Okay welcome to this new series that we're doing on Marxist Philosophy. The way this is going to work is it's going to be a series of talks about 15, 20 minutes long throughout the weeks which will go through all of the key aspects of Marxist Philosophy. The different key concepts, the different logical ideas and the arguments to back up Marxist Philosophy. And if you watch all of these videos you should come away with quite a good understanding of Marxist Philosophy as a whole and how we use it to explain the world around us. Now why do we discuss philosophy as Marxists? Some people find this to be a bit of a luxury and shouldn't we instead be going out onto the streets and campaigning for higher wages or you know fighting with fascists or something like that. But obviously we do those things as well that the two are not mutually exclusive. But it is essential to be absolutely clear about our philosophical ideas because we're fighting to change the world fundamentally, not just to improve things a bit, to end this or that problem, but to liberate humanity ultimately from inequality, injustice, oppression etc. And that requires that our worldview is as thorough, as deep, as thorough, as realistic if you like and as long-term as possible. So not a view which is sort of seduced by short-term you know solutions by prejudices or anything else like any kind of illusion basically. And our goals are far more ambitious than you know any other political movement in history really. So therefore of course we need to have, and everyone has a philosophy, not least any political movement obviously has a philosophy and we have to be absolutely clear about what ours is. So today's session is going to be an introduction and especially going to be focusing on materialism which we'll also go into in more detail next week. But yeah so Marxism is a materialist philosophy, thoroughly materialist, unambiguously materialist. And that means that we think that matter exists independently of the mind. Okay so there's there is only one reality and that is the material reality, which of course many people accept in one form or another and most people's daily life obviously that's the assumption. But for us this means that there is no other reality, there is no world, no spiritual realm, you know there is no God or anything like that. And it also means that for us not only is the mind dependent on the material world if you like, but also that the material world is not dependent on the mind and that's important to state. In other words the material world existed prior to the existence of thinking beings, in other words humans, which again seems obvious to state. And yet in philosophy this is not necessarily the most predominant view. In fact I would say that in the history of philosophy the most prevailing outlook is idealism which is the opposite of materialism. And that is the outlook essentially that in one way or another, because there's many kinds of idealism, but that is the outlook that ideas or thoughts are somehow independent of material reality or at the very least that material reality cannot be independent of thoughts. So perception almost makes the world essentially. Without perception, without something to perceive the world, the world could not exist. And one so cliched and very famous example of this is the question of whether or not if a tree falls over in the woods and nobody is there to hear it, does it really make a sound? Well Marxist and materialist would answer unequivocally, yes of course it makes a sound. It just means that nobody happens to experience that sound. It still of course happens. If that sound didn't happen then how on earth could somebody experience it if they were there? And so yeah idealism is actually really the dominant philosophy in the history of philosophy as I said there's many kinds of it. And that might seem weird like it's you know it seems obvious that the material world exists independently of us so why is idealism in its various forms so predominant? I would say there's really two main reasons for this. The first I think is the abstract character of thought itself. What is it to think? Well to think is really to generalise and to make abstractions. So if you have an idea of something then that means that you have generalised it.  But the idea of it kind of embraces all chairs and that's what it is to have an idea of it being a chair otherwise it's just a purely individual object that happens to be in front of you. That's what thinking is it's generalisation and it's an abstraction if you like. Which is an enormously powerful thing of course but there is a kind of a danger of this which is that through abstracting and generalising the abstraction can come to seem almost independent of or even greater than the thing that it is abstracting from. In other words you know our ideas such as our idea of a circle seems almost more perfect and for some philosophers more true than the imperfect circles that we actually find in the material world. And I would say the other reason for the predominance of idealism is the existence of class society and exploitation inequality. Once you have class society that is a layer of society, a privileged layer that doesn't have to work physically. In fact it doesn't necessarily have to work at all. It lives off the work of others. You know this layer of the if you like the leisure class, the ruling class that is of course deals more in ideas and is more highly educated throughout history and therefore it's natural if you like that such a class would justify its existence by elevating ideas in the world of ideas above that of you know the grubby world, the dirty and imperfect world of manual labour, you know generally the struggle for survival. And so the outlook of professional philosophers throughout history has tended to have this kind of elitism if you like it and I think that is expressed in idealism. Now materialism was not discovered for the first time by Marx and Engels. There were many materialists before them. The first philosophers in fact were materialists the first ancient Greek philosophers that is people who specifically dedicated themselves to philosophy such as Thales or Anaximander or Heraclitus. These people were essentially materialists. They attempted to explain the world only through the world itself, through natural forces alone. They didn't resort to spiritual forces or gods in any way. Of course their ideas today in some respects are very outdated, although in many respects they are extraordinarily ahead of their time with some brilliant insights. And this reflected, this layer of philosophers I think reflected the development of ancient Greek society at the time and the development of commerce basically and he had a class that was a very worldly class dealing in mathematics and you know developing the world and with a sort of highly educated essentially and I think that such people tended towards materialism and I'd like to draw your attention to this quotation from Engels that I think sums up this this outlook really this early materialist outlook where he says that when we consider and reflect upon nature at large or the history of mankind or our own intellectual activity at first we see the picture of an endless entanglement of relations and reactions in which nothing remains what, where and as it was, but everything moves, changes, comes into being and passes away. This primitive naive but intrinsically correct conception of the world is that of ancient Greek philosophy and was first clearly formulated by Heraclitus. Everything is and is not, for everything is fluid, is constantly changing, coming into being and passing away. Now that this conception was essentially this outlook this sort of essentially correct but perhaps rather sort of abstract outlook or was really the outlook of the first ancient Greek philosophy and as I said it was a materialist outlook and it's one that I think Marxist philosophers still draw inspiration from today. However following that philosophy moved in a strongly idealist direction. He had the most famous philosophers such as Plato that were very much idealists reacted against this this early materialism and there are various reasons for this and I don't want to denigrate Plato's ideas because he was a brilliant philosopher but one I think reason for this kind of idealism and I think this explains a lot of as I said the trend of idealism in history is a kind of a prejudice really against against work and against against ordinary people. For example Plato was just referring to the world of work and people who laboured he said it's meaning work accustoms a man's mind to low ideas and absorbs him in the pursuit of the mere means of life and his outlook was essentially that basically the mind is to the body or the material world as the master is to the slave you know the educated person to the uneducated person and you can see how these people again going back to what I said before that's how they looked at the world as the kind of the material world rather than the world of work as beneath them essentially whereas those who understood ideas and theories were of course higher people and therefore naturally the world of ideas was a higher world that's really essentially was their outlook and throughout the history philosophy there has also been a prejudice I think in which matter is seen as sort of inert without any animating force and essentially meaningless and nearly there for mind to order it if you like. So for example Kant who's skipping much further ahead and much later philosopher also a different kind of idealist but essentially an idealist or at least somebody who straddled idealism and materialism but I would I would say was essentially an idealist in the critique of judgment he says the following the possibility of living matter cannot even be thought its concept involves a contradiction because lifelessness inertia constitutes the essential character of matter and so for most philosophers it is thought consciousness that is the driving force that molds the world that gives it purpose shape form etc. and shorn of consciousness the material world is just chaos meaningless chaos essentially that's that's really the outlook of most philosophers throughout history in one in one form or another. However materialism did come back into fashion before Marx and Engels came into being in the with really with the bourgeois revolution and the Enlightenment the scientific revolution and these the philosophers of this era had kind of resuscitated materialism and that wasn't an accident they reflected the the the revolutionary development of bourgeois society and a new class that was confident and believed in science and the ability to explain the world around them and wanted to get rid of the prejudices and dogmas of religion which obviously had previously dominated what was feudal society and this was a huge step forward and really laid the basis for the ideas of Marx and Engels and they made many brilliant discoveries. However there was a limitation to this materialism and it's what we refer to as mechanical materialism. It was how would we put it a kind of passive materialism in which it's almost like they went to the opposite extreme in a one sided manner. Whereas the idealist emphasised that mind shapes matter and matter is completely inert. These materialists tended to go a little bit far in the other direction. They in their keenness and fundamentally get a correct idea this is their keenness to describe that the fact that humans are moulded by the matter of the world around them they're conditioned by society and material forces which of course we agree with but in their keenness they perhaps overstressed that and tended to describe consciousness as completely inert essentially and it's just just a sort of passive reflection of the material world. And Marx criticised this in his famous Theses on Feuerbach where he explains that well yes of course humans are taught or conditioned by the material world and by other people but then who teaches the people that teach them and what Marx is getting at is that is that the trouble with this kind of mechanical materialism in which the world was described as in a rather simplistic way in which you know one force just sort of smashes into another and the inner impulse of the of the material world is not really described. For example the ideas of Newton you know describing very well and in a revolutionary way the laws of you know the movement of planets for example in the solar system this was of course a revolutionary development. However the whole thing was rather simplistic in a sense a very linear kind of system which ultimately required an external mover to make it to you know to give movement to the system as a whole. So once the system once the solar system is moving then of course it all works perfectly the laws that he that he discovered perfectly describe how the planets move. But why they started moving is inexplicable from this point of view there's no inner impulse if you see what I mean. And therefore it required God essentially this philosophy required God's or some initial mover to set the whole thing in motion. And this really I think was the general problem of this kind of philosophy this this this mechanical materialism that it went so far in describing the world but the science was still at a very limited level of course it was a new discipline really. And it was only so much that it could describe and as a result it tended to fall back into idealist explanations for things. Similarly if you think about this this stressing that human thoughts is conditioned by the material world but doesn't necessarily condition the world back in other words is very very passive. The trouble with that is it assumes that the human mind actually is not part of the material world and is only pushed and pulled by it but doesn't exert any force back. Of course a revolutionary Marxist position would explain that well actually humans are part of nature as well we are only natural beings as well and we inhabit the natural world so whilst the natural world exerts an enormously powerful influence over our lives obviously we have to as natural beings we have to feed ourselves we have to eat we have to to house ourselves you know we have to struggle just to survive. This is absolutely this is the way to look at humanity. But what flows from that is that we are also part of that material world and in turn can and must change it therefore it's a little one-sided just to say that we are influenced by the world as if we don't change the world ourselves and indeed this is the revolution of Marxist philosophy of dialectical materialism because it explains that we change the world and that it's in changing the world that we change ourselves and that is really the secret to human development. So to kind of to sum up this introduction to materialism Marx and Engels took materialism further took it forward by by showing that really that the material world is an active force and that humanity is also an active force and is not outside of the material world or some sort of spiritual thing but is part of the material world and the way in which we we labor and you know put our ideas into practice if you like or put our desires into practice and change the world defines who we are and develops developed society and with it history and so for the first time in philosophy a realistic picture of humanity and of human society was developed by Marx and Engels. Marx describes how again in the thesis from in on Foybach that humanity or that human nature doesn't exist sort of in an ahistorical character you know outside of the natural world in each person like in their soul or something human nature is merely the ensemble as he says of social relations it is the product it doesn't reside in any one person fully but it's the product of all of humanity interacting with nature and with the rest of humanity in order to survive and and in doing so changing human nature in history and this this revolutionary outlook really I think it is is the is the best possible explanation of and the most accurate explanation of of of thoughts really and the role of thought in the natural world which is how we should see it however idealism still exists religion exists of course but I not only that but in the realm of philosophy idealism not only still exists but is probably still dominant 20th century philosophy is largely dominated by variants of subjective idealism which we will discuss in later weeks and for example post modernism tends to assert that we that the individual or that humans kind of create truth by the way that they think or talk about things rather than truth existing independently of us and that is an idealist position but why does this still exist why does this in my opinion fundamentally unscientific outlook still exists and even dominates well as far as I'm concerned it's ultimately because of the persistence of class society it's because we still live in a society characterized by inequality injustice and in which humanity doesn't control its own fate or doesn't consciously control its own fate and therefore we are subject to to the forces of society and as a result of that everything seems out of our control moreover there are people who are very interested in maintaining the domination of the ruling class and therefore want to obscure the real processes of history the realities of class society the real mechanics of class society and they would rather us look to our souls or to our values and and rather than instead of changing the actual social relations of class society so ultimately the struggle for materialism is part of the class struggle and it is a revolutionary struggle without which we will never we will never defeat idealism and never establish materialism as the as the correct outlook for humanity which I think it is


Bookmap's one-click trading add-on feature allows trading directly from the Bookmap chart. This offers a distinct advantage since Bookmap displays the current and historical limit order book. Therefore, you can optimize and pinpoint your trade entries, exits, and trade management within the display of the liquidity map. Let's click on the Trade Control Panel tool up here. Now, before I enable it, let's go through some of the configurations before I begin my trading. Click on this icon here and open up the window for the configurations. First is the option to show the Trade Status Panel. Let's click on that when we'll select it and you can see all the different trade data that's going to be displayed here. The same data is displayed over here in the Trade Control Panel. Also selected here is Show Profit and Loss in the position chart, which is the sub-chart down here. Also, all orders are displayed here. This is important if you want to see all of your orders displayed. So select all here and you'll have executed, working, canceled, and order queue all displayed within Bookmap. I'll go over the orders queue feature in just a minute. Now, let's go down to the sub-chart here and we'll display our profit and loss. I'll click on the Configuration button here and I'm going to deselect all of my cumulative volume delta data. And instead, I just want to show here my profit and loss. You can also show your position size here with the white line. Now, let's go up and enable the Trade Control Panel. We'll click here and note that the padlock icon turns green and is open. This signifies that the current market window here is now active and live. So any clicking within this window is going to generate a trade. So let's set up our trade activity here. I'm going to use the order duration here of GoodTillCancel. My stop order type, I'm going to use Market. And my stop order duration, I'm going to use GoodTillCancel. And then let's choose the size here, volume of one. I'm not going to go through the other buttons here and the other options as they are covered in a separate video. Also, I'm going to generate some simple orders here and not use the OCO, bracketed or trailing stop order types here. OK, so in the current market window, left clicking in this window always generates a buy. Right clicking always generates a sell. Now, depending on where you click in relationship to price, we'll determine the order type, as well as clicking with key combinations. Let's go through an example of a market buy order. Left clicking is always a buy. So I'm going to left click above current price here. And you can see Bookmap has recorded where I clicked here at $22.54 and a half. A beige dot appears. It also shows with a beige triangle where I got filled within the trade. Note that a beige horizontal line appears on the price ladder. This is my overall open position. It is the average price of my open position. Also note that the trade data now appears in the trade control panel over here, as well as my trade status panel up here and in the profit and loss in the sub chart down below. Let's click on flatten to close this position. You can see that Bookmap has recorded where I flattened the position here with a violet triangle. Now let's have some limit buy orders by clicking below current price. You can see that I'm clicking here in these areas and a beige dot appears where I clicked at what time. The dash line here displays that this is a limit buy order at these price levels. And you can see it's for volume of 1. Let's click up a bit further here with another limit buy order. And we'll display here this yellow line in the current order book column as bars or bars and numbers. This is my order in the queue here. So I am waiting in the end of the line here at this price level. All of this liquidity here is in front of me. And my order will get filled once either all of these orders are filled before me or they're pulled before me. And that option is here again in the configurations orders queue, as you can see here. Now I'll set a few buy stops above the current market. So left clicking above the market is always going to be a buy. It'll be a market buy unless I hold down the shift key. Holding down the shift key and left clicking above, now you can see my buy stops are up here. Note that Bookmap records where I clicked and is giving me a double dashed line. This line type is different than the limit order that you see down here with the long dashed single line. Okay, let's flatten the position here or cancel all. And you can see that Bookmap has now canceled all open orders. All the history of my orders is displayed here on the chart. You can see where I clicked and initiated the order and where I canceled the order here with a hollow dot. Now let's set some sell orders by right clicking within the current market window. Right clicking below current price is gonna generate a market sell order. You can see where I clicked and then where I was filled. And note my average weighted price here at 22.54 and a half. Now let's generate some limit sell orders above current price. Right click above current price and you can see the long dashed line here which displays my volume and where I clicked. Sell orders are with the violet color here that you see. Now we'll set a few sell stop orders below current price by holding down the shift key and right clicking. Now we can see our double dashed line which is our sell stop order. Now let's edit some of these orders within this market window. We can change the size of an order by hovering over the left of the order here of this vertical white line and we'll just left click once. And here I can change the size of this order. I'll change it to three. Note how Bookmap has recorded the change in the order here with a smaller violet dot. And you can see now the order is for a volume of three. Now I can also move these orders here if I hover my mouse over the left of the vertical white line here, my arrow icon becomes a double-sided arrow and I can left click hold and drag the order up to a new area. You can see that Bookmap records all of my trading activity. Let's set a few more limit sell orders up above current price by right clicking. Now let's say I move this three lot order up to the same price level of this other order here at 22.56 and a quarter. Note that when I dragged and dropped it onto that area that I am now showing here volume of four and in parentheses is giving me the number of orders. So there are four contracts up here but two separate orders. Now you can left click hold and drag and separate out those orders and move each order individually or you can hold down the control key and we'll move each order, left click hold and drag and move all of them at once. And you can see now that all orders have been moved through this one price level of 22.57. Holding down that control key allows me to move them all at the same time. Now in the trade control panel over here I have options to cancel all open sell orders, cancel all or cancel all open buy orders. However, if I cancel all open sell orders maybe I don't wanna cancel some of these that have been in line and position in queue for quite a while. So you have the option to cancel individual orders at specific price levels by using your center mouse wheel as a button. Let's come down here and cancel some of the sell stops that I have here. I'll just click on my center mouse wheel and you can see that I'm canceling each individual order. Now let's consolidate all of my limit sell orders at one specific price level. I'll hold down the control key, left click hold and drag all of these orders down here and then one more time down to 22.55 even. Actually let's move it up a little bit further so we don't get filled in this example and you can see that I have nine contracts here but seven separate orders. Let's say I want to cancel one of those orders. Well I can use my center mouse wheel and I can cancel that order. Now I have eight contracts and six separate orders. Or if you choose you can cancel all orders here at this specific price level by holding down the control key and using your center mouse wheel as a button and click on this price level and you can see that I've canceled now all of my limit sell orders at that specific price level. Now let's go over a few practical uses for using the one-click trading in book map. Since book map displays the liquidity heat map you can use this information to your advantage. So for example, let's say we are bearish. So we want to get filled before this high liquidity at 22.55.  I'm willing to absorb price before hitting this area of high liquidity to guarantee my fill. You can also left click below and begin setting some of your targets at some of the areas before high liquidity that you see here at 22.51. This gives you higher probability of getting filled before this area here of the high liquidity. Book maps one-click trading also allows you to utilize the API configuration up here. Let's click on that and opens the window for some automated trading strategies that are available for you here. You have the chase, escape and execute strategies. Now these strategies are covered in a separate video but basically they're looking for order book and balances to find an opportunity for an optimized trade. Let's close this window and please watch that video for further information. So you can see the advantage that book map gives with the one-click trading. All of your trading activity is precisely recorded here historically and it also allows you to quickly and intuitively react to price within the current market window. This will allow you to optimize and pinpoint your trade entries, exits and your trade management.


We've got one final tune up before the PGA championship coming up next week, and we're doing so with a pretty star studded field for this week at the AT&T Byron Nelson. A lot of big names competing for next week's championship are here as well, which means it's a fun event for PGA DFS. We're going to break down our top options over on fangirl.com. Let you know what you've got to know about TPC Craig Ranch and get you set for what should be a fun event. Welcome on into the heat check fantasy podcast powered by Number Fire. That's right here on the fangirl 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 senior managing editor of numberfire.com. Brandon, good to talk to you for the first time I think since the Masters, which is weird. No, we did the one after that too. We did the one in person. But like, I had one interaction with you in person and had to leave the podcast for several weeks as a result. But I'm back now. Big rudgingly. How are you today? Yeah, still recovering from that live show. It was look, it was just a little peculiar. And for anyone who's been listening in the past two weeks, it's been peculiar because it's just me. And we bring very different energy levels to the show. And I think we balance each other out. Well, if it's all just one of us, I think it loses a little bit of the heat check flare. But I'm glad to have you back. If it's all heat, where is the check? You know, you're the heat on the check.  So that's good. So at least like probably the past couple weeks have gone well. Do you feel like you've excelled? No.  Not good. Oh, no, no, no. Yeah, I had some good picks out there. I'll tell you how much. Sure you did, but I believe you. I've been like, like up any for anyone who's not watching. I'm doing, I'm like doing hand gestures. That's not good audio, not good radio, radio. I've been I've been close for my outright win picks for a while. But I mean, if you're not for not top five or top 10 in those bets as well, it doesn't mean a whole lot. But boy, it's been flying a little close to the sun. Eventually I'll fly into the sun, which is how I envisioned to make the metaphor work. I got to get there to fly into the sun. Isn't that not the point? Yeah, but I mean, I was I was locked in. Doesn't that mean deaf? I'm not like an expert on the sun. I try not to like talk about things that I don't know that well, but as someone who thinks the sun is quite hot. Like sexually like like someone who has an impression of the sun, like I feel like you probably don't want to fly into it. Question work. Yeah, but I was doing the the Icarus metaphor here. But he dies when he flies too close to the sun. Do you want to fly directly into this? But I need to get hot. I need to go higher and get hotter to hit some of these ones. Maybe there's just a little maybe it's not into the sun, but maybe just so your pinnacle is deaf from being from because I was locked into the metaphor. Just pivot, man. Just pivot. Well, what am I supposed to pivot to something else? The one that doesn't fly in the sun and burning to death. I don't know. Maybe that's a hot take on literally on my part and say, Hey, it seems bad to fly into the sun and die. But I don't know. Maybe I'm contrarian here. This is why you're the this is why you're the heat. You know all the stuff about the heat. I'm just out here trying to provide the check. I didn't I got in I'm checking you man. I'm the heat and the check right now.  Come in too hot.  That is where they're after this week's AT&T Byron Nelson into 7,468 yards and a par 72 last year was the first PGA tour event at this course. So one year of course history data will still have a course history section for today. But keep that in mind that not a ton of data here. There are 156 golfers in the field. Wolf the top 65 plus ties make the cut after two rounds. So we got to find dudes who will make the cuts. Oh boy. My favorite kind of PGA event what could possibly go wrong Brandon again just one year of data here. But when we look at that one year of data what stands out to you in terms of emphasis for TPC Craig Ranch. Yeah, so it's pretty long for a par 72 about 90 yards longer than the average par 72 on the PGA tour a bit wider fairways. If you look at things from a fairway acre to yardage ratio to 4.7 PGA tour average in my database is a 4.1 larger green sizes as well just shy of 6800 square feet on average PGA tour average is 6000 square feet. So about 113% of the average PGA tour green size. So basically what I'm saying here is long yes but wider fairways larger greens and if you can believe it that's led to some scoring last year winning score 25 under for Kyung Hoon Lee the cut line 6 under par. That's pretty easy. So you you kind of woofed at the 156 golfers in the field that leads to some extra volatility not that every one of those golfers toward the bottom of the field is a contender by any means but full field. Low scores that leads to increased volatility. So I did make sure to factor that in to my simulation model for this week. But as far as the key stats go for what matters then still strokes can approach is just it's super vital and I'm kind of keeping my key stats pretty simple because we need ball striking to hit these screens in regulation get in birdie chances. And so for me some of the things that that I noted here were the last year's top three finishers are finishing positions which included six total golfers due to ties they ran second six forty second seventh fifth and fourth so five of those six were top seven in strokes game approach one outlier Scott Stallings was forty second but he led the field in strokes game putting so that is why approach is usually in my model I have approach at like 30% which is a lot already for one stat I up that to about 40% for this week and speaking of that putting with Scott Stallings data golf has this cool I mean they have a lot of cool stuff but they have a course table that shows details on particular courses that have been played on the PG tour with Scotland data and it shows things like is it easy to put here or is it hard to put here is it and is it easy from different ranges this was last year and again it's just one year of data so I'm trying not to get too far into this but also I think I'm going to get too far into it anyway because that's that's all we know of the course it's really easy to put here so if we need if we need ball strikers to hit these greens usually we need good putters still to convert those birdie chances but if it's easier if it's easy to put here statistically a few names that the heat check listeners might have heard in the past will probably come up again this week so basically like what it comes down to is it's wide bigger greens scores are going to go you want strokes game off the tee strokes game approach putting in birdie or better rate game so you're saying it's will zalatoris Luke list system is that what we're coming to here the wills ease Luke list is definitely on the radar but even at the you know the pinnacle of that type of archetype is Justin Thomas like his strength is not as putter his strength is his ball striking his T degree in play they should set up well for just I mean most courses do but like if you look at things from an advantage standpoint like who should benefit most from if these greens are easy to put on yeah JT probably level that playing field mitigate the gap between his putting and some of the other golfers putting so I think JT is someone we're going to talk about a lot this week even though we have Scotty Schaeffer in the field all right while I'm building out my lineup now it's gonna be bad putters and I'm gonna feel great about it until they actually start golfing and I'm excited for that we're gonna dive into golfers who did well here last year in the one event and other stuff you need to know for this week's field but first a quick reminder to make sure you are subscribed to the number fired daily fantasy podcast feed wherever you get your podcast we of course are now for podcasts Spotify Stitcher Google podcast you name it you can find us there and while you're there if you like what you hear leave us a rating and review as well also sports fans there's no better time than today to sign up for Fandall fantasy with of course PJ championship coming up next week sign up this week get your feet wet get yourself ready for next week because for users who have yet to make a deposit on Fandall fantasy you can deposit today to receive two free entries all you have to do is deposit a minimum of $10 into your Fandall DFS account and you will be instantly rewarded with two free vouchers this is a limited time offer so be sure to deposit now and play for free head to Fandall.com or download the Fandall fantasy app today eligibility restrictions apply go to Fandall.com or download the Fandall app for more details let's dive into last year's event here at TPC Craig Ranch talk about Sam Burns finished second behind KH Lee last year and Burns is another one of our favorites but Brandon not a bad putter so I am upset that you're talking about him it seems like you're going counter to the spirit of this week what do you see with Sam Burns yeah not a bad putter is Sam Burns but not a bad golfer is Sam Burns either he's he's basically become what some of the prospects that I've liked have even wanted them to become he's basically been that just phenomenal way it basically everything I think that for anyone who doesn't necessarily understand how good Sam Burns is just pull up some of the stats and you'll see that there's there's really nothing that he that he can't do well and that that was evidence last year here when he led the field in stroke scheme T-degree and was top 10 and all three of those T-degree and stats so off the T approach and around the green but had just a neutral putting week that week so the slight disappointment there to finish runner-up but sets up well for success here again one of the best ball strikers on tour the recent results are there a runner up at the Zurich or Zurich I never know I should probably know but I never know Zurich Zurich yeah it Zurich I actually don't know but I think it's we played with he played with Billy horse school so Zurich alright so I think we just look at the horse school things that's what is this podcast of not amusement for just us yeah it would be the heat no chuckle well now because we got the CH but at the front so each neck check boy this one maybe people are just waiting for us to do solo pods again after all this but um yeah I don't blame him runner up at the Zurich with Billy Horschel missed the cut at the Masters in his debut there which I'm able to forgive one the Valspar 26 the players 9 to the Arnold Palmer invitational he's putting well even with expected regression which I lay out on an article a number fire you know just reference it moving forward but putting well going to regress a bit but still be one of the best putters on the planet what we talk about is Bermuda splits a lot but he's going to bent grass so I have like no issues with Sam Burns he's going to be one of my favorite plays I think that I could start a lineup with Sam Burns or I could try to get to Sam Burns alongside another stud and feel really good with that what are your thoughts on burns this week I have no like pushback to give I wish I did because it's more fun but I have nothing and like I think the fun thing with burns is again I think that if if we are emphasizing birdies for this week which we should given how low the scores will go he not only has like the components of a birdie maker via the putting and like the the ball striking also like he just gets birdies like it's like statistically he gets birdies he ranks fourth in birdies are better game the past 50 rounds according to fantasy national behind DJ JT and Schaeffler like that's great company it shows that I think that what that shows to me is that he is very worthy of that salary he's 11 for that's a good number for someone with that ability I think it kind of goes along with what you said where you can either start a lineup with him or pair him with one of those other guys and feel pretty good about it and honestly like that was out of tourists I think of a lineup of burns out of tourists is really fun at the top I'm not opposed that at all so I think the same burns I find no reason to push back like he's a pretty good play for this week fully on board he's also the cover boy for this week's podcast over on YouTube with his mustache so that's positive as well let's talk to you about someone who will fit with the narrative of we can be more comfortable with some bad putters that Johnny Vegas he's a bomber and he showed that off here last year Vegas super well rounded at the Byron Nelson last year gained at least 1.5 strokes in all four strokes gain categories including 3.1 off the T 2.1 and approach and I ragged on him for being a bad putter but it's been getting better recently he gained at least I gained 2.5 last week that's his fourth time in the past five measured events gaining at least 1.8 on the green that is how Vegas not three straight top 20 finishes but it's also jacked up Vegas's salary he's 10 to so it's no longer like a co crack range where Vegas is 93 he's 10 to that's a pretty legit number especially if you want to jam in two guys above 11,000 so Brandon where do you sit on Vegas given the blend of course fits and current form I like him I think he can make a more balanced lineup work which I don't think is the route I'm going to go even though we have a lot of golfers in the mix based on what we know the course playing easy and being a bit wider should keep a lot of golfers in play but I think for me I'm going to focus more on some studs and overlook this range but if I am in this range Vegas definitely now don't quote me on this but if I'm looking in like 98 to 10 6 it's probably Vegas number one for me he should be able to take advantage here and again if the course does play easy if the greens play easy that should level the playing field be good for Vegas but while he's not the best putter the underlying data for him is is fine if you can be a neutral putter and gain t-degree that's a good recipe for him this week so he's definitely on the list for me yeah I think that with Vegas I agree with you where it's more so like I'm just not going to be in that range as much because although the other part of it there are some guys in the mid 9,000 it's like 93 to 9 thought 97 who are really really good and I'm okay taking that discount to get myself more flexibility at the top so with Vegas if I'm there totally on board with him but I'm not going to force it because I do think that range below is pretty good now the range below below him even further is good too because patent desire there isn't is there at 9,000 because I or one of the guys have played well here last year and also it's got some good stats for this week so what do you see with desire at 9,000 dollars based on what he did last year well yeah I mean it's not just based on what he did last year which is what you want to see whenever we talk about golfers with past form and of course but he was in that cluster at t-3 last year had some up and down strokes gain stats though which is kind of interesting fourth and putting which typically is a bit of a red flag to be that good but it's never bad to be able to be that good so I always want to make try to make that clarification and not just write it off but also fourth and approach among the cutmakers if you could pick two stats to be top five and you would pick approach and putting because those are the two stats you can just statistically gain the most strokes on the field by doing well in a particular week basically 60th though among cutmakers off the tea and around the green so had the irons in the potter but everything else sort of fell apart but that was good enough for a t-3 among the field over the past year he is in the 84th percentile and approach at least field average in the others when I use my adjusted stats there over that sample he's a great potter from five to ten feet and from within 15 overall which is a key range always so he's setting up I think for a really good play to be a really good play at a value salary so spoiler alert I know we both like desire but how high are you on desire how high is the I won't say the desire for a desire is is through the roof he is a player pick for me is he for you as well he was going to be but because I know I know we decided we could pick the same golfers for our player picks but for the simple fact that we're naming a lot of the studs and the like the 11,000 range and I'm going to lock in maybe three no not in every lineup but like when I'm building my lineups three maybe four studs and then rotating the values I figured it was fitting to pivot away from desire name someone else in a little bit more detail that you're saying your desire for desires not high enough to deserve him you don't deserve patent desires what you're saying if that's what you need to for me to say to move forward let's say that one okay fine hater I'll let Patton know that you're hating on him just fuel his motivation his desire to win this week so that's that's what we'll go with let's have a cage Lee who won here last year kind of burying the lead a little bit by putting cage Lee down here but defending champ he checks him with a value sour 89 but potentially value sour for a reason Lee was a monster with his approach last year he gained 8.3 an approach so even though he did gain 4.5 putting it was not a flukey win like he earned it via good ball striking the reason the salary is low for Lee is that the form is mixed at best he has made just one of his past four cuts that was a 25th last week largely fueled by good putting there last week was the first time Lee had gained an approach since the American Express back in January so we're emphasizing approach Lee had good approach last year and was okay last week but has largely been underwhelming there and underwhelming is probably generous so even with the win I'm probably not on cage Lee this week what about you? Yeah, I think he'll probably look like look I'm going to have a lot of value golfers in my player pool he's not completely off of that necessarily but he's not necessarily one of the top plays for me either I could name at least five plays toward that salary range six maybe seven depending on what that range specifically is for you but I'm just not going to chase it I think that there's more with some other options here I think that's our Matt too so you know obviously played decently while last week and has shown it here before not a high salary but do you like some other guys more talk about that later on I've been in the current form section first though and talk about tell me Fleetwood Fleetwood is 98 and that range is probably more so where I want to live than the Vegas range above 10,000 so let's talk about Fleetwood is Fleetwood someone based in his current form who could be in that consideration set at 98 hundred dollars Yeah, so it sounds silly to nitpick between like 10 to and 98 but like if you got 98 and a little bit below or 10 to and a little bit above you build out a lineup with maybe a Justin Thomas Sam Burns start you see that that really is sort of crucial so Tommy Fleetwood definitely someone I wanted to take a longer look at because I feel like Tommy Fleetwood is just a more popular golfer than I view him as deserving to be not because of his personality seems like a cool guy but just based on the stats that I look at but he's really turned things around for me and because he's a big name in this range he could be a little bit more popular again from a Fando standpoint that I think he deserves but there's a lot to like miss the cut at the Zurich which is whatever but prior to that 10th the RBC Heritage 14th at the Masters 16th at Valspar 22nd at the Players 20th at the Arnold Palmer and in his past 20 rounds Fleetwood ranks fifth and true strokes gained in 12th Teter Green according to data golf I'm not usually in on Fleetwood like I said but he's interesting I don't know if he's tops here there are two golfers specifically at 97 just below him that I might prefer and could possibly get a popularity discount on with Aaron Wise and Maverick McNeely so any thoughts for you on Fleetwood I agree with you specifically naming those two guys as being options that for both McNeely and Wise over Fleetwood for this week and that's without considering popularity that I just like the more straight up honestly so I would say to me they're the considerations the one thing that I want to keep in mind though is that I probably will be in this range quite a bit like I have my like default lineup built out right now because obviously I was not listening to you when you're talking with Fleetwood I had to build instead and there are two guys in that range in my lineup so I'll be in this range a lot which means I'll need more than just two guys but honestly like there are a couple others too I'm like like you could you could push back on Lonto Griffin if you wanted but I think I like Lonto more except Straka is 94 Griffin is 95 I think I like both those guys more than Fleetwood too so I think for me Fleetwood does make sense and not totally opposed to him but I think that he'll wind up being he'd be a rotational guy after I get my requisite exposure to those others is kind of where I'm at is Fleetwood in the same range for you or cause it also could be a situation where I just like Griffin and Straka more but what are your thoughts on him relative to the rest of that tier um I don't really like a lot of this tier so we have Fleetwood at 98 along with Alex or Alexander Noren depending on all your preference there then if we're skipping over Wyze and McNeely it's Kisner Davis Riley Adam Hadwin Lonto Griffin Sept Straka Matt Coucher I'll talk about it in just a second honestly but I don't like any of those guys honestly like to the point that I'm going to play them which is why I think Wyze and McNeely stand out to me right so I'm I'm either going with Vegas at 10 to Wyze McNeely at 9 7 or a duo or trio in the low 9000 range with Keith Mitchell Mito Pereira or Luke List um do you want to head to head on Fleetwood versus no I don't just kidding ignore me who was it I was going to offer you Straka or Lonto but I feel like you would have taken Lonto and said yes so I decided to revoke not doing it not doing it I don't want to I don't want to lose I can't lose honestly honestly for me the Fleetwood does rank last in my model okay which again of those three which again like it doesn't seem like you should but he does and that's why I always tend to be low on him even though I'm higher on him than normal I think I'll still be lower on him than consensus okay so let's talk about Will Zalatoris someone we probably will not be lower than consensus on because Will Zalatoris is 11-2 and it's it's in part because there are some big names this week pushing him down and I think that that's actually a discount I want to take advantage of Zalatoris played well at the Zurich Classic but more importantly it came after a six-place finish at the Masters where he didn't putt terribly which was kind of fun Zalatoris has played eight total events in January 1st he has been sixth or better in five of those eight events he ranks fourth in True Strokes Game the past six months trailing Scotty Schaeffler, Justin Thomas, Hideki Matsuyama but obviously the putting is brutal but if we care less about that this week it should shift our view of Zalatoris so I like Zalatoris a lot at 11-2 where do you wind up on him? Yeah I love Will I was kind of torn on him between between Will Zalatoris and Sam Burns so he's both man Which is a very viable strategy especially if you're not starting off with Justin Thomas I know we're kind of bearing the lead with Scotty Schaeffler We'll touch on him We'll get to him Yeah I have nothing against him how could you whether on or off the course he's No I've got I've got on the course narratives to discuss with you later but go ahead Okay Well They're very important Yeah well Yeah Yeah you missed a lot of narratives for the NFL draft which we were disappointed about on the stream but we'll talk about that at a more appropriate time But yeah Zalatoris for me definitely one of the top three plays at salary it's some combination of JT Burns and Zalatoris for me I've implemented a sort of spike week stat for T-degree and putting where it's it if you gain enough strokes and either I don't need to get into the math of it but he ranks fourth in spike weeks in T-degree he's honestly not that bad in putting he's just below average in putting and if you kind of weight that is what's more important really good upside which is not a surprise but again if we're playing the angle that putting is a little bit easier this week on these greens something like Zalatoris should get a much bigger edge than some other golfers and I want to take advantage of that Yeah, I think that Zalatoris is pretty fun. I think that having I think the Burns out Taurus lineup is fun but also like I think Zalatoris like if we're looking at golfers at 11 to or higher I would not be shocked as out towards the golfer to whom I had the most exposure I would not be surprised by that at all honestly because I feel really good about him. I like the salary. He checks a lot of key boxes and fits every bill that I want to go with. So let's move now to Matt Kutcher. You tease this before Kutcher is 94 but Brandon it's bomber course Kutcher not quite there. What do you see with him recently? We sort of back for being Matt Kutcher pass for results on tour have been a T2 with the Valero Texas Open T3 at RBC Heritage T49 at the Wells Fargo and T16 at Valspar but he's getting a lot of strokes from putting and around the green which are the least predictive stats of the four strokes in categories. It's not that they don't matter. That's not what I'm saying here and it's not that it's completely random. That's also not what I'm saying here. It's just it's hard to keep doing that week to week compared to ball striking and so that's a bit of a red flag maybe a maybe an orange or yellow flag depending on what your system says is worse. I don't know just depends on that system that you got going on but over the past 20 rounds he has second strokes gained around the green 13th and putting according to data goals true strokes gained metrics but 110th off the T and 49th in approach. I do think we should be a little bit wary of Kutcher at a course that should require a lot of birdies and some distance but that's not to say he's unplayable. He was T17 here last year. He does make some birdies if he plays within himself. He can definitely do some things here but I think he will not be someone that I'm targeting. We talked about this range in good detail. He was not in a most particularly interested in and I would rather jump down to some like Mito for example. Yes we've seen Kutcher finish well but like I think that finishing well at certain courses are different than finishing well at others and I think that at this kind of course where you need to go solo where I do want to prioritize some distance is his upside in this specific context as high as what he's shown recently. I don't think so like I know he's finished really well recently but best case scenario for Matt Kutcher. What do you think 15th this week probably maybe 10. I mean you know where is he in my I have it sorted weirdly then I'll just say 15th. I'll just say that yeah I like nobody needs the numbers. I like think that's quite not enough for me especially I like this range more than you do given the presence of the guys just above it but also again I mentioned long toes 95 stroke is 90 94 I think both those guys to me better options than the Kutcher not other guys super super long either but they're also not short. So I think that I go that direction versus Kutcher in 94. So let's talk about Kurt Kiti Amma Kiti Amma is taking advantage of some of the regulars taking a rest the past couple weeks after the Masters. So the question now is can Kiti Amma carry that against a tougher field Kiti Amma finished second in 15th the past two weeks he's done that thanks to some really nice ball striking and we've seen Kiti Amma stroking out the tee with a good distance he ranks 15th in the field and distance gained the past 50 rounds he's 25th in approach and Kiti Amma did have a third place finish at the Honda back in February 2 so some other good finishes there but the time between then and before then was pretty rough. So I do like the ball striking and we do want to prioritize ball striking this week but he's had some high end finishes that are not but don't seem as sustainable based on other data. It's tough. So are you buying into the top end finishes we see from Kiti Amma recently at a value salary for this week. Okay so if I want ball striking at 91 I have a list correct and I'm gonna get better ball striking correct Kiti Amma over the past 50 rounds on tour is in the 80th percentile so good here from strokes gain putting from 15 plus feet she's gaining some strokes on longer putts he's the 18th percentile bad from within 15 feet so that implies that he should cool off with the putter not that he's been phenomenal necessarily overall with the putting but he should not necessarily have a lot of upside with the putter this week again I want to be clear because I'm downplaying putting to a big degree and I just said that I'm going to play Luke List so like I want to shine some light onto that that I'm not oblivious here but if I'm going to take the risk give me Luke List like the way that sounded with the is is like a political slogan yeah no I like it embrace the risk ride Luke List and then do it but I think that I agree to because like with Kiti Amma I agree with your your way of thinking about it where if I want to go with the guy who gets me the ball striking or rather go with Luke List and List does make birdies despite the fact he can't put he ranks 8th and birdies are better getting the past 50 rounds according to Fantasy National there's some other guys down here who can make some birdies to like Tom Hogi isn't that discussion 86 so I would say to me probably no Kiti Amma excited that he's doing well and I think that the ball striking is good but I can get just a good ball striking and even better ball striking from others in this range as well who may not be due for as much putting regression as Kiti Amma may be let's dive into the bookmaker odds you can't regress if you're bad yeah I was gonna say yeah I know I look with has nowhere to go but well up consistent he's consistent consistently awful but still counts bookmaker odds for this week Scotty Schaeffler the favorite a fan dual sports book he has plus 950 then he get down to Justin Thomas on an island at 13 to 1 Jordan speed is 17 to 1 next here is Dustin Johnson and Sam Burns they are both 19 to 1 followed by Zander Schaeffler 21 to 1 Will Zalatoris is 24 to 1 we got Bruce Kepke at 31 to 1 then Hideki Matsuyama and Joachim Neiman round at the top group at 34 to 1 so Scotty Schaeffler clear favorite for this week and for good reason are you approaching him in that same way this week for DFS what's your view of Schaeffler versus JT and more for this week well you told me you had a narrative about Schaeffler I do this is the right time for it it's a deep gap narrative we saw with Shane Lowry for his major win Scotty Schaeffler not only winning a major but winning everything else you know can we trust Scotty Schaeffler to care if we're going to pull out the deep gap narrative I don't know man so this is more mostly justification me to talk up my my boy Justin Thomas it's not an actual like thought process but the deep gap narrative is in play with Scotty Schaeffler I think we have to we have to weigh that in heavily to the money said approaches 30% or 40% this week DGAP narrative should be at least 36% that relative so is that good or bad for Brooks? Well so the DGAP narrative can only be bad okay because when he gaffes he does well okay so the DGAP narrative is always a negative. Gotcha. I got a lot to learn unless there's someone who's like too rigid and like they're playing loose like like if we got a DGAP narrative like Matthew Wolfe I could say that could be an adjust up like if you know cool down a little bit that might be a good thing. Yeah Matthew Wolfe's out there to have fun he said that's good so maybe little DGAP upward adjustment Wolfe you had some good rounds last week maybe then you know but DGAP narrative bad for Brooks bad for Schaeffler and I think that should weigh heavily on our minds this week. So I was I don't know I'm struggling with this because all my research and just like assumptions here pretty safe assumptions are that Scottie Schaeffler will be a chalky DFS player because he's the betting favorite and he is the highest salary golfer on Vandal that almost always leads to being the chalk but according to fancierfsports.com it's a pretty dispersed top of the field aside from Slammin Sammy Burns who is running away with fancier tags so we're going to have to take a long hard look at Burns and say where's Zalatoris on that so Zalatoris is T3 it's early saw just say Burns has 13 tags Taylor Gooch has seven and will Zalatoris and Matt McNeill here have six so like it's a pretty emphasizing off the T I think a Taylor Gooch right away that's exactly where I'd want to turn good golfer he's not exactly a kind of guy I'm prioritizing here but you know whatever. So wow I thought Hideki was going to be like the the galaxy brainplay but he's up there too. Hmm where's JT T9 okay so JT is the play easy but like name anyone else at the top and as Schaeffler DJ Zander I don't know if this is not the right fit for Zander because it's going to be to also be the wedding narrative of DJ which is very important that's that's always up. Spieth Brooks if you want to go that route so I would say if your assumption going in is that Schaeffler will be mega mega mega chalk because your research has said high salary guy betting favorites that will be true this week but it's less true than usual so like I guess I wouldn't view Schaeffler as being like prohibitively chalky this week are you getting the same vibe. Yeah that's the case then I love Schaeffler because this is a ball striking course he can go low he is just phenomenal he is and I just implemented this today so I'm not it's not completely up to well I mean the data is right but I haven't implemented it so he has spike weeks with his T a green at 40% of the time and putting 30% of the time only Sam Burns also meets those 40 30 thresholds so I mean we know that the upside is there for both of those guys yeah pretty phenomenal there. What about for a cash game is Schaeffler you're studying the cash game or do you want to go more balanced with Zalatoris and Burns because like my my concern is like although I'm down playing putting this week I'm not sure Zalatoris is like a cash game you play like there I'd prefer Burns in a cash game and I also might want to go Schaeffler in a cash game to I have like I do have Burns a tier above Zalatoris because of that safety yeah he has just as much upside with the T a green but three times as much with the Potter. So for cash games Schaeffler or JT let's shift that because I agree with you on Burns Schaeffler or JT for cash for cash games it probably it probably should be Schaeffler well now I'm gonna go JT okay again I don't know if anyone cares about any of this but I think it's really cool data and it does it well it does actually past the eye test but if you want to talk about 80th percentile results in T a green play you know meeting that threshold JT does that 63% of the time Hedecki's at 53% so 10 percentage point gap over Hedecki who's awesome and then it's Zalatoris at 44% 10 or Gucci 43% speaking of and Sam Burns at 42% so like JT's T to green play his ability to just dominate T to green is pretty much off the charts so I'm gonna go JT save a little bit of salary from Schaeffler well that's the key I don't think I know is that JT plus Burns is the exact same salary as Schaeffler Pazalatoris so give me that one I think that's where I'm at to using that against you this week for the head to head just so you're aware but JT and Burns yeah oh that's already been locked in for me all right cool so we're on the same page there which golfers odds have shifted since things opened on Fanduel on Monday just about everybody's but some odds that have shortened which I think are notable even if it's just slight Sam Burns 2019 will Zalatoris 22 to 21 Adam had when 65 to 46 so big movement there not necessarily the right I'm not saying it's wrong for him but not necessarily the type of golfer that we're talking up a lot so that's noteworthy Maverick McNeely 55 to 50 Sebastian Munoz 95 to 70 and then Matthew Wolf 100 to 90 so those are the notable shortening odds lengthening odds and let me ask you a question quick with the wolf did you see enough last week where you actually want to buy into it or not yet so this is I've learned from one of my co-workers named Jim Sands so it's honest someone in France said my last name right it blew me away it's not a French name but like someone said it right it just flabbergasted me it was wild that's cool flax that you went to France but or do you think I've been the past couple weeks nobody knows man. But I mean look like Matthew Wolf came out was talking about his mental health and saying that he was bringing himself down bringing down the you know his playing partners by being you know just negative and so he said he's trying to turn things around just enjoy it not trying to win but just having fun I think that would qualify as like a new relevant sample for him if you look at all the past data I'm not saying like what he did last week is who he is exactly it's like this kind of a new leaf on new perspective here for wolf so while I that's not enough for me to want to bet him necessarily I think it's reassuring and he's going to be someone that we have to do a little bit of Oversights with some similar to Brooks like you know Brooks for the PGA championship is not going to write out well on my model unless I manually adjust things. Maybe Matthew Wolf is in that range but as far as DFS as far as betting goes this week. I'm probably not going to get there sure but good on him and I'll root for him. Yeah and I think that I'm okay with buying into upside if the upside is there but with what we've actually seen spikes before when things been going well he's been a very good golfer and like he does he does have giddy up he's got some horses off the tee so he does he does so I think that like I'd be okay with taking swipes if you're multi-entering and are okay killing some lineups which you should be if you should be gunning for upside at all times I think wolf would fit that well so I'm open to it is what I would say for this week who is lengthened that's noteworthy. Brooks 26 to 31 two guys I thought that might get some some buzz because of what I'm seeing with the course just looking for ball strikers walking Neiman and Hideki Matsuyama 31 to 34 Taylor Gooch 37 to 41 so lengthening on the odds board but getting a lot of buzz on fan share Cameron champ 41 to 46 and Adam Scott 42 to 48. Okay which lower salary golfers have odd to stand out to you. We have Sebastian Munoz now at 70 to 1 he's 8800 on Fandall Ct Pond Matthew Nice Smith Patton Kezire K H Lee JJ Spahn, Sahit Thigala and Matthew Wolf all now 90 to 1 and then a trio at 100 to 1 includes Brandon Wu, Aaron Ray and Tom sorry I can't let it go and Tom Hogy I love Tom Hogy. Yeah with Munoz shortening I thought so I know you like Munoz so I know he's in your player picks. I was a bit surprised by that. What do you think it's led to the enthusiasm for Munoz in the outright market this week? I mean it could it could honestly just be the consistent finishes lots like top 30s top 25s but not a whole lot of upside from there at 8800 you will take a top 20 for sure. I don't think he is a must play. He was actually sort of he was more of an other to consider okay for me but I don't I mean maybe just a few sizable wages got him to shorten. Okay, fair enough. Let's move on to the weather for this week at the Byron Nelson wind speeds will increase during the day Thursday starting off around 7 miles per hour before hitting 14 miles per hour on 2pm Fridays more steady wind speeds will never get lower than 6 miles per hour or higher than 9 so I think I would give a slight bump up to golfers earlier tea times Thursday and I said slight intentionally I don't think it's a big situation where you're totally overhauling things are stacking tea times but I would give a slight bump up to guys with early tea times Thursday because they should have a lower overall wind speed than other guys so slight bump up to the guys early tea times Thursday pretty chill the rest of the weekend so that's the one alteration I'd make for weather based on this week with that said let's dive into our player picks here for the AT&T Byron Nelson starting off in the upper range based on the salaries of Fandall calm Brandon all the way up there who are you going to this week on Fandall Justin Thomas. I think he's just my guy this week the ball striking really really good for him if the Greens play easy benefits JT more than it would others. I honestly implemented into my spreadsheet my main spreadsheet the spike week numbers and I did not realize how far ahead JT was of everyone else you love to see that love to see it and so I'm going to go with a little bit of a discount for JT over Sheffler JT definitely hunting for some wins so the reverse narrative of Sheffler if I'm doing this right I don't know he's on the gap scale Oh boy dangerous dangerous and that's good. Yeah, I have JT is my like player pick because of the DGF narrative against Sheffler that's the only reason I have no other data to support that is just all it's all about the DGF narrative it's not the JT leads a field and approach it's not that he's 12th and distance game it's not that he's second and birdies are better game. It's all the DGF narrative and the that's it but I do think the JT legitimately is the top guy I don't know man I think for the way I want to build where I am very salary sensitive this week I do think he is the preferred option for cash games but I don't think it's a huge gap so if you like Sheffler more go Sheffler for cash games but I think that JT right up there too I just want that $200 a salary because it does it does buy me a lot for this week who else you like in this upper range up and it would buy you access to roster Sam Burns as opposed to Will Zalatoris which is my preference love it Burns I think again just you can use him as your your first your highest salary golfer and still have upside you can also find ways to use him with another stud and that's what I'm going to be doing this week to start a lot of my lineups 93% how an adjusted ball striking 99% how an adjusted short game really hard to understate how good Sam Burns is just the short game separates him from a lot of other options too and the putting is going to take a step back but that's not to say he's bad he would still be 82% out and expected putting so nothing against Sam Burns this week. Yeah I think that Burns makes a lot of sense in the the angle you discussed where it's you can use him either with a stud or as the top guy that applies as well as Zalatoris to which is why Zalatoris is my second guy in this upper range we talked about the form before but also like this is a course fit for Zalatoris to because he ranks 20th in the field and distance gained the past 50 rounds he's third in approach these 12th and birdies are better gained which doesn't count for the bad putting Zalatoris finished 17th here last year so he has seen this course before I don't really care about where he finished I just like that he's seen the course before I like the discount here at 11 to like I said I'm very on board of a lineup of Burns and Zalatoris as the top two guys does change a bit with Burns catching a lot of steam over on fan share but I still think that those two guys straight out really well they fit the ball striking they fit the birdie stuff so I do think that I am on board with that approach even with Burns catching some popularity but I just think Zalatoris overall great option for this week let's move to the mid-range who are you targeting down there Aaron Wise again just stick him with wise gonna ride with Aaron Wise till he wins on tour and then I'll probably stick with him from there 94th percentile ball striking it should have legitimate putting regression should be about a plus 2.7 rather than a minus 0.14 you'll take that it's not to say he's going to be the world's best putter but and it's not to say that he'll gain that many strokes on average this week just that should be better than he has been and that should help 55th here last year so he played it didn't put well but it's the right type of week I think for for someone like Aaron Wise to make a lot of birdies and that's why I'm sticking with Aaron Wise this week I had two guys I was considering for this top mid-range slot one of them was Aaron Wise didn't go there but I thought that he was a great option second one was Maverick McNeely who I did wind up on is my top play here he's not super long off the team but he's long enough to make it work he ranks 48th and distance gained but he's 34th in approach to the past 50 rounds and he converts on birdies ranked 7th and birdies are better gain in part because he ranks 17th in Bencraft's putting so he's like Sam Burns light in the sense that he has good ball striking not great like Burns but gets birdies good putter McNeely no top 15 finishes since the Genesis but I still think he has it upside and I'm very in on him at $9700 you mentioned you like McNeely to what puts you on him in addition to wise yeah the the podcast listeners are going to hate this but here are the irons for for McNeely so like see to me because you're going this way it looks like you're trending down kind of I don't know like I think you should go this way I don't know if the cameras are backwards or not no they're they're not near yes you're good yeah that that's what it is looks like it's going the other way no it's like it's sloping down you want to slope up my sloping up I'm sloping up like this way right hand right hand right hand use your right hand right there you go that's McNeely well then it'll be gone backwards on the timeline you should use your critical thinking skills Jim I don't use the gosh I don't use that you know that we're just or just be like the podcast listeners or Rosa don't watch just from how old this morning during the solo shot it was so loud and I was like I was listening back to when I was about to post it and like I thought she was barking again because it came through so loud on my microphone so she is she's riled up she got to play their friend Layla today so she's a she's in a mood well I like my average McNeely because the irons are improving and that's kind of the one one of the things that's been holding it back so I think that we can buy in on McNeely prefer wise but it's more of a coin flip than anything else okay let's move to the other guys in this mid range who else stands out to you there Keith Mitchell great ball striker 87 percentile pretty solid short game as well 78 percentile putter is you know he's putting too well but even with that should still be a you know strong ish media above median putter from within 15 feet played here last year finished he 26 I think we get the rose of stamp of approval for Keith Mitchell this week at a very nice salary of 9300 she's really into Keith Mitchell or just was a mid range I don't know which whichever you want to go with I think either way something's going on anyway we'll figure that out later at least she's not biting something I don't know looks like it's I'm taking this as a positive feeling this is a win right now she might not be but I am I like Mitchell think he definitely works for the reasons you mentioned I also accept Straka Straka not super consistent and he's coming off a miscut at the Wells Fargo but he does have upside Straka since the start of February has the win at the Honda Classic he finished ninth the players he was third at the REC Heritage and it also does help that some of the missed cuts in there had been like not hideous like they've been just like you know right around the number not terrible Straka is a pretty well balanced golfer he ranks 27th the birdies a better game the past 50 rounds I do like him in 94 I like Lonto Griffin in 95 where do you sit on set Straka here at 94 to dollars I think I'm probably going to take a week off of set Straka vehemently or she agrees it's hard to say no no I know I can tell we speak the same same language he's been doing a lot of putting on that's not to say he's a bad putter I think that it's just he's been a name for long enough that I might as well go with Keith Mitchell or I really like me doper era this week I think this should this course should suit him well so it's you know some of these guys with better finishes getting their name toward the top of the leaderboard a little bit more often like a set straka or Matt Kutcher at 94 I'm just going to embrace like a Keith Mitchell meet doper era kind of week instead and Luke lists behind them for you I would rank them Mitchell me to list okay that works for sure let's move down to value range who stands out to you there so I am going to like diversify with my value plays but the by far the one I like most is Tom Hogi think he's just under salaried he could easily be like 90 in that 9300 discussion and I would like him just as much he's missed two straight cuts at the RBC Heritage in the Zurich but he's been having some bad putting lock losing some strokes should be gaining some strokes it's not the hugest gap for him so I don't want to overstate that but 89 percentile and adjusted Tita green play with the assumption that he'll put a little bit better at 8600 like that's pretty phenomenal for me yeah I think the Hogi works to because he's one of those guys where the distance isn't great but he still makes birdies and like he said the putting hasn't been great either but like it's been bad luck and he's again he's still made birdies so I think the Hogi grades out well at 86 and very on board with him my top value play his patent because I who we discussed before he has not finished better than 10 since the start of the swing season so you can question the upside but I think he has what we what we call here on the podcast the building blocks for upside like his profile a lot because I ranks 31st and approach to past 50 rounds 40th and bank grass putting not a bomber but he's also not short and because I did show that off finishing third here last year as you mentioned in the form section so I think you couldn't it pick the upside I think that's probably the most valid argument against because I'm not the biggest birdie guy but I do like what he offers here at 9000 any final thoughts for you and desire just steady like it yeah all right who else do you like down here so I flipped from desire to Munoz who's you know getting bet down what you like to see but again my core for this week is going to be most likely JT burns in Zalatoris I thought had decky could overtake Zalatoris from a sneakiness standpoint but I don't think I have to go that route so I'm gonna lock in a few of the studs at the top and then rotate in the values so Munoz will definitely be part of that he's been really cold putting from the key ranges which you don't like to see but that's not really how he's been long-term and you've seen some big movement on him what you like but again just a good T degree and golfer at his peak and I think that you know he's not going to be popular even if yeah he's getting down yeah I think that makes sense too and Munoz I think a good safe play and someone I be into now I mentioned that I think I kind of you Matt McNeely is being like a like a light version of Sam Burns I kind of you Patrick Rogers being a light version of Keith Mitchell in the sense that he can bomb it and he can put they're like you know Mitchell can occasionally you can at least make birdies I kind of feel like Rogers is somewhat similar in that sense he's not a big birdie maker at right now but he has components to make birdies and I think that could lead to birdies at this course specifically Rogers good off the T8 18th the distance the past 50 rounds he's also 7th at Bengrass putting he is at the finished 10th of Mexico open a few weeks ago despite being neutral on approach so it is a pretty volatile game plan for Rogers but I do think that volatility comes with upside and I like that so I think it's risky to go Rogers but I'm okay with a risk if there's upside I think there is what is your read on Patrick Rogers here and $6,600 I didn't really have one so I'm looking at him closer here really good putter stable putter great on Bengrass as well I think he makes sense so I have to add him to the list I got to make sure that list doesn't get too long but yeah I think you know five or six golfers in the 8000 ring or like the 93 and below I can he's definitely in that conversation now I'll take that as a win let's move on to our player picks our win picks here for the AT&T Byron Nelson based on the current win odds over at Fan Duel Sportsbook I'm going to think about mine for a second who do you have who stands out to you here the standout plays for me like true standouts are JT burns and Hideki I I'm going to go with I'm going to go a little bit or a lot shorter than I typically go I'm going to go with JT is my first play here okay Zalatoris burns Hideki also in that conversation for me I will go with I'll go I'll go Zalatoris the model doesn't quite agree with me there but yeah I'm going to throw that one out a little bit because I think the course sets up really well for Zalatoris so I'll say he gets a win leading into the PGA and then we get hyped up here for Zalatoris okay I'm going to go Zalatoris too I know I'm kind of blocking you but I think that he is like the best option on the board at 21 to 1 so I'll go with him and the other option I consider JT but I don't want to overlap on both so and I don't want to go super long I know it's like a volatile event because because of like the the birdie the score ability of it but also like there are so many studs the number of dudes you have to beat is tough so why some Keith Mitchell were the longer shots I was considering I'll just try to buy you some more time here but a or B bro be come on be that's like one of my only only nick names a or B yeah that's what people call me yo what's up a B yeah every now and then don and select a select few a select few BG don the dong Dula that one doesn't caught on yet but we'll make it happen if you mash Brandon's names together branding a Dula in the middle is dong Dula and I think that that should be his nickname but anyway okay we're going to the narrative wedding narrative to Dustin Johnson it was between him and Burns Burns was technically B which means I should have picked him when he said a or B DJ was a but my heart says DJ so we're going to Dustin Johnson off the wedding wedding narrative in full effect the DGAP narrative been cancelled for Dustin Johnson forever so the win picks for me Zalatoris and DJ you have JT and Zalatoris like that sets up well for this week any final thoughts for you Brandon on the AT&T Byron Nelson before he said the good people off to fill out their lineups while our win picks were no longer than 21 to one I do think it's a week where you can embrace more that volatility for your actual win again we're trying to hit winners here to gain standings points you can get a little bit longer with your win picks but it is a full field so you got to be a lot of guys and that also transfers over to DFS where you can play some more value plays than typical I'm not going balanced despite a field that could potentially fall into a balanced you know format but you know yeah I think that you can I don't know you can just pivot a lot of different ways even at the top like you can play Hideki or DJ or Zane I don't again I don't think it's a Zander course because he just doesn't like and play well at like Bertie Fest but right a lot of different stuff you can do and that's really fun if you dig in you know throughout the week I agree about too so we're going to send people off now to fill out your lineups that is all that we have here for today but a quick reminder to make sure you are subscribed to the Number Fire Daily Fantasy podcast feed we do still have daily MLB podcasts over there getting you set for each day's slave of MLB DFS PGA UFC and NASCAR cooking along as well so hit subscribe and if you like what you hear leave us a rating and review as well Brandon if people have questions for you on Twitter where can they find you there I'm at Godula 13 G D ULA 13 13 my favorite number but also looks like a capital B B is that intentional or is it just because it's your favorite number and my favorite number but it also works and anyone who anyone who doesn't like the number in the Twitter handle they can just deal with it well I'm at Jim Sonnis no number there aren't a lot of Sonnis's so you know just there at Jim Sonnis J I M S A N N E S you can also follow the Fandall podcast network at Fandall podcast big thank you everyone for tuning in for today good luck to you with your lineups we'll talk to you once again next week for another major PGA championship coming in hot this has been the heat check fantasy podcast powered by number fire


Alright, our first caller is David from California. Hey, what's up, David? How can we help you? Hey guys, how's it going? First of all, thank you for all that you do I really appreciate I've learned a ton from the YouTube channel I had a question about how to integrate Kettlebells into a three-day-a-week full-body type program Prior to the pandemic, I had been training like an upper-lower type split And then when gyms closed we tried a few home programs eventually settled on working with Kettlebells Which I actually enjoyed a lot in the absence of a barbell But when the second lock lock down kind of hit, you know, we finally couldn't take it We bought a rig for the patio, you know barbell squat rag all the stuff we need And I'm so happy to be kind of back lifting heavy weights And so I was able to recognize a ton of value from the kettlebell training which was new to me at the time So I guess my question is how can I best integrate some kettlebell training into more barbell dominant three-day-a-week full-body type program Still like optimize the benefits of both. Yeah, that's a good question I need more information though. What are your fitness goals because that that makes a difference Definitely strength strength aesthetics Okay, yeah, so you're looking to get stronger and look good. Okay, so I'm gonna look better So kettlebells are Another form of resistance just like dumbbells barbells, you know cables or even resistance bands And now if you're if your goals were a little bit different Let's say your goals were athletic performance or then my answer might be a little different But your your goals are pretty general. I want to get stronger. I want to look better in that case What you want to do is you want to look at the tools that you're gonna use for resistance training and use them In the with the exercises that they're best suited for for example If you're gonna do loaded squats and you want to go heavy It's hard to beat a barbell barbell is gonna be one of your best tools for heavy, you know loaded squats If you're gonna do a windmill Kettlebells are one of the best devices you can use and that mainly has to do with the way that the weight is loaded And how it sits on your forearm. So there's a few exercises. I love kettlebells for I love them for kettlebell specific exercises So like swings, obviously you want to do swings. You're gonna use a kettlebell over a dumbbell or barbell I love shoulder presses Overhead presses are awesome with a kettlebell. It's a totally different feel the weight sits lower on the arm So it's a shorter lever and it encourages this kind of straight line spiraling effect when you do an overhead press You could also use kettlebells for some exercises to change the way that the tension feels on the body for example When you do a fly a chest fly if you use kettlebells You'll notice you have a different feeling with the tension when you drop the weight and then when you bring it up because the weight Sits outside of your arms. So you could play with that, you know as well but honestly my favorite exercises with kettlebells are carries swings and overhead presses Turkish get-ups and What I say windmills those are probably the best exercise I could think of with kettlebells And I would put those in to replace dumbbell and barbell exercises for those kind of respective body parts or goals Yeah, it sounds to me and well, I know back in the day We had like a smaller program out is kettlebell for aesthetics, but we just basically took a lot of You know common exercises and we put them together in kind of an aesthetic type routine There's a lot of versatility with kettlebells is the point to that So, you know, if your goal is to get strong but also like really try and shape your body like there's a way to do that By loading kettlebells. I like to use them personally more for you know lateral type training and it really complements like barbell training very well because it's such a different stimulus and it's such a different way to You know load the body and have to account for that And like Sal said with with unique moves like windmills or bent presses Are things where there's a lot more rotation. So any chance that you can add rotation like in your rows and your overhead pressing You know any kind of pressing I think it's it's it's a very valuable tool for that because of the way it's loaded So I honestly I think that even if you have a an established barbell routine You're already doing you can also add that in is like accessory lifts So David I have a question for you. Are you are we looking to add the kettlebell? Exercises into the three-day week routine or are you looking to potentially complement that on off days with the kettlebells? Is that an option? Are we sticking with the three-day routine that because that changes my answer? Yeah, I'm not married to three days I mean I kind of was going with three days because once I switched back to Doing like a full full body routine. It just worked better for me But I think you know having the rig on my patio is maybe a little bit easier to you know get out there when I can So I think you know, I'm not married to three days necessarily. Maybe maybe more as a complimentary type of type of Okay, cool because that definitely changes my answer. So at first you I mean your main goal is strengthen the way you look So to be honest like running the three body three three day a week Barbell routine is going to get you the most strength and probably build like the best aesthetic physique now. I Love to use kettlebells. How I and your goals kind of align with kind of my goals So how I like to do it is I normally pick one two three max of these kettlebell Exercises that the guys both brought up and I might do that on just on an off day So like I have my three full full body routine day or routine and then in the middle in there I might do Turkish get-ups win meals and carries. That's it. You know It'll be a 20 30 minute type of routine and I'm just gonna practice the skill of those moments One thing that's cool about kettlebells is they they're definitely high-skill type of exercises and and takes a lot of practice to get Good at it. You probably I'll have to work on some mobility if you are limited in some movements Like win meals and things like that and like Turkish get-up, which I think is really challenging So I like to just pick one or two of those those movements and just practice them and get good at it And I would either one add them into my three-day week routine or two set a day aside where it's like This is my like kind of functional day. I'm just gonna work on mobility I'm gonna work on these two or three kettlebell movements and the goal is not to push the weight really hard It's just to get better at the movement That will carry over into your three-day routine and you're not your desired outcome when you're training the kettlebells It's more about the movement and the art of it and the skill of it Versus like really hammering the weight save the hammering the weights and your growth and your strength and changing your physique for the three-day A week routine that's how I would do it. And by the way, there's no wrong answer here I think everything that everybody said it works. It's really finding what works best for you Got it. That's awesome. No, that's it. That helps a lot. Thank you so much. I appreciate it. No problem, David Thanks for calling in Yeah, it's uh, you know, I never used kettlebell actually a lot of most people didn't use kettlebells for a long time And then I don't know it was probably what would you say like you wouldn't even find them in gyms back in the day No, I think it was well early 90s. I think it really started to take off. Yeah, but I didn't really see them Yeah, I was gonna say just don't remember 2000. Well, I guess I was an early adopter. Yeah Yeah, you were you were but even when you worked for me at hillsdale. There wasn't a kettlebell in there Yeah, that's true. It wasn't in the gyms. No, I had to go. I had to go see yeah There was always so I always had like and it started probably in 0506 I was gonna say like early 2000. Yeah 0506 I'd say I'd always have like one trainer that one guy who was like into like Different usually it was a rushing guy the guy who read povels book Yeah, well because two one of the main reasons why it wasn't adopted early by your normal big gym trainer was because it was like a $1,000 $1,500 certification. Yeah, it was very expensive. It was very expensive to get certified in kettlebells Nobody just nobody knew how to use them. You know, the irony is kettlebells are the original weights They're the free the first free weights were kettlebells. In fact, that's what that's what dumbbells were called because it was a bell That didn't make sound And then somebody created the dumbbell use the term and then they had to change the name to kettlebell But they've been around for a long time. You could see the very first strongmen who are using weights They didn't have dumbbells. They had barbells with round ends and then they had kettlebells And I didn't use them for a long time and to be quite honest, you know Aside from the kettlebell specific exercises like you're not going to do a swing with a dumbbell or a barbell very well at all Right. Um, there are some exercises. I think even traditional exercises. I think kettlebells are better for overhead presses I prefer a kettlebell overhead press to a dumbbell over if I had to pick and I like them both I'll do them both. But if I had to pick, I like the kettlebell version. Well, there's a reason for that, right? It follows the natural spiraling of the shoulder as you press for one and two It's loaded on the back of your wrist, which naturally Pulls pull your back. It helps hold the arms back behind you One of the number one problems when teaching a shoulder press to almost any and every client Is the the you know, the forward shoulders when they press up the arching of the low back Loading the kettlebells on the back of the wrist when you press it follows that spiral rotation and in addition to that It puts the weight on it's also just a fuller range of motion I mean you could do an Arnold press, I guess with a dumbbell, but with a kettlebell It's like it's ideal for for something like that. That's one of the oldest tools out there You know that has still has relevance today. So it's like one of those things like obviously It stood the test of time for reason