now. We talked about DJ. We've talked about Rahm in passing. And you talked about Patrick Cantley, potentially putting him in the Rahm tier. So let's have that discussion right now where we're viewing Cantley. Cantley has played four events since January 1st. He has finished top 10 in all of them and has gained a minimum, minimum of 2.44 true strokes per round across each event according to data golf. If you look at the past six months, Cantley has the best true strokes gained data in the field by 0.7 strokes per round. He is one of the, one of just four golfers in the field at better than two strokes per round. He's a 3.04.  Cantley is 12,000. That's between Rahm and DJ. So is Cantley in the Rahm tier now? And how should we view those three entering this week's event? Who is the third? Sorry. DJ.  So DJ is not in this tier for me. I agree. There are, I have to convince myself that DJ is going to play at his peak. He's also just naturally more volatile than the Cantley and Rahm, which is what makes them so good. Did you talk about Cantley's history here, even? No, not spaced out. 15th, 17th, 15th, 4th, the past four years. So even though he's not long, he gains distance here generally according to data golf. So Cantley is in the Rahm tier. I don't want to go so far as to put him above Rahm, even though with my adjustments, he's 0.01 strokes per round better than Rahm over the past year now. But it's basically, I don't want to, I don't want to put too much stock into that because there is nothing wrong. We could put stock into it though, if people were like definitively skeptical of him and still in on Rahm, that there you could. Yeah, I don't think that that's going to happen though. You know what you're saying? Let me see. Okay, it's early. Cantley's got two tags. Let me just sort by salary here. Basically, what I'm getting at is like, I've got nothing against Cantley or Rahm. I don't want to overreact to John Rahm's. He's got one tag. So the consensus angle might sort of be to go a little bit heavier at like more Kawa, Zalatoris, maybe leave Rahm and Cantley a little bit less popular than they should be. I think we can say with a decent amount of confidence though that Rahm will be more popular than Cantley. He's the betting favorite. He has a higher salary. Those two things have to correlate pretty well. Maybe there's Rahm fatigue, but I doubt it. I really doubt it. There could be. I doubt it as well. But point being like Rahm, Cantley, we have two anchors. These guys have no issues in their game. I could go through and tell you how everyone at the top would miss a cut. There's really not a path to missing a cut for Rahm and Cantley. Not that they can't, not that they won't. It's not a guarantee. There's nothing in their games ever to suggest that they will struggle because every part of their game is good and it helps them. If their driver's not there, they can pot it. If the irons aren't there, they can get up and down. Everyone else has issues. So Cantley isn't that tier. I still have Rahm ranked ahead of him despite the fact that Cantley's a smidge more likely to win according to my numbers. But I think Cantley is a fantastic bet. It's a better odds though. I wish he had won last week. It would have been great because my win pick last week didn't happen. Anyway, how likely are you to have lineups that don't have either? I think the only way I could see myself having lines without them is if I go like maybe 10% with neither have 50% of each, but then having a couple overlap effectively. So that I have, I could see that being the route, but it's realistically probably just going to have at least one in every lineup. So let's say we take out Rahm and Cantley from this field and then just bump up everyone and it's JT Morikawa is the top two. And you asked me that same question. I'd be like, I'm not tied to either of those guys because I have a similar case to be made for everyone else. Rahm and Cantley are just in their own tier. I have them both above 2.35 strokes gain per round. The only one really close is Cam Smith at a 1.99 over the past year with field strength and recency adjustments. So like 0.4 strokes, 0.3 strokes per round, that adds up obviously. It's just really hard to start yourself off of Cantley and Rahm. Not to say like, hey, you got to play one of them or both of them because I think both is a little bit restrictive.  So for me personally, if I'm building 10 lineups, I'm going to have one of them in each and I can differentiate in other ways. I'd agree. Okay, let's move down to some lower salary guys, both actually at $9,200. They're starting off with Tom Hoagy, the Hoagmeister back in here once again after another impressive event, you know, top 15 for him this past week. What do you see with Hoagy at $9,200?  He's around constantly lately, second at the AmEx, cut at the Farmers, one at Pebble obviously, T14 at the WM Phoenix Open. The Irons were there and all three of us made cuts. He has 10th in data golf, true strokes gained over the past three months, but again, salary just $9,200. So great current form for a reasonable salary. He's played Riviera four times, never finished better than 39th. However, the form now is not really comparable to what he was doing at the time when he played Riviera in the past. I think that Hoagy, and I didn't see his name specifically with the buzz, but Hoagy is another candidate to be a little bit more popular than we think that he should be. And you want to sort of buy low on golfers, obviously. I don't know if the buy low window is closed because people will know what he's been doing and just play him at 92 because he opens up a lot. But you also want to put stock into like a full year of data because that's more predictive. And again, between the second and the win, there was a missed cut. He's not flawless. So I think that Hoagy is very much in the conversation. I think in a low 9,000 range, I will have a lot of decisions to be made. He's on the shortlist to be considered, obviously. But why don't you talk to me about Peters and then maybe we'll talk about this low 9,000 range in general. Yeah. So Peters is a guy we have not seen on the PGA tour, like in a PGA DFS contest in like a year, but obviously he's been playing elsewhere. And he has no other results. Specifically, he won the Abu Dhabi HSBC back in January. Pretty decent field there. A lot of guys in this field were in that field as well. Peters beat them out. He was also 12th at the Dubai Desert Classic. He was 24th at the Saudi International. Peters can go long. He's got some good giddy up. He's a good approach player. The putting has never really been stellar, but he's also just $9,200. So if we're looking down here, I feel like I can get more distance than Hogi and still get good approach play, which is kind of his major plus. So I feel like personally, Hogi is going to wind up being fourth, fifth somewhere in this range. Peters to me at least would probably be above him. What about for you? You usually have a better feel for Thomas Peters than I do. Aki, I use him more and not always in a positive sense. Well, I mean, you do have a, I think you're tuned in better with Thomas Peters specifically than I am. He's got, he's got some, some discussion around him though, much more than Tom Hogi. Our guys, Sheamus Power, Cam Trangoli in the same range have no tags right now. How does Sheamus power have no tags? This is disrespectful. So like, this is the sort of the thing, whenever you get a field like this and you have so many names, it's like, okay, Hogi is golfing really well. Peters golfing really well overseas. But then there's like Cam Trangoli, Sheamus Power, these guys with really like consistently good form. Corey Connors, I know struggled a bit last week was up and down, but you have so many names that it's really easy in this conversation to say if Peters is going to be like, you know, 14, 15% rostered, I'll just play Sheamus Power, Cam Trangoli. Sheamus Power more in a vacuum. Like you don't even tell me popularity, I would take power. So like, yeah, so this is a good conversation for super recent form. I think Hogi is the more obvious candidate just because he's doing it on the PGA tour, but you know, Peters has a somewhat comparable, you know, recent results. There's more to it than just what you've done in the past, you know, three events, because it doesn't obviously doesn't stick or else there would be no change over ever. And guys would just golf the same way that they're always that they did the past past month. So for me, I'm not out on Peters. And I say this a lot, like, I'm not out on Peters. I'm just more in on, you know, the other guys around him. Yeah, I would say power is one of this tier by a pretty wide margin for me. Um, I would say the battle for second is between Trangoli and Peters. It might be hypocritical to like put Trangoli above Hogi, given that like Trangoli also is not super long and is not as good of an approach player right now as Hogi is. But like, I just kind of like Cam Trangoli more, I guess. And maybe maybe I can use popularity as a justification for going Trangoli over Hogi. But I think that to me, it's power in a tier of his own down here, followed by probably Peters, Hogi, Trangoli, Connors all in that discussion for number two down here.  My numbers have Cam Trangoli again, with field strength and recency adjustments at a 0.97 strokes per round, Hogi at a 0.7. Again, that adds up. If you look at all golfers in the 9000 range, Trangoli is like top six there and Hogi's bottom four. So it's, it's, it's narrow. There's variance in golf, but just because Hogi's golfing better right now, it doesn't mean he's the better golfer or so. Yeah, I think the bet is important to note as well. Okay, let's dive into the bookmaker odds for the Genesis Invitational. John Rom is the favorite of Van Dool Sportsbook. He is plus 950. Patrick Cantlay is 12-1. Justin Thomas is 14-1. DJ is 15-1. Then Colin Mora-Cow is 17-1. Next tier starts with Rory McElroy at 20-1 followed by Hideki Matsuyama at 21-1. Xander Shafley, Cam Smith, both 22-1. Got Victor Hoven and Scottie Schaeffler at 27-1. And Will Zalatoris, rather than the top group here, at 29-1. So let's iron out this, this roster construction discussion here and how we want to play things. Where are you looking to go with your second golfer? So we talked about having Rom or Cantlay in each lineup. Where's your second golfer? Are you trying to have two guys in the 11,000 range or do you want to jump down to the Zalatoris type range in the 10,000 range? What are you doing for that second golfer after you get one of those top two studs? In the 11,000 range most likely, but there's a little bit of a caveat because it's just Cameron Smith at 11-1. So he's just barely there. I think Cam Smith is every bit as good as like the other golfers in that tier aside from DJ at his peak. And that's what the fear is with DJ. Let me clarify, Colin Morca was much better at his peak too, but in JT, but you know. And then Becky. Just like student attire tier. But I see like Scottie Schaffer coming off a win, Victor Hovland, you know, Brooks there. I think that Cam Smith could get forgotten about. So realistically, I can say with this, with a lot of confidence it might change, but in my head to head lineup against you this week, I'm going to start that with Rom and Cam Smith.  Sure. Cool. I'll take it. Oh boy. I just cursed Cam Smith because Jim is up 14 to seven on me on live. On these like live Jim thrown out off or something. Yeah, let me take that. Like last week, I took Hideki over Cantland. Hideki was good, but I was like, that was that was dumb to do. But Jim knows how to get me on stuff. So what's the case for Rory? Are you going to tell me that later? I'm going to get them in player picks. We'll be talking about Rory later on, but I think that Rory is doing everything well, except his approach play. And we know Rory can be a very good approach player. So he's been known to once or twice. I think that with how well everything else is going, I want to buy in on Rory because even if the approach play doesn't snap back to where it has been at any certain point, he could still be a very, very good play. And I know that there's an upside within his range of outcomes. That's kind of the thought process. Me with Rory and he's 11-3. He's like pretty low salary for how good he can be. So that's why I'm in on Rory personally. But I think in general, like having low 11,000 for my second golfer is probably where I want to go. Like, yeah, it's kind of scary to not be supering on JT, Morakawa, Xander. I'd probably be on Hideki. But I think Smith makes sense. I think that McElroy makes sense. I think that DJ makes some sense too. So I think skipping over that second tier of Xander through JT, kind of okay with that. Would you double down on Rory and give me DJ versus Rory as well? No. Why? Oh, come on. No. Also, fun with small golf samples if you look at the past three months. So four events for each of these guys. Mackenzie Hughes is a better golfer than Rory McElroy, which just is another reminder to use larger samples for the most part. You just want to throw a shot at Rory.  Get out of here. Which golfer's odds have moved since things opened up into a sportsbook? I see through you. Don't worry. DJ, 16 to 15. Colin Mora-Calas, 20 to 17. Will Zalatoris, 31 to 29. Matt Fitzpatrick, 41 to 33. Tony Finau, 45 to 41. Taylor Gwich, Mark Leishman, 55 to 50. Joaquin Neiman, 65 to 55. And someone out there, I don't know who this was, but someone got Doug Gim to move from 270 to 120. Packing up the bringstruck for Doug Gim at a distance. That's pretty sick.  Anything jump out to you? I think Mark Howe is interesting because, again, I'm low. We're okay not being in on him. And it sounds like smart money is on him. And that's a little bit scary. But also, I kind of know why I'm not as in on him. But he's not in the Brooks Mold where you just ignore the stats. The hardest sell for me with Mora-Calas is that anytime there's a course where driving distance specifically is not a prerequisite, I need to tell myself no matter what, Mora-Calas. Yeah. This is not that track. No. He's been 26 and 43rd at Genesis with fantastic irons, probably led in an approach play, but didn't pot well. Not really gaining a ton of strokes off the tee. The chipping, not really there either. So I just don't think it's the right setup for Mora-Calas. Would I be surprised if he went out in one? Absolutely not. But again, if you compare Mora-Calas to Patrick Cantley, like one guy, you have to kind of tell yourself that things will be all right. The other, you don't. Right. I'd agree with that. Other thing that's interesting is Fitzpatrick. I wasn't really interested in and I'm still not. So I'm kind of surprised his odds shortened as much as they did, given the kind of course it is. He has good history here. He's had two really good finishes recently, but was a bit surprised to see him shorten. What about the guys who have lengthened? Hideki's slight move from 20 to 21. So probably just not a whole lot of action on Hideki. Max Homa, 37 to 41. Tom Hogi, 65 to 80. So not a whole lot of people jumping in there. And then Adam Hadman, who was lingering a little bit last week, 90 to 100. That does help that maybe the narrative that Hogi will not be as popular as potentially expected, but I still think that, I like other guys in that tier more, which lower salary golfers have odds to say it out to you. Alex Noran, spreadsheet ruiner, Alexander Alex Noran, 65 to 1 at a salary of 9,000. Same for Luke List. We feel like we'll both talk about more a little bit later. Lonto Griffin is 80 to 1. Eric Van Royne, Mackenzie Hughes. The aforementioned Mackenzie Hughes. Mackenzie McElroy. I'm in Maverick, McNeely, all 90 to 1. Harold Varner, the third. Sahithi Gala, Adam Hadwin, 100 to 1. And then of course now, again, all those golfers are 87 or higher, between 87 and 9,000. And now we have Doug Gim on the list at 8,000, who's now 120 to 1. I don't get it, but whatever. That's fine. Someone smarter than me isn't on him. I am not. What's to read on Varner? Obviously had the big events at the Saudi International recently, $8,800. He's not super, super long, but he's also pretty good off the tee in general. A decent approach player. What's to read on him? Hasn't been great here when he's played it. I think once you hit 9,000, Luke List excluded, it falls off a good bit, which is, again, speaking to the depth of this field. So I want to strangely be out of the upper 8,000 range as much as I can be. I'd rather take the savings with a Jonathan Vegas personally. I like Johnny Vegas too. Let's talk about him in a bit. First, weather for this weekend, there's nothing to note. I'm just going to keep it simple. It's all good. So let's move into our player picks here for the Genesis Invitational, starting off with the stud range. Brandon, who are you targeting? That upper tier on FanDual.com. John Rom. Okay, I feel like, I don't know, maybe I'm just overthinking it, but I feel like people with other options, with Rom, sort of not really in the mix, despite being kind of in the mix. Last week, people might just forget or look at other options, or because it's such a deep field that they'll try to get a little bit more balanced and overlook Rom, but his third in strokes gained tee to green, was third tee to green last week, first off the tee, 11th in approach. He's finished 9th, 17th, and fifth the past three years here. He just didn't putt well last week. His stats are phenomenal. I'm just going to go with John Rom, number one over Cantlay. If you get the read heading into Thursday morning, that Cantlay will be far less popular than Rom, would you pivot then? Yeah, I think it's close enough. And by close enough, I mean again, I have Cantlay like a little bit ahead, which is- Don't fight the model. Don't fight the model. Yeah. Well, that, yeah, sometimes it doesn't work out for me, but I'm going to bet Cantlay for sure. I wouldn't bet Rom. I'd rather just take Cantlay at the same win odds, or same win probability at longer win odds. Yeah, makes sense. I have Rom at the top two for me in my top player pick. I would though pivot, as you said to Cantlay, if I get the read that Cantlay will be a lot more popular. The reason I prefer Rom in a vacuum and thus Rom for cash games is, just grades out really well across the board. He's John Rom. He's John Rom, 6th in the field in distance, 11th in approach to the past 50 rounds, 9th in the Poa slash overall putting blend. Finished 17th or better. Each of his tries at Riviera includes a fifth last year. So like he's not like the DJ type history, but like really freaking good and his form is absurd. So even in top field, half me to get off Rom again, the only thing that would push me over away from him would be if I get the read, he'll be a lot more popular than Cantlay, which might happen actually given the betting odds. So decent chance to go Cantlay instead. But I think in a vacuum and for cash games, I'll go Rom there. Who else do you like in this upper range? Cam Smith, 11,100. That's a really good salary for someone golfing as well as he is in 2022 in the season. He's got five top 15s, won the tournament champions, missed the cut at YLI after his win at Capalua, but that's a little bit forgettable. Honestly, just hang out in Hawaii, but was T4 at the Saudi international solo fourth at Riviera last year. He does everything well. Again, he is third and it might adjust the stroke scheme model, which accounts for recency over the past year in data golf numbers that I don't think adjust for recency, which would make sense why ROMs at 2.4, Cantlay's at 2.2, and then Smith's third at 1.9. So again, Rom's form is not quite as good current like hyper recently than Cantlay and Smith, but Smith I think is honestly like the number three and I would consider him even at a higher salary. So that's why I feel good with Cam Smith over your guy, Rory McElroy.  I think it's the same line of thinking though, where they're at the bottom end of this tier from a salary perspective, not from a quality perspective, salary perspective. I think that they're the final guys before we get that next tier drop down. And I want to get to that next tier drop. As far as Rory goes, I can be top heavy without being like too crazy from a salary perspective. McElroy started to pick things back up over the summer and he carried that into the swing season. He won the CJ cup in January. He finished 12th at the Abu Dhabi HSBC. He was third at the Dubai Desert Classic. Again, both those against pretty tough fields. The approach play in the showings wasn't always on and that is a concern, but we know we'll crush off the tee. Short game has been steadier recently than usual, which means if that approach play does snap back, his upside is really good. So I think that Rory is a good spot to buy at 11.3. And I'm very okay doing that, despite the fact, again, the approach play has not quite been there as of yet. Let's move down to the mid-range. Who are you targeting there? Adam Scott. We talked about him already. Just good form here. Putz really well on Poa. He returned to the PGA Tour last week, was 38th at the WM Phoenix Open, had two top 10s in January on the DP World Tour, which is what the European Tour used to be for anyone who doesn't know. It's now the DP World Tour. But Adam Scott, 9900 just makes a ton of sense. And the only issue honestly is if I start with Rom and Smith, I have a hard time getting back up to Adam Scott unless I am willing to go Wyndham Clark or someone else in the low 8000 range, and I might just pepper the low 9000. So I might be lower on Scott than I want to be, but it's not because of him specifically. Yeah, just roster construction may take you there. I think that Scott is good here. I also like Sergio Garcia, who's in this range at 97. Garcia, recent history Riviera is pretty bad. No top 35 finishes since the mid 2010s, but he was great here back in the day. And his form has been better recently. Garcia has three top six finishes of Riviera in his career, most recent back in 2015. So been a while, but the form, pretty good. He has finished 12th and 24th in the New Year Plant, the Dubai Desert Classic and the Saudi International. He was also seventh at the Worldwide Technology Championship over the swing season. Garcia, he's got some juice off the tee. I like him quite a bit this week at 97. Why? Why are we laughing at Sergio? Because your notes say Garcia's recent history at Riviera has been very good with their top 35 finishes since 2156. And I was like, man, that's like Sergio. He's old. He's got longevity now. He's got longevity. Sergio is never going to win. Yeah. Would you be shocked though, if we're here in 20, I mean in 2156? Like in Sergio Garcia, still like racking up top 10s and majors. Would you be surprised? I wouldn't. No, that's, I think, what made it funny. I probably would have glossed over if it weren't for for Serge himself. But yeah, I think he makes sense. He's an other to consider for me in this range. Has good distance overall ball striking, pretty good overseas results. I have nothing against them. And if I weren't so drawn to Kim Smith, maybe I say I'll skip over Smith and go rum and then just like the, those guys like Burns, who we didn't talk about probably enough, Burns, Gooch, Scott. Don't say Burns and Gooch together. It's like the two consecutive words just puts horrible visuals in my mind. I'm going to let you talk about the other guys in the mid-range who you like. Go ahead. Kim Tringale. I'm not going to have the length here, but hasn't bothered him at Riviera in the past. Nine of 10 cuts at this event with six top 26 results. He's got like, it was like seven top 30s. And like, it was like, if you made the cut off to arbitrary, he missed out like on some, some extra results. So basically just, you know, relevant here. I mean, he's been really up or down lately. T2 cut, T7 cut, T3 cut in his past six starts. So I think if we pick up the trend there, he's due for about a T4 maybe. So that's a lock for sure. And the short, the short game is really good. 95th percentile combined around the green play and putting over the past year, according to my data, with those adjustments, that should help out. So the betting odds aren't very good at 80 to one in terms of if you use those to predict because we have other golfers with better win, win odds there. But I think that might get Tringale a little bit forgotten about. And he's probably also somebody's got some DFS fatigue at this point. Yeah. And Tringale, I think the only real negative is like the length. And it's not like he's terrible there. He's not good. But like, that's fine, given how good everything else is. So I don't mind Tringale either. I think that he is pretty solid in this range. I prefer Seamus power. So let's talk about him here at the same salary 93. Possible that the collapse at Pebble Beach lingers here for him because he didn't play last week, but a little concerning, but I think the longer term sample on power is really good. He has four top 15 finishes in five events since the new year, does include a third at the Sony Open and a still solid showing at Pebble despite the collapse.  So I don't think there's a huge like risk of that Pebble Beach showing like lingering, like despite the miscut. I don't think it's a huge concern for me personally, if you disagree on that, but power is 93. I think that's too low for how good he is. What's your read on shame this week? I like him. We're probably lean. It's like a coin flip for me between power and Tringale, honestly. Power is good at like avoiding bogies and I think that's going to matter this week. He's really good tee to green. Nothing bad to say about about power. So he Tringale, like these guys can really make a wrong Smith lineup work.  Okay, I like that as well. Let's move down to the value range guys at 9,000 and lower. And let's talk about our boy, Luke List. We both have him as our first player picked out here. Yeah. So hasn't putted well here, which is not a surprise. It's basically a lock. But he's in the 86 percentile and adjusted it to green play over the past year. Just sort of mixed results at Riviera, four top 30s, two missed cuts. I think that you could do a lot worse than Luke List below 9,000. And I don't think you could really do any better. Do you know what his least bad putting surfaces? I bet it's Poa. Poa, baby. That's Luke List. But again, it's a situation where we know the distance is good. The approach is good. But also he's actually good around the green. Like that's kind of the thing we don't talk about a lot with Luke List, because like we say, short game to be all encapsulating, but in this sense, it's just the putting. It's actually just the putting. That's bad for him. He ranked sixth in stroke scheme around the green, the passage around the fantasy national sixth and distance, 19th and approach. Like you said, he's had good events at this, at this course. So I think there's enough here where at 9,000, you just kind of like use him and hope the putting is not catastrophic. It could be catastrophic like it was last week. He lost 5.9 strokes putting, but even then he still made the cut because he's so good elsewhere. So I'm still on List despite the bad putting. It's $9,000. I can't get everything. So I'll take that as being the one negative given how good everything else is. Who else do you like here in the value range? I have Maverick McNeely, 89. A name we've been talking about a lot. He's got three made cuts in January and February in as many tries, which you'll take it a value salary. One of the best Poa putters in the field and is 67th percentile and adjusted T degree in play, even with like just okay irons and wedges. Like his iron play is really what's holding him back, but putted well here, missed the cut a year ago, but he's played it. And I think that there's enough to like, it's just more a matter of really, really thinking long and hard about wanting to be down in this range too much, which I know is a little bit ironic because I was talking to Wyndham Clark, but that thousand and savings might be worth it. Dropping down to McNeely from like Seamus Power, Tringale might not be worth the trade off. Well, I think the like the thought process with Wyndham Clark is you use fewer guys down here. Like you're going lower down for using fewer guys. And I think that's kind of the appeal there, but also a similar appeal, maybe with Johnny Vegas. Vegas is $8,500 and he is rough around the green and with his putter, which makes him very risky, but we know he has a distance. That's pretty valuable. Vegas ranks fifth in distance the past 50 rounds. According to fantasy national, he is 25th in approach. Vegas wasn't the Saudi international. He finished eighth there. Good ball striking to the farmers, but finished 39th because he was pretty poor around the green, which again is something that could happen again here. It could happen, but he's $8,500. I can live with that. Again, I would also consider Aaron Wise. Again, I know didn't go well last week at all. It was actually really, really bad, but I would go there again as well. I think that to me, rather than like derping around in the high 8,000 range, rather go down to Vegas wise, maybe Clark instead. I think that that's probably the preferred route for me. Yeah. Again, there are pros and cons to both and you made a good distinction where you don't want a whole lot of value golfers in a field this tough because it's going to be harder to contend with all these names. We're pretty much guaranteed a leaderboard on Sunday that looks like a major and you really have to balance what that is. But if you're saying I need one guy to finish top 20 rather than two or three to finish top 25, top 20, something like that, that's a worthwhile trade-off sometimes. Yeah. I think that's the way I'm doing it for this week. Okay. Let's finish up with our win picks here. Again, Patrick Cantlay couldn't quite seal the deal last week for me as my win pick. We're going based on the odds over at FanDuel Sportsbook as of right now. Anyone standing out to you at first glance? Cam Smith, 22. Yep. That was the lock of the century. And so I was going to pull a gym. You're talking about someone we have not discussed? Well, I think that I don't like him as much from a DFS standpoint. His betting odds were 27, they're not 24. That's Victor Hovland. I still think that's a little bit. There's some value there. But honestly, I might, because I see enough value in my betting model, go with Patrick Cantlay, even at 12-1. Okay. So definitively, Cantlay? I think it's going to be Cantlay 12-1, Cam Smith 22-1. Okay. I would have considered Hovland at 24. And if, I would have considered Taylor Gugge 50-1, but I don't really want to go long shots this week. Yeah. That's kind of the hang up I have too, because I'd be okay considering Sheamus again. It's like a joke. But he's probably undervalued in the betting market, but is that going to convert to a win? Maybe not. So I want Rory, I know. Rory McRoy is 22-1 over Fandall Sportsbook, so I'll take him. For my second guy, considering Sam Burns again at 31, probably not going to do it, but like, maybe I will actually. Actually, yeah, let's just do McRoy and Burns. Let's do that. Why not? I would have considered Cantlay had you not taken him, but I just, I can overlap with you, but I don't know if I really want to necessarily. Yeah. Brooks at 31 again. Brooks is never going to show up. He's never going to show up as a betting value in my model because of the way that he plays golf, but that's one that I might just take care of. So you have Cantlay and Smith. I have McRoy and Burns as our win picks for this week. Any final thoughts for you, Brandy, before we close up shop for this week? Really go through and rank out the superstars. If you think that ramen Cantlay are just not going to get it done and you don't really want to, and you kind of want to bet against them, feel free. I think thoughts that they missed the cutter too low to fade them outright, about 15% each. But just think of, I think you can really just try to get a feel for who's not getting talked about and play those guys at the top. That's kind of how I do it with every major. Right. And this is a major-esque field, also with the way the cup breaks down too in the size of the field. So play it that way, kind of a nice little warm-up for when the events start to heat up in just a couple of weeks. So I think that that is a fair way to view things for this week. That is all that we have here for today on the PGA DFS podcast, but we of course have you covered for NBA, NHL, USC, two NASCAR podcasts this week because the duels at Daytona are coming up on Thursday. The duels podcast will be Thursday morning since qualifying is on Wednesday night. And then the Daytona 500 podcast will be on Friday as well. So hit subscribe on the Number Fire Daily Fantasy podcast feed wherever you get your podcasts. Brandy, if people have questions for you on Twitter, where can they find you there? I'm at Goodwill13, G-D-U-L-A-1-3. And I am on Twitter at Jim Sonnis, J-I-M-S-A-N-N-E-S. You can also follow the FanDuel Podcast Network at FanDuel Podcast. Big thank you to everyone for tuning in for this week. Good luck to you with your contests. We'll talk to you once again next week. This has been the Heat Check Fantasy Podcast powered by Number Fire.


In the first second, the white light is blinding, the heat immense. In the first day, fires consume the city and there's no way to fight them. Your skin is badly charred. In the first week, those hospitals that are still functioning are overwhelmed and can't treat the injured. Others who seem fine suddenly fall ill and die from radiation sickness. In the first year, radiation is seeped into the water and the soil. Crops and animals are contaminated. In 10 years, congratulations. You might not have leukemia or another cancer, but many of your friends do. You fear it will come any day. In 30 years, you look at your children wondering if you've passed on the effects of radiation. In 70 years, you're still seeing your doctor for check-ups. He says it's a miracle you're still alive. The humanitarian consequences of nuclear weapons are horrific and span generations. It's time to ban them now.


Alright Mambo Vipin Penzim Teza Majo, H.P. Mbasa, U.T.T.I.V. Nadjelango T.V. Tukona Nimrod, fashionista and influencer brand ambassador Kijana Omgini, Kijana Mbana Uza, Sera Nangarisha Wa Sani Juchini Mambo Vipin Bro Wa Sani, Elmeni Sifu, Kidovom Hey! Ah, Buda, kwaza kwaza tu meza wumaeza kupenda? Hey bro, life is a beautiful thing and experience. Nairobi? Yeah, of course, yes. But you have to take your time. How many years have we been in the streets? So many years. Yeah, I think so. Alright, welcome to the official launch of Best Box City, a place where I will get a new outfit, material, designer, top industry. May I tell us, maybe you working with a good friend to Bolo. What is the experience working with him, maybe knowing him? I've known Bolo for almost close to 10 years. We're in the semi-industry. We've struggled together to grow the industry, take it to where it is right now, whereby we're being appreciated as far as the local government is concerned. As you can see right now, the president is wearing Kenyan suits in terms of, you know, kawanda suits and all that, is promoting the brand in, you know, indirectly, in the sun. So for us to reach that point whereby even the president is promoting us as far as the Kenyan local designers is concerned, then that means that we, as Kenyan designers, we've done a good job and Bolo B spoke included. Yeah. What is the journey now? You've been in the industry for, I don't know, four or five years? No, 10 years bro. 10 years now? No, professionally. 10 years. 10 years. What is the journey? It's been ups and downs of course. There are days that you feel like quitting, but then the day all depends on how persistent you are and how bad you want to succeed. Yeah, yeah. And any challenge that you guys are facing in that the Kenyan president Bado had your notice, like Bada Jeffika Pukwa who has been succeeding again? Yeah. Um, it will take time.  You get a client that's ordered a fabric that is out of stock. So that's some of the challenges and also I don't think the president not, you know, visiting our shops is a big issue, but he himself just wearing a Kenyan brand. That's enough. That's enough. We can work with that here. Yeah. Nimrod, we've seen so many times Kenyans have been criticized when they attend events, red carpet events. Most celebs say they don't know how to dress for occasions specially. It's not like they don't know how to dress. They just don't want to work with local designers.  If you work with the local designers, you're going to look the way any other celebrity should be on the red carpet. But if you don't have a budget for an event, then you should not even call yourself a celebrity.  So take your time. Work on a stylist.  If you have all those four or five people in your team for a red carpet, that you should earn the name of a celebrity in Kenya. But if you just stand up in jeans and all that stuff, come on, come on. And being in this fashion design stuff, have you ever felt like you need to quit all this and just do something else? Of course, yes, no.  Those are the days that you feel like quitting, but then the day you wake up the next day and you're like, let's do it again. It was just a bad day in office. And any biggest Kenya celebrity who has ever just approached you and is like, can you just please be my fashion designer? Takulipana mensho. Akin takulipa. Mensho. I never do that because when Kenyan celebrities approach me, they also approach me with that respect because they know what I've given in the entertainment industry. So they never approach me with that anymore.  Kido kid. Yeah. Just to ask you, why is it hard for you to work with a celebrity? Why is it hard for you to work with a celebrity? Are you too professional? Are you too expensive? Say too expensive. They don't want to, they don't want, they can't ask, but they just being too stingy to get to appreciate class. When you want class, you have to be able to afford it, feeling it. So there's no way I can give you a suit worth 50,000, 40,000 shillings. Come on. So do you mean these upcoming celebrities or even artists, they can't even approach you just because you can't even, you know, talk with them. No, I've worked with almost all Kenyan celebrities. If you see, if you go to and see my page, I've worked with all the Hoos and the Hoosnos from politicians to, you know, newscasters to artists. These top tier artists, I've worked with almost all of them, almost all of them from South East or Brazil. I don't want to name drop many of them, but they are on my page. Just to ask this now, remember, because you've mentioned you've worked with top media personality, comedian artists in the industry. Who do you think has the sense of style of dressing? Who is the worst to you? Worst to me? Wow. That's going to be controversial. You say it. In terms of suits or general look? General look. General look. I don't know if it's because of Shiti. Shiti? Ah, come on. Thank you guys.  But one of the people Kenyan artists want to tell you, but I never pay attention to the street looks. But when it comes to suits, so many of them are poor at it. Because they don't work with stylists and designers. So they just think, since I'm a celebrity, I'll wear something people will appreciate. Come on. Work on a stylist. Get a stylist to, you know, tell you this is wrong, this is right, this is good, this is bad.  Who do you think tries? Tries as far as suits. We have so many, the people that I work with. We have Obina Jalanga, of course. Good friend. Of course, CEO of SPM Buzz. You already know who? Eddie, always dressing him up. Yeah, brother of mine. Eddie has supported me since I didn't even have a show. He believed in me. That's a good thing. He believed in me and I always appreciate him. Which color do you love? I'm a guy of bright colors. Oh, that's why you're dinnering today. Gold, pink, I like all. I just like expressing myself. Yeah, I don't have a specific color that I say I love this. We are all excited about Yeah, official launch now exclusive. Yeah, tell us what we have in store for us today. Yeah, but today, of course, definitely we just going to hype up and see a brother win, see him pop champagne and all that. I want to see him being happy for all the days and nights that he's been toiling and you know, shedding tears and sweat. We want to see what he has in store for us as far as the suit business is concerned. Can we see if definitely he's going to elevate the industry?  Is he getting it right as far as even the styling inside the interior design and all that stuff? Is it challenging the next people? That's what we've been advocating for because we want we want when you go let's introduce yourself to your wife or your wife to be to their parents and you say, I'm a fashion designer. They'll take over heart of you off their heads and be like, respect what you're doing. So we're just trying to give fashion and name in this country. We want that when a kid in Kenya is growing up in primary and high school they wish to be a fashion designer in Kenya. So we're going to sell that lifestyle for them to believe that it's possible it can be done. A message now to the promising upcoming maybe designer you are looking up to you. Don't look up to me. Be yourself have a plan have a 5 year plan or 10 year plan whatever you want to have a plan just have a plan for yourself. Don't rush don't have be under pressure since Bolo is having a luxurious shop you want to be the same it will never work out for you like that. Take your time have your own plan and it's going to work for you and also believe in yourself and pray. Very important. And any keyword that always keeps you moving keeps you motivated. Motivating myself I like telling myself I'm looking for it for myself 5 years to come. Like I want to see myself if I'll know I'll be more rich than I am right now. Amen Thank you so much. Thank you so much.


My name is Nathan Yerham. I'm a urologic oncologist at the Hackensack University Medical Center. I'm also currently the Director of Urologic Oncology as well as the Director of Urologic Research. My area of expertise involves treating tumors of the prostate, tumors of the kidney and tumors of the bladder. When a patient typically comes and sees me in the office, they're at a crossroads. They're either diagnosed with a cancer or they're looking that they're going to have a diagnosis of cancer. So it's really my goal during that time to be an advocate for them. And so I try my best to be able to tell them I'm at your side, I'm here to look after you, and I'm here to give you the best possible care that modern medicine has right now. A common question that my patients tend to ask me is, Doc, what's going to be my quality of life after the treatment? For every patient, I tell them that my goal is to not only cure their cancer, but maximize their quality of life. And so those two things come together that I try to provide for every patient that I see and evaluate.


the same parties are involved in signing it. So something is happening here and the interesting thing is this is what's happening in credentials. You're having all the alternative providers writing the same kinds of statements but writing them in different ways that may or may not affect their recognition. So what we wanted to dive into was really what this means and what we found is that we have to look into first of all the quality of the statement. So what stands behind the quality of what's written in the credential and secondly the quality of the media. And by the quality of the media you remember we defined the credential as a documented statement. So quality of the statement and quality of the document is written. And what we found is that there are five elements of quality that can apply to each tool. Distictiveness, authenticity, accessibility, exchangeability and portability. Don't worry I won't leave you with the key words. So let's talk about distinctiveness first of all. Distinctiveness is something which I'd say has been referred to quite a bit by things. So if we think of the quality of the statement what do we mean when we say the statement has to be distinctive? It means it has to represent a specific identifiable and measurable experienced skill or fact. So I have to identify the specific learning that took place and have to identify the specific person that holds that credential. Nothing particularly well shattering there. The quality of the medium means that the medium needs to allow for the storage and display of the statement as well as any and all associated. And then we already start coming to some differences. So your traditional degree was not able to hold a lot of data. So they invented a diploma cycle to go with it. Digital degree can hold a very limited amount of data if you choose to and it can even do some structured namespaces and so on. The next part we come to is authenticity. And authenticity is a big concern, big business at its institutions. And what we're talking about authenticity is basically is the certificate secure and is the certificate verifiable. When you break down those concepts though it means that the statement needs to contain enough information to verify first of all when, where and by whom it was issued. Because if you know where, when and by whom it was issued then you can go back and say verify that the transaction took place at that time. You also want to be able ideally to trace and reproduce the conditions under which it was issued. What do we mean by this? The typical example is in these scandals we'll be hearing around Europe about various ministers who plagiarized their degrees. When there is a claim about it the evidence still exists. You can go back, you can actually check that degree again and you can reproduce the process that leads to the issue of the credential. So because the evidence was there we could continue to verify the authenticity even of the process. And there should be a time limit. You should have the ability to issue the credential for a limited time. This is typical with professional certifications for example and just as an example of the degree it should be possible to revoke it if for some reason it is invalid. Now if you look in the medium there are quality aspects of the medium that allow it to move. First of all it should only allow an issuer to create a certificate. Now there's all sorts of tricks that have been used for that over the years. I mean special types of papers, special seals, special stamps. In digital it's easy to just use a PKI key which only the issuer has and that way only the issuer can issue a certain type of credential. It should ideally be tamper proof and edit proof. It's arguable whether anything is truly tamper proof but the higher the more tamper proof it is the better quality it has. You should be able to store or link to the information required to verify all of this preferably automatically. And this is an important one for usability. For the media the medium itself should be able to display its validity. So if I have you know one of the typical security paper holographic whatever whatever degrees if I try to edit that it's going to be immediately visible that I've tried to mess with it. If I do the same on a digital document if it fails any of the validation checks or if some of these tried to tamper with the ideal issue or the medium itself should be able to give me a big red mark that this is invalid. If I'm able to do that the credential is in itself more valuable. Accessibility is something which is straightforward widely spoken language in terms of the statement or easy to read graphical format, open badges philosophy. In terms of the medium interoperable medium and a widely used and or open format. Now the interesting thing about paper for example is that paper is 100% interoperable everywhere except paper. But on the other hand the white leaves an open format that depends on how you're at it. On the other hand if you look digital interoperability is more of a challenge because just you have one doesn't mean somebody else can read it. So even those digital can make things a lot more automated. They doesn't necessarily make it more interoperable. Exchangeability is a big one. A lot of effort has been put into ECTS, modules, so on and so forth. And when we looked at it from a quality perspective, an argument was that if you build a credential to be modular and modular means you can divide it into smaller parts or you can put smaller parts together to make bigger ones. The more modular it is, then you have to find different ways for different purposes, which means you can use the same credential for more use cases. And if the purpose is recognition, you remember the equation at the beginning, then it also instantly becomes higher quality. So in terms of quality of the statement, we talk about being one dealer and we also say that you should convert to a whole range of other types of credentials. Typical example here, you can convert 180 ECTS into a degree. You have 180 credentials of one type and you've converted them into one of another type. It increases usability. For the medium, this means ideally you should be able to create relational links by the medium. In paper, that might be just putting all your credits on the file. Digitally, you can do it better here probably. And it means that it should, the tech, should allow you to do this conversion process. And finally, portability. Now, we are using portability a little bit different than, say, the bottleneck. By portability, we literally need to put it in your pocket to carry it around. Quality of the statement is the statement document owned by you. You will know GDPR, your own, your personal data, et cetera, et cetera. But there are still universities in Europe who they keep the only original copy of your certificate and they will only give you certified copies. So are you holding in control of your data or aren't you? And I think we can all agree that your grades are as personally identifiable as it gets. Quality of the medium, it means that the medium should allow for the user to physically possess the credential in a place of their choosing. So the quality element, again, if you get it on paper and see if you have it, you can store it in your safe or under your bed or put it on your wall or whatever. Digital, though, if I only make your credential available in my university cloud and you're not allowed to download it, then am I really physically possessing my credential? And also, from a usability perspective, as the shareability might be. You put all of this together and you get an idea of, let's say, the complexity of credentials. And all of this is not just clear at the core of the problem. So what we taught you about, we can control quality principles and criteria. Quality principles and criteria can be used to build standards. And once you have those, then it makes sense to actually start building tech for this. In terms of why are we so interested in tech, it's very simple. The EU is building it right now. So part of the digital education plan is actually an European framework for digital credentials. And it's very easy to say, we're going to build a framework for digital-ficy credentials. But our postulation is that that framework will have to take this level of complexity into account to actually serve the real purposes that are needed by education. And the other thing is that if you look at all of this, a lot of you are going to be saying, my university has said probably most of the things we said in the statement. And at least half of the stuff we talked about quality of the medium. Why are you talking about this? Why do you need this? And the answer I would give you is, this isn't so much for the university, but it's for all the alternative potential providers. One of the stories we talked about, for example, modularity. MOOCs started as completely non-formal, no certificates of any kind, etc. And they slowly gained more and more of these quality criteria. They got more formal assessments, they got more formal certificates, they got identity verification before you do the exam. They've now started doing nano degrees where they modularized them. And so somehow they're actually building onto this and enhancing the quality of the criteria that attached to it. Such as some extent, we're hoping that this will form the framework of a roadmap of where we want to go, both in terms of standards and in terms of the tech. So I'll stop there for the moment. And first of all, do you have any questions? I'd be happy to answer any questions. And then afterwards, we have a little bit of work to make to help you understand the concepts. When you're talking about availability, we often, we are users of the platforms where we put some credentials like digital badges, so we depend on them. Sometimes they do not work like open badges, you know, so we can preview and have a badge or something. So how to make it happen that we do not depend so much on the platforms because they can be here today and not tomorrow. What can we do with our credentials? Well, I have a whole bunch of answers for you, depending on who you ask. We'll look at what approach for it this afternoon before we're filming ourselves. But if you look at the landscape, GDPR tells you you have to now include export of all your data. So all these platforms basically have to buy your, I know certainly they have to do it, but by your vision, they basically go and download all of them. Secondly, when we talk about portability of credentials, you can think of something as a digitally signed PDF, a digitally signed PDF has the verification and security inbuilt into the document itself and is self-verifiable. If you want to look at some fancy solutions people are doing, there are people, there are these three different companies who are actually doing this on the watchdog so that you can have like independently verifiable decentralized blockchain credential networks. So there is a few ways to do it, but it isn't very useful for if you're a company because honestly, I don't need a online platform to store my credentials and send them to my employer. As soon as you take this away from them, it really misses their business model. Further questions? OK, so if not, we are actually going to ask you to try and use some of these concepts. We have two basic questions for four or three different types of credentials. What are the quality features a typical credential already has in this area? And how could the quality of such credentials be improved? So the idea is that we are going to ask you to use the framework to first of all look at a bachelor's degree from a European university that's made up of credits and awarded by a paper certificate. Is this a quality credential? Is it not? How quality is it? And most importantly, what are the deficiencies of such a credential and how can we make it better? Question one? Question two, and the ideas will ask just three groups to spend about 10 minutes on each case. Case two, a MOOC certificate awarded by the Red Cross, and which is issued as an over batch. Again, what is the quality of such a certificate? And how can we improve this quality? And the third one, a MicroMasters issued by a US university and the credential is issued as let's say a signed scant document. But it's like has been written, it's been signed and it's scant due. And what we're looking at is both the quality of the statements in these and the quality of the meetings. Unfortunately, printing has been challenging this bit. So we're going to have to ask you to refer to the screen for the quality. So I just take a minute to remember the cases. I would, yes, write the cases here as well then, but we'll just do three groups. Case one, the university bachelor's degree on this side, the Red Cross certificate that's what it does imagine the middle, and we will do the MicroMasters by US university on the left. You don't have to stay at the table, you are. This might be a bit small to read, but we put all the quality criteria on one grid on the screen since we couldn't find printing for you. So that you could hopefully work with it here. I appreciate it's no idea, but thank you for the patience on that. And we'll give you 10 to 15 minutes and then I'll ask you back for each group, somebody to present how you think each of these three credential types could be improved and whether let's say this quality matrix gives you an idea of the strengths and weaknesses of these different credential types. Does that sound reasonable? Yes. Then to work with us and I would like to


So today I wanna talk about an experience that I had with the person that came to us and it's a very, very weird story that you guys need to share. Ah, okay, so he said, hi, I have Senior AdSense AdLimit Innovality Click Protector WordPress plugin would like to know more about. So one of my customer support texted, hello, he's sent the plugin link and said, what do you wanna know? He said, I have seen that but still confused, okay? He asked, what confused do you have? Every time I buy traffic from Facebook three to four days I get AdLimit, that's 100% sure, will this plugin save me from that? So one of my customer support said, yes, are you 100% positive about that? We again said, yes, okay, great. If you're interested, visit our page to buy it, okay? Second question, in these days, AdSense is deducting money from account in form of invalid clicks, will this save that also? So one of the things that you have to understand AdSense can do anything to your account.   So you're looking at like a huge problem that's gonna create if you get banned in AdSense. So just to make sure that you follow the AdSense rules. All right, so my support said, okay, I'm gonna talk with Mr. Iftaker, which is me, and he said, and I'll get back to him. So after that, he sent me a screenshot where it's showing that the Google deducted $955 from his account because of invalid clicks. I'm curious to know if your plugin can help me with this kind of circumstances. So I came and I said, hey, it's me. So I asked him a couple of questions, which I usually do to understand his business. So he said, Facebook is the sources of pages for traffic. So most of the people in Facebook pages and groups are his traffic sources and his click-through rate is below 15%, which I would say is a lot. A good click-through rate is around five to 10%, maybe at highest, maybe at highest, like 11% or something, but 15% is a lot. And then I always ask, what is the country of origin of your traffic? He said India, so that means it's a lot of bot traffic or he is maybe paying somebody to click on his ad. So I said, is it okay if you block Indian traffic? Because in our plugin, we have a feature. It's kind of like, you still get the traffic, but your ad is not going to show to that specific country. You can block India, Bangladesh or Nepal or Sri Lanka, whatever you want. So this is kind of like a big feature that we have on our plugin, blocking specific countries. And then I asked, are you paying someone to click on the ad? He said, nope, they're driven by articles or two groups, okay, understandable. So I asked him, can I see your website? Because I need to understand what the whole business actually is. He actually didn't send me, he sent me a really weird website that has nothing to do with it. So I asked him again, if you can show me your website politely, I can understand, sometimes you don't even need our plugin. Sometimes it's just the way you position your ads on the page can cause a lot of problems, can cause a lot of invalid clicks. So I was just trying to help him as much as I can. He was like, he didn't give a damn what I was saying he kept rambling about these and that. He said this, I'm not seeking your help mate. I'm here to ask you some questions about your product. Okay, so basically you're asking for my help. My help is my product. So I was like, I gave up, there is no, we are kind of like going back and forth. It's not going anywhere. I was like, okay, we don't sell our product to everyone. So I became very clear. First, we see if we can help you with your business and then we move forward. You have to understand adsense is a very critical and like most sophisticated software that Google has. Any type of thing, this and there, that client can lose the whole account. So we need to make sure that we can help you before anything like moving forward. So it was like, if you will do it, you will get to know that Google detect $955. Again, same rambling.  And he's like, no, no, I'm not doing anything like that. It's just a normal article website. I was like, okay, okay, okay. And then I told him, the most I can do is you can download our plugin. It's $20 a month for a 20 bucks. Check it out if it works, great. If it doesn't work, we go our separate path. A simple as that. Because he is not giving me anything to work on. You have to understand, this guy is making like $1,000 or $1,200 a month. I have clients who are making $30,000 a month. Even like my website, which is one of the top websites in the state of Florida, it's currently valued at around $1.2 million, the whole brand. So to reach that term, terms of level, we are doing a lot of business with that sense, to be honest. And then one last question that's really funny. How your product is different from AICP? And at that moment I got mad. Like dude, you're just wasting our time. We are talking with so many other clients and it just doesn't make any sense. We're like, we are a business, I said.  So that's like, they claim the same things, preventing fake clicks and bots. Dude, I understand your question. What your concern is about, if our plugin can help you with your invalid clicks so that Google doesn't take away your money. That's it, right? In order to do that, just use the plugin, it's like $20 a month. Or worse, it's like only you, do you just pay the first month, we just $20? And I was like, okay, and then this is very crazy. And this, the conversation went downhill from here. He said, how many website can I use with one month plugin? I asked him, how many do you have? He said he has more than 10 websites, okay? So I told him, our plugin is per site per license. So he asked again, $20 for one site and one month also, yes. And he was like, never mind, thanks for your time. I said, sure, good luck. So I then, at the end, after a long time I sent him a text, listen. Good morning. Let me know if you are still interested in our plugin. He said, I am like, okay, if I buy this, in how many, he is kind of hovering around, like the mentality of most of the ads and publishers that we face, especially from India and Pakistan, is like, they wanna get everything for free. Well, why? It just doesn't make any sense. Like, if you think about getting anything for free, you're literally shooting on your foot.  Like, let's say you wanna create a restaurant, right?  And if I, you know, make successful, I will give you the money back. It just doesn't make any sense.  I don't understand their logic. So you're literally risking $1,000 of your money, so you don't wanna pay me $20. Come on. Like, if you have that kind of mindset, I would advise you, like, to do job, not to come in the business, don't try to be an entrepreneur, because entrepreneur is a very hard, very complicated process. And I know lots of people from East Asian countries like India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, they worked so hard and they actually, you know, reach to the success of their life.  Being a cheapskate has nothing to do with your business or anything. Just, you know, just try to focus and understand the whole spectrum of the business. And those you guys who don't know, we have a plugin special for AdSense AdLimit. It will help your AdSense account from invalid clicks, bot traffic, and all the other clicks that you guys face. It's only $20 a month. It's basically a slice of pizza. And you can have so many features and stuff. If you buy a yearly, we will give you 20% off, which is $200 only. And we have so many custom reviews, many, you know, companies using us. And yeah, that's pretty much it. I hope to see you guys again and God bless.


rs was my toughness is over 3 million. Oh Wow, you have higher toughness and I've got 2.5. What's your recovery? 142,000 oh mine's 2000 or 277,000 Okay, you're probably you're probably rocking a lot more damage than I am I Have 250,000. Yeah, I'm only at a hundred and thirty-three, but I'm also creating a lot Like I've got a lot of gear here that Increases the chance the likelihood and the damage of crits E-men said 80 asks is Diablo a good game. Well, we just spent 12 hours playing it Yeah, this has been a 12-hour live stream of us testing the game And I think we can all say Anthony I have something you may want. Oh, okay. Check out these gloves They decreased my damage a little bit, but they've got nice survivability with their life per hit Yeah, I think I'll start using those instead at 2 million gold. That's insane I had a crap ton, but I trained my jeweler and my My artisans as much as possible and I also bought some extra inventory space for my stash Now I'm broke Pretty much same here. I've maxed out everything But yeah, it's really broke Now let me ask you this as far as the artisans and all that is that her character? Like leveling those up or is that per? user Gotcha Cool So now we're we're to 70 what do we do now sleep? Basically Do you stack the reduced cooldown on all skills like how how do you prioritize that? Because I really like the reduced cooldown because that seven-sided strike is my DPS and I want to get it down as much as possible so I can use it as often as possible It's also in vulnerability while it goes on for three seconds. So it's a good get out of Trouble quick. Oh, wow. I just got a message from Gabriel's ahead of MGM Brazil and Brazil beat and He wants me to try This city in Metro or this restaurant in Metro Manila and get back to him. Let him know if if I like it. I Think he might be asking that for a reason. Oh, no Just a theory very cool. Very cool. So I think we might want to wrap up the Stream it's a good idea. So how do you want to do this? Should we give maybe people five minutes to ask George any question they want? Since they've been very loyal and then sat three with us, of course All right guys, you got five minutes. Give us your best possible questions for George This comes about each one's channel rather than getting bored. It's a good idea George you're gonna play GTA 5 Probably not that's another big time sink that I sadly don't have Jordan your favorite color blue ocean blue What do you think of Norwegians? No opinion Someone wants to know if you if they can ask for you to subscribe to them. Nope I Don't stream often very rarely squids How do you respond to the haters? I hug the trolls And they is What's your position on cake? It's good. I like it I don't play move as never did probably won't don't know why they don't appeal to me I believe wow is better than low but That's obviously a personal opinion and I'm not gonna play Minecraft, but I do have a Minecraft account Thank You Batchy B. You rock too. I've never played CS go Favorite console. I don't have one because I never owned one. I had to pick I would say Xbox romantic trist sorry That's right. You need to put in the effort we provide the tools and the training But it's up to you to do the work work next idea for a heartbeat That's a surprise Never played a venture quest for a green Indian railways. I doubt I'll play Terraria or dig or die What is that on stream? Digger dies on a new game You are you forgot to give your opinion on that Maybe potentially no bananas. Just kidding My opinion on bananas, I think yeah, what do I know about bananas? I don't eat bananas actually bananas are good Okay, I The tree falls to the ground no one is around to hear it doesn't still make a sound of course Another addictive game believe me if another network wants to join freedom, of course, they're welcome We are happy to welcome any network powered by freedom Yes, we're still alive ultra-draft just barely Like cake your locals George would you ever eat a ghost pepper? Don't know what that is So the answer is no Favorite YouTube I Think he needs favorite YouTube video Don't really have a favorite YouTube video There's a lot of good videos out there I've been to Singapore. Yes Only for a few days. All right guys, it's 9 23 p.m. local time. We've been here almost 12 hours and I'll see you next time Bye guys, take care It's someone gonna hit the stop button