Hello everyone, welcome back to a new session on dentistry and more today we have a continuation of fluoride topics that is defluidation techniques. So in this video I will be explaining about various defluidation techniques which are commonly used by the Indians that is 15 out of 30 states have affected with fluorosis. So the common practices which are seen in India is explained in this video. So I have explained you about fluoride as a double H sword in my fluoride toxicity video because once it is going low it can cause or it can attribute to formation of dental caries and if it is going high it causes fluorosis. So in 1984 WHO guidelines suggested that there should be one PPM for the optimal fluoride one PPM should be the optimal fluoride concentration. So as to get the maximum benefit of it is to prevent dental caries. So if it is a warmer climate the PPM can be low around 0.7.8 and if it is a cooler climate it can go up to 1.2. So the range varies between 0.7 to 1.2 because it is affected with the temperature. So we have already learned the motling because in the history of fluorides we have seen the motel enamel it goes higher the motling and discrete witting will be seen. So if it goes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 range it causes severe destruction of the tooth. So for your information the highest naturally occurring fluoride is recorded in a lake in Kenya and the lake is known as Nakuru and it has 2800mg per liter that is 2800 ppm. So we are talking about 1, 2, 3 ppm but this lake has 2800 ppm this milligram per liter is ppm. So India has 15 out of 32 states that includes unit territories we do not have 32 states as such it includes unit territories. So 15 of total this states and unit territories are affected with fluorosis that is endemic fluorosis is present for a very long period because groundwater has high amount of fluoride content. So in India we have in USA we have seen the community water fluidations where happened in many cities but in India there is no possibility of community water fluidation because we are suffering from the excess amount of fluorine or the fluorosis. So we are always thinking about de-fluidation not the water fluidation because we are at the other edge of the fluorine because we are getting disadvantage out of fluorine. So mainly the Gujarat Rajasthan, Andhra are the 50-100% of the district in these states are affected in Kerala it is Alopea and Palakkad were affected mostly but in these states have a severe attack of this fluorosis that is almost 50-100% districts are affected. So let us come to the point that is de-fluidation so what we are doing is we are removing fluoride from the drinking water that is the idea behind de-fluidation. So what we can do is either we can remove the fluoride from water or you can go for alternative source of safe water and bring water from very distant sources so those are the things we have but the most convenient and most feasible method is de-fluidation that is remove the fluoride from the water we have. So we have few methods de-fluidation and by definition it is the downward adjustment of level of fluoride in drinking water to the optimal level so we have learned fluoridation is upward adjustment so we are increasing in community water fluidation the upward adjustment of fluoride but whereas in de-fluidation it is a downward adjustment of level of fluoride in drinking water to the optimal level that is 1 ppm. So we have the common methods as adsorption technique, ion exchange technique, precipitation technique and some techniques known as reverse osmosis. So adsorption is keeping some material in the water and the fluoride will be adsorbed to the surface, ion exchange is replacing the fluoride ions by cations and anions, precipitation is just like our water purification method we add alum lime and bleaching powder and precipitate the fluoride by making it a flux. So this precipitation method is the most common also known as an Alganra technique which is almost same as our water purification or the process which we have seen in the water plant the flocculation sedimentation filtration all those procedures are same in this precipitation technique. So water purification is almost same. So let's see one by one first one is adsorption technique it is nothing but the adsorption of fluoride ions onto the surface of an activation we put some active agent into the water and get the fluoride adsorbed not absorbed adsorbed on the surface. So the material used are activated alumina, activated carbon and bone char, bone char is nothing but bones of this dead animals so it can it has a property to adsorb this fluoride okay so activated alumina which is launched by UNICEF in rural India because rural India is mostly affected with fluorosis. So alumina can be inserted into the water and it adsorbs the fluoride but the most problem faced with this alumina application is adsorption of fluoride only at specific pH range so we have to check the pH range whether it is suitable for this alumina application or not and there is always a pre-post pH adjustment of water. Water should be at a proper pH for this alumina activation or alumina application and there should be frequent activation of alumina is needed which makes the technique very expensive so once we use alumina it gets replenished it needs to be replenished the active ingredient will be lost after a period of time so it needs to be replenished or frequent activation is required so these are the disadvantage of alumina so bone char as the same process bone char we put into the water and it absorbs fluoride but the problem is it depends upon the temperature and pH of the water but it is economic bone char are economic because it is maybe available not like activated alumina but the main problems are it can harm the bacteria and it is unhygienic method and it is very technique sensitive and the biggest problem in Indian scenario is the cultural and religious objections we take once of the dead animals it may cause problems considering the cultural sentiments so the next thing in adsorption technique is big pieces column so it is almost like activated alumina so it has a agent compound is the compound which is present in the brick column is alumina oxide which absorbs fluoride and also mud pots also can be used to remove fluoride so water which is kept in mud pots the mud pot will receive or it absorbs the fluoride and it is one of the common method which is used in the rural part because of its economic point and it is commonly used commonly accepted in rural community because mud pots are easily available and it is cheap so there are some natural adsorption adsorbants like drumstick tree seeds of drumstick tree roots of vetiver grass and tambourine seeds the MS swaminathan research foundation that is MSS RF had shown that this drumstick seeds to have a remarkable deflugation efficiency which is higher than that of activated alumina so which is all natural adsorptions we have drumstick seeds roots of vetiver grass and tambourine seeds so these also can be used as an adsorbent so these were the adsorbing techniques so we had seen this natural adsorption adsorbents and mud pot brick pieces then the bond charge activated alumina so the next we have ion exchange method so ion exchanging method is using of synthetic chemicals namely anion and cation exchange so the problem with this technique is it is very expensive and economical in Indian scenario because Indian scenario this pleurosis is mostly affected in the rural areas and they cannot afford this type of equipments and this ion exchange techniques they're all convenient with the adsorbing techniques till the nalgonda technique has come into practice so one of the ion exchange technique the compound used is carbion it is a cation exchange resin so it can be used on sodium and hydrogen cycle so it exchanges the cation whereas a defluron 1 and defluron 2 are different one so defluron 1 has it is a sulfonated sawdust which is mixed with 2% H alum solution the defluron 2 was developed later to overcome the problem of defluron 1 it is sulfonated coal using alumina solution okay first one was sawdust whereas the second one was coal both are sulfonated so that was a very expensive method this carbion defluron 1 defluron 2 the ion exchange method so the ion will be exchanged either the captain or anion the ion of this fluoride compound or this fluoride will be because fluoride and ever stays as an ion it always exists as a compound so the product we apply will replace a scion or it exchanges scion and reduces the fluoride availability or the presence in the drinking water so make it to a drinkable condition so this is not used because of its expensive nature and the most common method we use is a precipitation technique so disadvantages of ion exchange agent and adsorption techniques we have seen because there need to be a necessary flow system and it is often difficult to arrange if there is no pipe to water supply if people are taking water from the wells or rivers or something like that ponds or such water supply this is not possible the two methods which I explained already are not run with this well system there should be a flow system that is it should go through the pipes and this equipment should be connected to the pipes and there should be and this is an active agent so there should be frequent activation of the agents there should be replenishment of this agents otherwise the water won't be get the fluidization but the precipitation methods are based on the addition of chemicals such as coagulants and precipitating the soluble fluoride as insoluble fluoroappetite okay so it's just like what we have seen in water purification method the big tank we add alum as a coagulant and it coagulate the impurities and the flokes are getting sedimented and it removed from the bottom of this chamber and then it goes through the filtration it's the same principle is being applied in Nalconda technique except some extra agent will be added here the Nalconda technique of fluidization is almost same as water purification and it was invented by Neary that is national environmental engineering research institute in Nagpur and it was by Nalke et al in 1974 it was very economical and simple method so why this Nalconda name came because Nalconda is a district in Andhra Pradesh where they used this technique as a indigenous method later this institute has taken up this method and commercialized and they started building this plan for these rural people but Nalconda is the area where this technique was in its primitive fashion so they started it so the name was given as Nalconda technique Nalconda is not in Nagpur it is in Andhra okay so what they're doing is they are adding sequence of sodium aluminate that is alum lime and bleaching water to the fluoride water then do the flocculation sedimentation and filtration just like our water purification so in most commonly we add alum to the water purification plant or water purification the first step here we are adding lime and bleaching water in a sequence so that is a difference in between this water purification and Nalconda technique so it can be very useful for domestic and the community water supply so this is just a flowchart what we are doing is lime alum and bleaching water will be mixed to the first point of entry and there will be a rap mixing this is flocculation then there will be sedimentation this sediment will be removed from the bottom of the chamber and this goes to the filtration so filtration slowly it gets filtered and it goes to a clean water tank so the process is almost same as water purification only thing is it has a different reagent lime alum and bleaching water so mechanism is it will commonly run for a 22 liters of water the first we do rapid mixing that is coagulant will be added to this water and then 30 to 60 seconds with a speed of 10 to 20 rpm the coagulant is rapidly mixed so it gets uniformly dispersed so it start getting microflogs of fluoride because of this chemical coagulant then flocculation is the second stage where it is rpm is 2 to 4 the beginning it was 10 to 20 now it is slowly run for 10 to 15 minute the rapid mixing was 30 to 60 seconds the flocculation it is slowly to the rotation and it started forming the flocs because of this coagulant the fluoride compound will get become will become flocs and it's starting sedimentation so due to this gravitational force this particles will be sedimented at the bottom and it will be removed okay as we have seen in the diagram okay so we add here we do the rapid mixing then for flocculation this is 10 to 20 rpm 2 to 4 rpm this is for maybe 1 minute this is for 10 to 15 minutes then this it goes to sedimentation this is a sedimentation tank here it is slowly slowly for 10 to 15 minutes and 2 to 4 rpm then this sediment this floc flocs are removed from here because flocculation happened here and the flocculation flocs are removed from here then it goes to the filtration and filtration and finally we get the clean water so filtration is same like our water purification plant so it get filtered and we can send it for the domestic supply so maintenance is very cheap it is like 1.6 lakh for a 250 population and only we need 50 stainless steel filters and it is costing around 35000 so the main advantage it's its low cost of investment and low cost of maintenance so the biggest advantages are there is no need of regeneration of media which we have seen in the adsorption techniques no handling of caustic acids and alkalis the chemicals are required are readily available and it can be used for domestic use economical symbol design construction we can use a very large quantity of water which is very efficient removing fluoride from high levels and very little wastage of water and needs minimum mechanical and electrical equipments there is no need of energy only need muscle power semi-skilled workers also can be used so the biggest disadvantage is if the total dissolved salt exceeds 1500 milligram per liter we need to do a prior desalination and hardness of water also matters if it is 200 to 600 it requires precipitation softening and if it is beyond 600 milligram per liter it needs becomes a cause for rejection or adsorption of desalination so there will be a high amount of sledge compared to the other methods in algonoma and there is a requirement of a large amount of alum so indications should be total dissolved salt it should be less than 1500 milligram per liter total hardness should be 600 below 600 this should be below 1500 and raw water fluoride should be between 1.5 to 20 that is 20 ppm modifications are like poly aluminum chloride is another compound poly aluminum hydroxy sulphate also can be used and the other methods are reverse osmosis electrolysis or electro dialysis are the physical methods that are tested for deflutation so these methods are also can be used for a very small amount of water so reverse osmosis is like we use hydraulic pressure exerted on one side of a permeable membrane we have seen it in our nr classes what is osmosis what is reverse osmosis we keep a semi permeable membrane and apply hydro hydraulic pressure which forces the water across the membrane and leaving the salt behind so leaving the salt of fluoride behind and get the clean water on the other side in electro dialysis the membrane allows the ion to pass but not the water okay so our idea is to remove the fluoride from this water so we can use a reverse osmosis escaping semi permeable membrane or in electro dialysis the ions will be passed and the good water will be left out and electro dialysis is also very expensive and intensive procedures but it is very rarely used all these reverse osmosis electro dialysis techniques electrolysis also it is a process with adsorption of fluoride with freshly prepared aluminum hydroxide which is generated by anodic dissolution of aluminum or its alloy in electrochemical cell we have learned in chemistry what is anode what is cathode what is electrolysis so once electricity passes this ions moves to anode and cathode so that procedure also can be used to remove fluoride from water biggest advantage is it doesn't need any chemical and no need to pre and post treatment low volume of sludge but it is there is a requirement of electricity so that's all about defluidation techniques because like I said 15 out of total Indian states are affected with fluorosis so we are into the action of defluidation not water fluoration because we are to remove the fluoride from the water to get people a palatable or portable drinking water so that's all about defluidation techniques the most commonly used in algondae technique and adsorption techniques are there this is a precipitation technique and ion exchange methods are very expensive and some other techniques we have seen reverse osmosis electrolysis like that so that's all about defluidation techniques I'll come up with another topic then just general thank you


It is time for the fourth major of this golf season as the open championship, the 150th open championship is coming up this week. And of course that means there's some DFS to be played, some money to be won, some courses to be broken down. So Savana and Gitchi said for this week's open championship made DFS perspective. Welcome on into the heat check fantasy podcast powered by Number Fire. That's right here on the fan dual podcast network and numberfire.com. My name is Jim Sadas. I am a senior writer and analyst for numberfire.com. Join here as always by Brandon Gadoula. He is the managing editor of numberfire.com. Sorry, the senior managing editor of numberfire.com. Brandon, I keep trying to devote you. How are you doing today? Good, Xander's winning. Finally, he's got nine wins in his past three starts. It's crazy. I was told he wasn't an alpha and couldn't win. And this doesn't align with the narratives I saw pushed on Twitter. What's going on? Yeah, there's a lot of variance in golf when it comes to winning. And anyone who really thinks that golfers as good as Xander don't have what it takes to win. Doesn't have that dog in him. He shows up at every single major. He's on the leaderboard any time there's a good field.  No disrespect to the John Deere. But it's not like he's just winning these lower quality events. Yeah, I'm shocked he didn't skip the open to play the Cuda this week. I was expecting that. I was expecting the withdrawal. The Rob Bolton tweet of, hey, he withdrew. He's going to play the Cuda instead. Get those FedEx cut points.  But I think that what this is setting up for is Xander is now the number two favorite to win this week's open championship, which means I would say by 9 AM Eastern on Thursday, which I mean afternoon-ish across the pond, we're going to see tweets about, oh, Xander can't show up when everything matters, because he's going to go like one over. And we'll be like, oh, he was the number two favorite. Xander wilts under pressure. Pull of law. That's what this is setting up for. You know that, correct? If he doesn't win this week, someone's going to tweet that. I guarantee it. I love to lean on straw men as usual. If we just stay off Twitter, then we're not subject to the silliness of downplaying somebody for not winning three. I judge the public's takes based on the comment section on whatever, pick your random news website. So I don't actually know what you're talking about. Look, I mean, what it comes down to is, again, winning golf tournaments is hard. Even things like holding 54 whole leads and converting them, that does not have enough context into who was close, who else was in the field, how many guys were within a few shots. And also, I don't see how holding a 54 whole lead is ever a bad thing. And sometimes people treat that worse than just not even being close to contention. You've got to have a lead to blow a lead. It's like we're broad in the finals. You know how you lose in NBA finals, though, is you've got to get to the NBA finals. When you get a fourth quarter comeback, you're probably in the fourth quarter.  Like, there are these situations like that. So are you guaranteeing a Xander victory at the Open Championship this week? Not a guarantee, but I mean.  They were not there. Was he a win pick for you last week? I didn't listen, obviously. No, I didn't quite get to Xander. Fraud. Fraud. Fraud. Well, he was like. Fraud. I like Xander. Fraud alert, Brandon Gedula. It was honestly like one of those where I thought he'd be a good pick for this week for the old course. And I was like, you know, you can't really pick the same guy and the irony. The irony is not lost on me here. You've got Xander every single week. I get it. But I was like, you know what?  But now that, as you mentioned, his win odds are down to, what, 13 to 1 on Fandalsport's book. They're shorter than they were for last week. Yeah, that's steep. He was 20 to 1, liked them there. So we'll talk plenty about Xander later on, because we got a firecracker of a field to use a term from across the pond. Is that actually a term? All my terms for like British things are from Love Island and the BBC's Formula One podcast. That is my total consumption of like British like slang. I think those two are not the same thing. So I might be like getting a wide range here, but I don't know what that covers the entire lexicon. I've definitely heard some soccer goals referred to as firecrackers, or sorry, football goals. Jenny Gao, who is the BBC Formula One podcast, will say twiddly bits when referring to like some turns. So I'm gonna work that in somewhere. It'll be organic, not forced. I'm just calling my shot right now. We'll talk about St. Andrews. We'll talk about everything you need to know about this week's event in just one second. But first, the PGA back in a big way this weekend, with a massive daily fantasy contest on Fandal for the Open Championship. This week's PGA mega eagle contest includes $400,000 in total prizes with first place netting, $100K. Best of all, just $9 to enter to get yourself a chance at all that cash. Go to Fandal.com or download the Fandal app. Eligibility restrictions apply. Go to Fandal.com or download the Fandal app for more details. Also, a reminder to make sure you are subscribed to the Number Fire Daily Fantasy podcast feed. Wherever you get your podcast, we of course have this PGA podcast every week, but also MLB podcast every weekday. We got USC and NASCAR as well. Everything right there, or Brandon's pointing through watching YouTube. Subscribe to the Number Fire Daily Fantasy podcast to get those podcasts right as they are posted. I'm sure the people listening in the podcast version are like, what is he pointing at? And the people watching are like, all your medium. And of course the people watching are like, of course he pointed to the wrong side of the screen first and then to find his bearings. I thought you were pointing to Twitter handle and I was very confused. No, never.  So people are complex, Brandon. So let's dive in and talk about this Open Championship. It is at St. Andrew's golf links, the old course. It is 7,313 yards in a par 72. Of course, St. Andrew's has a storied history of hosting the Open. They've hosted 29 or 30 times previously, a whole bunch. They hosted it back in 2015, hosted in 2010, 2005, 2000, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. There are 156 golfers in the field for this week. The top 70 golfers plus ties make the cut after the first 36 holes. There is no 10 shot rule, just top 70, not 65 for this week plus ties for the Open Championship. Brandon, the good thing is, unlike a lot of majors, we actually do know a lot about this course. The old course at St. Andrew's, what do we need to know about this course before we fill out lineups for this week? Yeah, so this is the 30th time that this is hosted. And thankfully, I mean, we can dig back to 1873. Look at the stroke scheme data from... Not gonna do that. Shot link. Shot link. Shot link. They didn't have laser spec then. Are you sure? No, they had lasers. Yeah, they had all the coverage. You said they didn't. When were... If you put, when were in a Google search, the things that pop up in suggestions are weird. So lasers were invented in December of 1958. So you still got a couple Open Championships and lasers were invented. That's good. Yeah, so I mean, look. We have a lot of history at the old course, but realistically, shot link data, not existent. And we basically had this thing played every five years since 2000. So we can look at some more general stats as well, but one thing that stands out to me digging back into the more recent Open Championships is that there's been a lot of runaway winners. There was a three-man playoff in 2015, but before that, the past three winners were five shots or better. But if you look back at full season stats in terms of, you know, and compare those to in-tornament stats, like in-tornament strokes gained, which stroke differential, we can figure out strokes gained without shot link and lasers, but we can't figure out off the tee and the grain there and stuff. But you have to be a good golfer, basically. The better golfer's farewell here. Full season stroke differential correlates really strongly with success during the tournament. So what that tells us is the golfer's in good form during a year tend to separate here. Makes sense. We see that basically at every single major, which is why one of my key stats tends to be just strokes gained average or whatever form it is you want, adjusted, long, just anything in that regard, because we want good golfers to boil things down. But distance also matters here. I'm gonna use strokes gained off the tee, but distance over accuracy is sort of what's jumping out because very, very wide fairways. And the analysis I did did show an emphasis on driving distance. Again, sort of comparing things back to performance within the specific open at St. Andrews.  I don't know how easy this is gonna play. The winners have been 15, 16, 14, 19 and six under. Again, a lot of those were sort of standout winners. So maybe like 12 under. Then again, the distance gains that we've seen since even 2015, it's gonna depend on what the weather is and we'll talk about weather later on. But we could honestly be looking more at a 15 under winner whereas with a lot of majors, it's we're looking more for like bogey avoidance than birdie or better rate. But overall for me, I'm looking for that long-term form, that's my number one key stat, stroke gained approach, stroke gained off the tee, driving distance and birdie or better rate for this week. So we know that overall form matters most and that's gonna be our big thing, but you mentioned that distance does matter too. So let's talk with someone like Cameron Smith, who's not super long off the tee, but is a tremendous overall golfer. How much do you ding someone of that archetype who is a good overall golfer but is not a bomber given the way this course sets up? So only a little bit because Cam Smith isn't like specifically prohibitively short. If you look at like a Z score, he's about 0.21 below the average of this field, which is not that bad. I can talk about rankings, but specifically with like driving distance, you can see a lot of clustered rankings and someone can be 15th or 40th and have a difference of like two yards off the tee on average. So I don't really like to look at just specific rankings when it comes to really anything. I use these scores to drive everything, but I just refer to things as percentiles because it's a lot simpler. But for Cam Smith specifically, I think he stands out because you're gonna have to be creative in certain spots. That's one of the things that you have to do at the old course. And one thing I didn't get into is just how large the greens are. They are basically as big as you could even imagine in terms of relating them back to what we typically see on the PGA Tour. And so you're gonna see a lot of lag putting. You're gonna see a lot of long first putts. And that's why one of my sort of like secondary stats or one of the things I'm looking for is like actually like lag putting and three putt avoidance because you're gonna be in positions to make three putts. It's hard to three putt unless you're me on a smaller green, but with these huge greens, like your first putt is gonna matter a lot. So Cam Smith, one of the best iron players in the world plays well in the wind. We saw that at the players. And he's gonna be able to sort of be creative with the short game and lag putt. So Cam Smith specifically, I don't mind. But yeah, distance overall, I think does give you a leg up. I don't think you have to be long. And one thing I will note is we've seen Louis Wiestersen and Zach Johnson win here. Louis at the time was gaining distance on the field. ZJ was basically field average when he won. So it wasn't like they were short. We don't think of them as big hitters now, but that is one thing that I found in my research. So I think Cam Smith fits that mold. I think he's a really interesting player this week because it seems like the lochter's wearing off on Cam Smith, but he was T10 last week at the Genesis Scottish Open. And it's a piece of the puzzle. Okay, so let's talk here about, what golfers have done previously at the Open Championship? We're gonna open this up here, of course, because we focused on just saying Anders, we're looking at just 2010, 2015. And that's probably not like irrelevant data, but it's probably pretty darn close. Do you want to say Zach Johnson? Yeah, yeah, that was Louis. Honestly, I mean, Louis is fine, but like, you know, not gonna factor that in too much there. We're talking about the Open Championship though, because you mentioned wind. Wind is typically a factor in these conditions. Obviously, typically a links style course as well. So there are some correlations between previous years at the Open Championships that Brandon, you dug back and looked at what golfers have done at previous Open Championships. Who stood out in this format as far as getting a boost at the type of course? Jordan Spieth has the best Open Championship form in terms of strokes game per round since 2017. It's not particularly close. And I have all these numbers in this list in my helper up on numberfire.com, which is just sort of a very good reference for, if you want to see this list straight up. But Spieth has a win, four top 25s and all four starts, three top 10s. He's just a really good Open Championship player. But second up is Robert McIntyre, who I think will get a lot of buzz this week. I see the case for it, but he's finished top 10 in both of his starts at the Open Championship in the sample. Brooks Kepka, top 10 in three of his four. I typically just sort of talk myself into Brooks for every major, but that's kind of wearing on me. And I think I'm not gonna do it this time around. Tony Fee now very interesting for this week. Three top 25s in his four starts in the sample. Tommy Fleetwood, usually I go around, but not a whole lot of upside. One top 10 in those four starts. Shane Lowry is a former winner. Rory, who we're gonna talk about plenty this week. Three or four made cuts, but two of those were top fives. Francesco Molinari's got a win. Xander shows up at basically every major. He's four from four with made cuts to top 25s. John Rahman, Matt Kutcher round out that list for me of notable form at the past opens among golfers with at least two starts. And I will mention that Colin Morkawa obviously won his loan open start. Scotty Sheffler, Victor Holland also good in their loan starts to date. But yeah, I mean, it's a pretty interesting list. And again, it goes back to like, if you just play the best longterm golfers, like as many studs as you can, it's really not gonna be that bad of a lineup. So do you care about like open history? In terms of like bumping up golfers or down, do you care about major performance history? If like, let's say like there are a lot of guys, Max Homa, Patrick Cantlay, who I will consider this week, who don't have like spike weeks and majors but have good overall form, even when you adjust for field strength, do you care if guys have not flashed against the type of competition? Only a little bit. Cantlay, I was actually looking more into him because again, you went longterm form and good all around stats that's Cantlay every single week. But he's had some poor putting performances and majors, which is interesting. You don't really expect that to stick around because he's a good putter. Max Homa, a little bit of a different case, wasn't really the same class of player he is now. And since he's become like a multi-time winner on the PGA tour, he was T-13 at the PGA, I think was decent at the US Open, but my memory's not very good. I just remember that he did flash at the PGA, but I've seen enough from Homa now. Cameron Young, we were talking about before the show, he's got really bad major performances. I think he's missed four cuts with one top five in there and Cameron Young's a different golfer now than he used to be like years ago, so I think there's a lot of nuance that's required and you can't really give nuance to 150 golfers. So it's a little bit like it's a piece of the puzzle. I wanna see good major form. If I don't see it, I'll look into things and try to figure out why, but it's not like it's an absolute must for someone to be rock solid in majors or else I won't consider them. And like Brandon said, if you wanna see the list of guys who've done well at previous Open Championships, you can find that in the pceroteoveronnumberfire.com. So some of us in current form here will go through six golfers who have noteworthy form one way or another. I'm not sure which side Xander Shafley falls on that. Is he in here for good form or bad, Brandon? Please enlighten me on this. On its decent, I think we could call it an upswing. Won the Zurich with Patrick Cantlay and then won the Travelers, was the 54-hole leader at the Genesis Scottish Open and converted with what he sort of called like his worst stuff of the week on Sunday, almost didn't convert, but ultimately did. And we're gonna remember that he won a couple of weeks from now, not that he almost didn't win. That's just how things go. So it's important to keep that stuff in mind long-term. And Xander now has 13 of 15 made cuts in 2022 with six consecutive top 20s. Data golf on their true stroke scheme, query toll over the past three months now ranks Xander second in the field behind someone you'll talk about in just a moment. I think Xander, process-wise, was a core play regardless of what he did last week. He went out and won. That is probably gonna make him popular. He always is pretty popular. Just, I guess, despite people thinking he can't win tends to be very popular in terms of DFS, but I can't really nitpick Xander. We know that the win odds are shortening, but obviously the salary on Fandall is locked in so that's not gonna shift. So I think Xander is standing out as one of the best plays of the week. We gotta talk about the rest of the studs though. So talk to me about Rory and we'll kind of, we'll dissect the top field a little bit. And we'll happily talk to you about Rory. So we'll talk about Rory right now. Xander down at 11-3, whereas Rory McElroy is the highest salary golfer in the field at 12,000, but it's for a good reason because Rory playing well right now. He's been on a tear. If we start with the Masters, his worst finish in seven events is 19th. More than half of the seven, so four out of seven, had been top five. So including when at the RBC Canadian Open, Rory was second at the Masters.  Eighth of the BGA Championship, fifth at the US Open. The Open Championship recently has been shaky. Obviously he won it here back in 2014, or not here, but he did win it back in 2014. He's top five three years after that, but amidst the cut in 2019, he was 46 last year, but also I don't care. He's red hot right now. I've been his third at St. Andrews all the way back in 2010. So, you know, he fits this course. He knows this course. I'm having a hard time, like ranking anyone ahead of him straight up, but what about you? What's your read on Rory? What's your read on Xander, et cetera, et cetera? Yeah, Rory is the best play overall, regardless of salary to me. I'm not gonna be alone in that. He's the betting favorite. He is the highest salary golfer that almost always means he's gonna be the most popular play of the week, but best long-term golfer in my database, best T-to-green golfer over the past year in my database as well. He's gonna gain distance, trust only John Rom over the past 50 rounds on tour and distance gained on the field. And one of the issues with Rory can be, well, I guess these are two issues, but how are the wedges doing? They're better right now, whether that sticks or not, we'll find out. And then how's the putter going? He's really putting well right now from long range, yes, but also from within close. 88th percentile over the past 50 rounds within 15 feet, very clutch range there. 93rd percentile from 15 or greater feet, he's gonna get a lot of, they're all gonna get like lengthy putts. You gotta knock it close, avoid those three putts. But yeah, I mean, Rory's the best play of the week. Xander, as I mentioned, he's gonna be just the second place I look because of the salary being what it is. I know I won't be alone in that, but we can find other ways to differentiate. That's gonna leave a lot of golfers. Scotty, Chef or John Rom, Justin Thomas, Shane Lowry, Colin Moriakawa, a bit overlooked because I would think most people would rank Rory and Xander at salary, one and two in some capacity. But yeah, I think that they're the two standup plays above 11,000. And then if I'm gonna rank just the top three, I would put wheels out at tourist there, on number three at 11,000 even. So I think that that's kind of the key thing for me is that I think Xander and Rory relative to salary are probably the two of the best plays in the field. But I also think there are other good plays in the same salary ranges as them who will have their roster rate trimmed. They will not be low rostered, but they will have trimmed roster rates as a result of all the attention Xander and Rory will get. And Jordan Spieth too, because you mentioned that the open championship history, people love Spieth justifiably, he's awesome. But like that's gonna get that attention. And so my thought process here is, okay, how much, how do I view Scottie Schaeffer? How do I view Justin Thomas? Matt Fitzpatrick at 11, two, obviously did just win a major, but he's not the hot name right now because we saw Xander win, he's not Spieth, stuff like that. Zalatoris obviously, we're talking about guys proving in majors, he's done that pretty obviously. Yeah, no dog in him. So like, I think that's kind of a takeaway for me. For a cash game, I'm probably just going Rory and Xander, I think I can get to that from a salary perspective and feel pretty okay with it. And I like them for tournaments, I will not full fade them, I'd like to use them, but I'm okay not going overweight on them, maybe even with the field or a little bit below in order to get exposure to, I think specifically Schaeffler, JT, Zalatoris, those are the guys I like actively, actively want to seek acts. I think that they're a tremendous place this week. Again, not at low roster rates, but I think reduced from where they should be. Yeah, I think the field drops off at 10-9, I should say after 10-9 with Cameron Smith. What's up? 10-7. Rude. Okay. Rude. Patrick Cantlay, it's 10-7 by the way, it's why I'm offended by this. Well, I saw Dustin Johnson there behind Cam Smith. You can ignore him, Cantlay, come on, man. Well, I could deck you at 10-5, so now we're just opening up this rabbit hole, but I think anyone from Cam Smith and above is very justifiable. Oh, sorry. Yeah, sorry, go ahead. You mentioned being like open to pivoting, I think that's something we talk about every single major, just you can play John Rom, and maybe like one or two of these guys are just gonna be like on half as many rosters is like Rory and Xander, and you can get a lot of leverage just by playing them. I'm fine with that, but as it stands among the 11,000 and above range, I feel pretty good with Rory, Xander, and Zalatoris. JT would be the first place I'd go from there. I think I just like them more as a bet because it's all wrong. JT over Schaeffler? For DFS? Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Bet? Potentially, let me think on it. Incline to say yes, because I'm gonna bet JT and I can have an emotional hedge, so actually that Schaeffler, I don't know, I'll see. But yeah, I think I'm pretty open to that for this week, and I think that's the right way to view things. So again, for me at least, I will not full-fade those guys, but I'm okay being, I wanna make sure I have enough exposure to Schaeffler and JT and Zalatoris to benefit if they do well. And if that means I'm at 25% Rory, I prefer to be around 30, 35, but if I have to drop down 25% to get the requisite exposure to those guys to benefit if they do well, that's okay. I can make that trade off personally. So let's move on and talk about the mid-range and value tier guys who are in noteworthy form heading into the open championship. You're talking about Tony Fina, we talked about Fina, I think going into the U.S. Open, we talked about someone recently, but he keeps doing well. So what are you seeing with Fina here and what does that mean for him at 9-9? At what? 9-9. So with Fina, the reason for him is really good. If you, I wrote a piece for number fired, looking at like stabilization rates of strokes gain data. And if you look at like the soonest, like the quickest, shortest time frames for ball striking and short game stats, he's basically behind just the ender in terms of like what you could call recent form in that sense, but overall like we know the finishes are good. He has gained strokes from approach in all but two measured events in 2022. If you want results, T2 at the Mexico Open, T41 at the Wells Fargo, T30 at the PGA, T4 at the Charles Schwab, solo second with RBC Canadian Open, missed the cut at the U.S. Open, but then 13th at the Travelers. Again, someone we can also rely on in majors, which is not a must, but it's nice to see. Since 2017, 17 of 20 in terms of made cuts with nine top 10s, half of those were top 25s. I think that he's a good play. I think some of the losters weren't off, but I have seen him bet down from 48 to one to 40 to one on Vandal Sportsbook, like Tony Fiena at 99, what are your thoughts here? Yeah, I think that he's definitely someone I'm receptive to. My question for you is, do you prefer him to Joaquin Neiman, who is at 98? And I think would be the one hang up to me, feeling like super, super jazz about Fiena. So I like both. I would only, I'd probably have to flip a coin, honestly, if I had 99 hundred left for my final golfer. I think I'd probably lean toward, probably toward Fiena. I can trust the long-term major history better. He's got a really good, like lag putting numbers, which could be very flukey, but it could also just be that he's a good distance but struggles from within close. I trust him more to gain distance on the field, even though Neiman's right there. So I think it's more a question of those two versus Cameron Young, who's also in that same tier for me. Yeah, Young's betting odds are very long, which is always concerning to me, at least. But I think that he's had a three-event sample where he struggled and your research has shown that's where things get close to stabilizing, but maybe not quite at that point yet, because he had a miscut in there, I think. So he's not at like 12 rounds or anything yet. That's a concern to me. I would say guys I am interested in, guys who have my attention in that range are burns at 10-1 if you want to loop him in. Not as into Fleetwood, I think he's fine. I'm not, I just like, I think it'll probably be too popular for my personal preference there. Fiena, Neiman, I think that was it. And Young, I think that those are the ones who have my like pretty extreme attention in that range. I think it's a pretty good range too.  Yeah, I'm with you. This does though feel like a classic major field where you could build a lineup centering on those options and have a lot of, you still have good win equity. You'd be missing out on the elites from that regard, I like with Rory, Sheffler, Rom, JT, Zander and Cam, but like, sorry, I have Cameron Smith a lot higher than his win odds are, but so I like the tier. I do too. Okay, let's talk here about Max Homa who is below this tier at $9,000. Just golfing super well recently to the point where he's up to 12th in data golf's true strokes gained across the past six months, which is pretty sick for Max Homa. And the question is what we talked about before. Can he carry that form into a major? Homa finished 16th at the Scottish Open. That was his eighth top 20 in 13 events since the start of February. And he's shown upside too. Obviously he had the win at the Wells Fargo, he was fifth at the Memorial and those are not like bad events. Like they're not majors, but they're not bad events. But we haven't seen Homa blow up in a major yet. He's made the cut in just five of 11 majors since he turned a full-time pro, but four of those made cuts have been consecutive since he kind of became Max Homa. His finishes in those were 40th, 48th, 13th, and 47th. It's not great, but also made cuts in majors or made cuts in majors. I'm willing to overlook that personally. He's been good against decent fields. So doesn't seem like he's a feeder field disaster, a feeder field Easter or anything. If we're gonna, you know, coin that term, feeder field Easter, his form is very good right now. So for $9,000, I think that Homa don't really care that much about his major history. I think that I just want to use him and make him one of my core plays this week. But what about you where he had a Max Homa? Yeah, I love him this week. He won the Genesis. Like that's pretty nice to see in terms of if we're trying to figure out if the form can hold up against tough competition. And he is basically just gaining strokes across the board and every category, which is exactly what you want to see. I think that he's just one of the best value plays if not the best value play of the week. Okay, I think that our name stack of the week, if we're gonna do this now, we'll get out of the way early, is a Homa stack where you do Homa, obviously, but the H-O-M-A also gets you Thomas's. So you get J-T, Thomas Peters, it's fine. Thomas Detry, probably not. Can we flip a Tom in here? Like is Tommy Fleawood the actual name Thomas? Go with that. Homa, J-T, Peters, Tommy Fleawood. I think that the Homa name stack is the way to go for this week. Thomas Paul Fleawood. Is it? Okay, so he's in there. What if he was Paulie Fleawood? If you were Paulie Fleawood, he'd be a plumber in New Jersey. So that's a good career. I just hope I got to use him in DFS. Good career, not gonna use him in DFS though. Let's talk here about Keegan Bradley not involved, I don't think, in the Homa stack. Unless he's secretly named Thomas or Homa, Homa Keegan Bradley. He's $8,700 and also grades out pretty well when you adjust for field strength. And the putting number is kind of not that bad. I hesitate to say the next thing I'm gonna jinx it. There's no wood for me to knock on. But like, what do you see with Keegan right now? Yeah, 13th and True Stroke's standard of the past three months, just recently in contention at the US Open. Salary of $8,700 I think is someone that's like, you gotta consider that territory. Miss the cut at the Genesis Scottish Open from awful putting, which is always a possibility with Keegan Bradley, but he's just is pretty much a lock to gain strokes with his approach play. He has three top tens and four top 25s in his past seven stroke play events. We know that he finishes well because of ball striking. And I hope this came across, but like this is a ball striking course. It's, you're gonna have to hit these greens, which again, big greens, but firm, you're gonna wanna try to not leave yourself with 60 feet putts too often. I think that Keegan makes a lot of sense. The big question is always just gonna be the putter, but does he do enough for you at $8,700? Yeah, for sure. I was, when he was first starting to like, round into this form, I was a bit hesitant because like, I think we all have had the Keegan experience where it sticks with you. But like, he just, he keeps doing it. I know that obviously the putting last week was not good, but like, if you look at a larger sample, it's been fine for a decently large sample. He has bad weeks and that makes his floor low, but like, find me a golfer at $87 who doesn't have a low floor. And then once you fruitlessly go through that exercise because you won't find anyone, find me someone who has a good ceiling. That's tougher. And I think that Keegan has that. So I think I can accept the risks with him and know that I could be cursing at my phone on Friday morning or whatever it may be. But like, that's kind of true with everyone in this value range. I'd rather take someone who has a path to an upside type week. And I think that Keegan does have that. Yeah, that's why he's gonna be someone I consider this week. Any savings goes a long way. $8,700 even down from like $9,300 goes a long way to getting back up from, while we like the Tony Fienaute here, getting back up to like a Hideki or Cam Smith, like that's gonna go, that's gonna help us. So yeah, I guess it's Keegan week. It is Keegan week. What could possibly go wrong? Let's finish up the current forward discussion here by talking about Jiyoung Kim. Kim has had some interesting spike weeks recently in noteworthy fields. And I think that that's at least worth making him discuss worth, makes him worth discussing at $7,600. He is more worth discussing than I am right now. Most recently, Kim was third at the Scottish Open. Obviously we saw that this past week. Before that, he was 23rd at the US Open. He also had a 17th at the AT&T Byron Nelson, not to mention some really good finishes on the Asian tour. That's all good. But Kim did lose distance compared to the field of the US Open. Basically I carried by a short game there. He doesn't seem all that long off the tee and we don't have a great sample to say he's lights out with his iron. So my worry is that these good finishes have been fueled by short game. What's your read on Kim based on what we've seen? Yeah. Also goes by Tom Kim by the way, which comes from Thomas the Tank Engine. I just thought that people would want to know that. So is he in the homestack then? I know it's not Thomas, but like... I think that would work. Yeah. I think you could probably... I think that's important. Justify that. I think it's an important question to ask at least. Yeah, I would say so. Almost made it to a playoff too for the Genesis Scottish Open, but I think three-putted from like 60 feet, which again is probably gonna come into play a lot this week, but on a 70 second. But yeah, I mean, I see the case for it because of the good finishes. I just think sometimes it's a little... It's not necessarily worth like the risk of such a low cut probability just to get back up to another stud. Like give me Kegan and Hideki versus like Rory and Tom Kim, maybe. Yeah. I don't know if that works exactly, but something like that. Yeah. I think if I could just... If I could confirm that it was via ball striking, I'd be more inclined to buy in. And that's kind of the hangout for me. Can't do that right now. So I'm okay. Very good. Very good around the green right now. Yes. According to the data golf stuff, that's flukeier even than putting. Would you have the same mindset towards Jordan L. Smith? Because he also... He finished top 25 at the Scottish Open as well. Spreadsheet ruiner. Yeah. You have to do Jordan L. Smith, Jordan L. With no period, Jordan Smith, you'd do all those. Yeah. I just like... Look, one week of data is not really enough to get too excited about. And somewhere, I think I have this open. Yeah. I'll actually tweet this one. But I just pulled last year Scottish Open and where a guy's finished in the open. And usually good finishes at the Scottish Open led to decent finishes at the open. But we also have Min Woo Lee, who won. He missed the cut. Thomas D. Tree was tied for second at the Scottish Open last year. He missed the cut. But he's in the homeless acts. He's guaranteed to make the cut this year. Lucas Herbert was T4, same as Ryan Palmer, both of those guys missed the cut. So it's not necessarily enough to chase a good result of the Scottish Open. So I'm probably not gonna get there. I think that in majors, it can be tempting to take some risk. But you want six chances to hit the winner and the thought that like Tom Kim is gonna win the Open Championship, I think is probably a little bit too optimistic. Yeah. As much as I love Jun Kim, I think that the Thomas Tank Engine nickname is very fitting. He looks great, a huge fan, but not gonna use him in the DFS yet this week. Let's dive into what bookmakers are saying about the Open Championship. Rory McElroy, the favorite of Fandall's sports book. He is 10 to one. Then there's a jump down to Xander Shoffley at 13 to one with Jordan Speed at 15 to one. John Rom, 16 to one. The 18 to one coupling is Mathis Patrick and Scotty Sheffler, Shane Lowry, 20 to one. With JT at 21 to one. Ken Smith is 22 to one. Followed by Patrick Cantlay at 26 to one. Will Zalatoris is 27 to one. With Colin Morakawa rounding at the top group at 28 to one. So let's talk with Sheffler and JT here because we talked to them before with the Rory and Xander. Xander, thank you. Discussion, do you think these odds are too long on them or is it an appropriate reaction to something that I'm overlooking? I know JT was not good last week, but I also don't care. Yeah, like again, one week of data is not indicative of anything, especially like when the baseline is Scotty Sheffler, Justin Thomas. We know what these guys are. And you either think that one bad week of data is the end of their careers or it doesn't matter. So I think we're like, I'm starting to see a lot of overreactions. The more that I'm digging in to betting odds and even things like top 10s like Hideki, his odds are really drifting. So for sure I would say JT and Sheffler, more so JT undervalued in terms of the betting odds. I think that people can very easily just match the betting odds to the salaries and play Rory, play Xander, play Spieth over these guys. We're talking specifically about Sheffler and JT, but like John Rom has distance. He can be a really good lag putter. The putting is training back up for Rom overall.  So yeah, I think JT, Sheffler would be good outright bets at these numbers, but also great pivots. I would also say that it's important to note that betting lines are not sharper for majors than other events because there's a lot more public interest in them, which means there's a lot more public money. We talked about this with John Sheeran, who is one of the bookmakers at Fandal Sportsbook during the NFL playoffs. And he's like, yeah, I mean like, it can be tough to set lines, but you're also getting more public money during the playoffs. So like it's actually like not that bad of a thing. So when you see Xander at 13 to one, that does not mean that Xander's win odds are 6%, I trended to map my head. I don't know, like the implied odds, whatever. Anyway, I can pull up a calculator if I want to. But anyway, it doesn't mean that that's representative of what its actual odds are. JT and Sheffler being 18 to one does not mean that their odds are closer, like four or 5% or whatever. So take that with a grain of salt. Don't make the odds your be all end all in terms of how you pick golf versus this week. Guys can be undervalued by the market, especially in events that have more public money involved with them, which is what this is here. So don't overreact. Like if you like someone who has long betting odds like Cameron Young, don't overreact to the fact that their odds may be too long. It just probably means that they'll be less rostered. Obviously you want to take the guidance of people with money on the line. Typically betting odds will give you that. And I do think it's a good tool overall is don't make it the only thing you consider. Consider other things as well. Which golfers odds, speaking of after I poop on the betting odds, which golfers odds have shifted most notably of late? Well, yeah. The thing I was going to say and we'll see this with the number one name here with Sander Shafley going from 20 to one to 13 to one of Vandal Sportsbook from I believe Friday is when I pulled these initially to try to get some, let the weekend of the Scottish really like dig in and track those changes from there. But 20 to 13 is pretty substantial. And betting odds really reflect not so much like underlying strokes gain data but finishing positions and like wins in top tens and stuff. That's why I like to look at, I don't even look at finishing positions to make any decisions. Things like missed cuts with good under, like good ball striking data.  So that's one thing that we have just talked about for years now and I think it's important to keep in mind but yeah, Xander 20 to 13, Matt Fitzpatrick 20 to 18, Cam Smith 27 to 22, Patrick Cantlay 33 to 26, Tommy Fleetwood 41 to 28, Joaquin Neiman 50 to 37, Tony Finault 48 to 40, Max Homer 80 to 45 and Gary Woodland also good showing last week 100 to 80. Those are the most notable golfers whose odds have shortened over the weekend. Now the flip side of that is if someone's shortening unless the Vig is getting higher, someone has to lengthen too. So which golfers odds have lengthened to make room for the homas, the Xanders, the Maddie Fitts, et cetera? Justin Thomas 18 to 21, which I just find like disrespectful. I mean, he's so good and he just won a major. I think it can only be the fact that he hasn't had good major, or sorry, good open championship history but he's been playing with Tiger and according to John Rom, JT is the only one who ever gets any advice from Tiger. Tiger's won here multiple times. So he probably is gonna be up to speed on like what to expect. Will Zalatoris as well, 22 to 27. I think he's a great bet as well with how good his major form is. Both of those guys are good win players. So I said, sorry, Collin Morkow is 20 to 28. He gets sort of a wrap that he doesn't play well in the wind that he like feasts in sort of calmer conditions which I'm sure he does, but he has good ball striking numbers even in the windy conditions according to Fantasy National. I think Morkow is the easiest fade in terms of DFS of the top guys, but that's just me. Brooks and Hideki 33 to 42 and then Tiger Woods who we haven't mentioned yet. I guess I just did like a second ago but not for his own purposes. Bryson DeChambeau and Sung J.M. from 50 to 65. This is not a betting segment. It is about, it's about betting but it's not a betting segment. Hypothetically, you could bet only one guy between Schaeffler, JT, Zalatoris, where'd you go? I'd say Zalatoris, but JT would be a strong consideration. Okay. Asking for no one in particular about myself. Okay. Which lower salary golfers do you have on stand out to you? Max Homa, 45 to 1 at 9,000. Ryan Fox, 55 to 1 at 9,300. Robert McIntyre, 60 to 1, he's 9,300. Bryson DeChambeau, Tiger Woods, 65 to 1. I didn't even know Tiger's salary was, he's 88. Seamus Power, Gary Woodlander, 80 to 1. Thomas Peters, 95 to 1. Those are gonna be your sort of quote unquote value golfers but with odds better than 100 to 1. Where are you at in Peters? Because he is someone who has some length out the tee, obviously, fine overall golfer, tense Chauvin majors. Any interest for you at 86? I mean, he's fine. He's not gonna do enough to like make him a core play. Give me, would you say a salary was 86? Yeah. Give me Keegan. I'll find an extra 100 somewhere. Go to Keegan. Don't want to talk me into Keegan, that's for sure. Weather for this week, obviously it's always impactful, but we're talking on Monday. So I want to, before I say this, preface this by saying make sure you check back later on this week to ensure things have not changed since we discussed this. But as of right now, wind looks pretty steady around 10 miles per hour the entire day Thursday. That is for the early wave, the late wave, et cetera, et cetera. Gonna be steady at 10 miles per hour as of right now. Same thing Friday. Though the winds be closer to 13 miles per hour there. So as of now, doesn't seem like you need to stack tea times, winds not outrageous for either of those two days. Wind speeds will get up to around 20 miles per hour Saturday. They'll sit around 15 miles per hour on Sunday. So wind splits, okay, definitely in play. It's not as crazy as it can be though. And I think that that's also noteworthy because it means that scores could go lower too, which you talked about in the beginning where scores could potentially be lower this week. But I think that as of right now, no need to go nuts of stacking in terms of tea times. But again, check back on that later on this week. Let's dive now into our player picks here for the open championship based on the salaries at Fanduel.com. Brandon, beginning in the upper tier, who stands out to you this week on Fanduel.com. It's gonna sound like I like everyone at the top and I do, but if I'm picking one lineup to build around, I really wanna try to get Rory in there at 12,000. I think he's the best golfer, the best sort of process-based play for the week. Best long-term golfer in the field, best long-term adjusted stroke-skinned tea to green, super long off the tee, putting really well, good major form, even if a lot of people can joke that a lot of the top 10s are like backdoors and non-competitive. That's still fine in DFS if, cause only one guy can win. If Rory gets me a backdoor top 10, it's still gonna be a good showing at 12,000. I do think he has a lot of win equity though, and he has the favorite to win according to my betting model. Win juice, Rory McElroy, he's got it, guaranteed. I like Rory as well for a cash game. For tournaments between JT and Schaeffler, I keep going back and forth. I have Schaeffler as my player pick. I think what I would say though is that I'm receptive to pivoting. Like a single entry lineup, I'm not gonna use Rory, which stakes. I love Rory, but I would rather pivot to either JT or Schaeffler. Talking about Schaeffler here specifically, he's 11th in distance game in the past 50 rounds per fantasy national, eighth in approach, fifth around the green, which in addition to being a solid putter, Schaeffler is now down to second in data golf's true strokes gained across the past six months.  We cannot trust for anything, but he's right behind Rory, 0.01 strokes per round behind Rory. I still think Schaeffler is awesome if he's gonna come in at a lower raw straight than he would have previously. Again, we're not talking 10% I wouldn't think, but like if he's gonna be 15 instead of 20, you know, maybe 20 instead of 25, I'll take that.  Who else do you like in this upper range on Fandall? It's kind of a three-way tie. I would go Xander in a cash game, Cam Smith specifically in tournaments, but if I'm short of going in between, I'd go Wells out of the three. I think they're the combination of upside and safety just too good to pass up. I think he's just like the third best play at salary. Again, among the top, however many golfers are 11,000 and above. I initially had Jordan Spieth who we kind of glossed over. Yeah. I'm really worried about Spieth's putter, which is crazy to think about, but his leg putting, his close range putting is bad. Watched him get very frustrated on the Greens this past week. Don't love to see that entering a major, but Xalator is a better ball striker than Spieth. Just a fantastic ball striker overall, plays really well in the wind. And the one thing that I keep coming back to is when asked why he plays well in majors, he said part of it is that first of all, he didn't fire at any pins on the U.S. Open, just sort of played this, played smart golf, like Boris Kappke always said, just play boring golf and you'll be in the mix. But he also said he's a really good, he called it speed putting, if I'm not mistaken, but basically lag putting. You don't have to do that a lot. These Greens are massive and you're gonna be stuck with some 60, 70 foot putts, which are uncomfortable distances from sure for a lot of guys, because they're usually gonna be closer than that. But the stats say that he's a good lag putter. We always are gonna clench up a bit whenever he's got like a three footer to save power or something like that. But honestly, if you watch him putt, he looks great from 15 plus feet. So I think Xalator is just one of those plays that you're not gonna regret building around what was Xalator is. You might regret building around someone more Cowherd or Jordan Spieth. So. Yeah. I have Cantley as my player pick. I might prefer Xalatorus. I'm not gonna talk about him. I'll talk about Cantley, but I was talking about how for single entry I would not use Rory. Would you go Cam Smith or Cantley? What's that? Would you go Cam Smith or Cantley? Cantley, I think. Okay. Buy a hair. It's not buy a lot. I think both are fine. But for single entry, I might go Xalatorus over either. Honestly. I do wanna get a read on Xalatorus' rostrate in case he gets like the major buzz, but I don't know. I think that Xander and Spieth will keep his a lid on his rostrate. I think so too. And I went through, I wrote my article last week. I had all my picks in. I had, again, Spieth over Xalatorus in that sort of tier between Cam Smith and Xander. And I was like, this is so silly. Yeah.  And it's like, why would you not play Xalatorus this week? I got nothing, man. Like. Great question. I have regretted playing Patrick Cantley at several meters. So let's do it again. But with Cantley, he has not finished top 10 in the majors in 2019, but his form right now is good enough where I'm on board with him at 10-7. He was really good at the U.S. Open this year. I finished 14th there thanks to strong play both off the tee and on the green. The putting has been really good overall. Cantley ranks ninth in putting the past 50 rounds per fantasy national. That's actually the best mark that he golfed with odds shorter than 40 to one. Cantley fourth at the Scottish Open. That followed a stretch where he was 13th at the Travelers, third at the Memorial in addition to the 14th at the U.S. Open. So Cantley has his flaws, but his salary is very forgiving at 10-7. So if I'm gonna like prioritize salary, I go Cantley, but I think that for single entry, I'm just gonna go Xalatorus and like deal with it. I'll find the 300. I think he's, the more I think about it, the more I like Xalatorus. That's the conclusion I came to. I agree. You're right. As well. Yeah, okay. Mid-range, who you got there? I feel weird because I'm not listing Sam Burns, but I think Sam Burns at 10-1 is very, very appealing despite his showing at the Scottish Open. But I'm gonna stick with Tony Fino here because I think there's a lot to like about Fino. I mentioned the recent form already, but you're looking at someone who plays major as well, who's gonna gain distance, who has good like long putting ability. Another one of those golfers where you're like, he's standing over a five footer. You don't know if it's going in, but anytime he is, you know, 40 feet out, I feel like he's gonna stick it close, maybe make one or two. That can go a long way to sort of getting you back on track in a particular round. So if you want ball striking, like we know at his peak, he's can be as good as anyone when it comes to the ball striking. So I think Fino is a really good standout on the 99. Yeah, do you like Fino? Do you like Burns? Who you alluded to? The other guy in that discussion for me in addition to Cameron Young is Joaquin Neiman. So I'll talk about him here. Neiman, the putting has regressed pretty hard the past few events, which is not fun, but you shown that putting specifically across a two event sample, not something we need to care too much about. And the ball striking is still been very good for Neiman that time. He's 23rd in distance gained and 36 in the approach to past 50 rounds, 28th around the green two. Neiman's been okay in majors this year. He's finished 35th, 23rd, 47th. So not perfect, but he's 98. He's a really good golfer. I like quite a bit. You said coin flip between Neiman and Fino. I think I agree with that. I think I'd also say coin flip. I prefer Burns over both at 10-1. If I can get there. So like the question would be, do I go Neiman plus Cantley or do I go Zalatoris? We know Zalatoris plus Neiman or Cantley plus Burns? I think that's a good selling point for Cantley, but also I don't know. I'd probably go Zalatoris still. But that's kind of a discussion we'll have to have. I'd go ahead to Acty maybe. That's fair too. Who else do you like in the mid-range here? So a name that we're probably gonna hear a lot, Robert McIntyre. Sorry, my cat might knock down my camera. Do it. Almost knocked down the water as well. Which cat? June. June, do it. She's kind of nuts. Did she get me? Yeah. Do it, June. Do it. Okay, so we're recording. Do it, June Coward. We're recording in the afternoon. Every day at four o'clock she gets. I just saw a tail. Was that your tail or hers? She gets fed every day at four. So around 3.30, she starts swarming. All right. Yeah. Stand up for yourself, June.  Robert McIntyre, 9,300. I think we'll hear his name a lot this week. There's a very good chance he ends up being just a popular value play or mid-range play, whatever you want to call it, 9,300. But they're the case four and against them. I think the case four of him sort of outweighs the knit sort of more nit-picky questions about the stats here. But he's one of four golfers to play in at least eight majors since 2020 and make every cut. Or I guess one of three with a decky and bubble Watson, surprisingly, but he's got plus distance slightly. People kind of say that he's like a, he just nukes it, but that's not really the case. He's a good putter as well. The issues now are like the current form's a little spotty, the driving stats not particularly great, been an actual, like actual sort of negative with the irons lately. Don't love to see that, but I think there is something to be said for being good in majors and showing up, playing in Scotland. I think that he's going to be a fine play at 9,300. So if I'm down here, which is probably my least favorite range, once again of the week, like 95 to like 9,000, or I guess 91 I should say, because we have Homer there at 9,000, but McIntyre is the one name that does stand out to me. So you mentioned, why not use guys who are good in majors? Why not use famous power at $9,200? It's the exact same range as our McIntyre. Power this year has been to all three majors. He has finished 27th, ninth and 12th, not bad. He's done that, I think this is fun in a couple of different ways. It's been, you know, some via the short game, some via the ball striking. He's 21st and putting the past 50 rounds, 34th and distance gained. Should have put him in a good spot. I think he's a pretty quality play at 92. Would you do a McIntyre versus power head to head? No. Why? Because I think that McIntyre is a bit too volatile to want to put into a head to head. Rude? I'm upset. Anyway, I like James's power. Is she back? James's killing me, man. I told her to fight back. Don't let him stress you, June. Like at least Rosa just barks from like off camera. It's never about food. It's like a dump truck driver, something like that. Well, yeah, it's every day without fail. She's not food motivated. I wish she'd eat more.    It's swole. This is what we get for recording early. Rosa doesn't understand it's game season, okay? Like let's try to work on this. June does, so shout out June for understanding it's game season. Rosa will work on it, you know? Value plays. Who are your favorite lower salary options on FanDuel this week? Max Homa. Should we talk about him more? I think we can just both say Max Homa is our favorite value play. I think that the way we can talk about it is, is he like the core level play for you this week? Cause we often talk about like the plays you build around and like, oh, we're building on the studs or building on the value plays because I'm differentiating a bit in my stud play, I would not be shocked at all if Homa wound up being my highest exposure golfer this week. I would not be shocked. I'm not saying I'm actively looking to do that, but I wouldn't be shocked if it happened. I think that'll naturally end up happening. Yeah. He's gonna be the guy that I feel most comfortable with in the sort of 9,000 range. I know we're talking Keegan, but I definitely don't feel comfortable there. The one name that I haven't really talked about that might be in that sort of tier is Mito Pereira. He's my second low salary play that I'm recommending here. So I'll just sort of break him down, but he was a target of mine entering the Scottish Open. Started off well, didn't end too well, but he started missing cuts after four straight top 15s, almost won the PGA championship, bounced back from that with good results. So it's not like this is just, ever since he blew the PGA championship, he's just been missing cuts left and right. It's not really the case. Really good tee to green player, 89th percentile over the past year with my adjustments factored in, in that category. Not a whole lot of major experience overall, but a good putter, good ball striker, good tee to green player. I think he's the name that's in contention for me. And at the same salary as Keegan, I have a conversation that I'll have to have with myself. I'll probably wind up about even on the two, despite the fact that we've talked about Keegan a lot on the show so far. I think that's what you do is you build around, Homa is your one value play, and then you can differentiate with the second, second guy, making that Keegan at times, making it Mito, other times, and just kind of going based on that. I think both are good plays as well. I agree with that too. One guy I want to mention is terms of giving myself more flexibility, maybe to get up to a Zau Taurus, as opposed to a Cantlay, or getting up to a Burns versus a Neiman. It's Keith Mitchell at 83. Mitchell is someone who can bomb and he can putt. And that's a pretty fun combo for this week. He ranks 12th in distance gained, and 15th in putting the past 50 rounds. He has used that to get some pretty good finishes. He's made six straight cuts, paratop tens at the travelers and the RBC Canadian Open. The putting could come back to Earth for Mitchell, but the distance is, we know, gonna be there. And the rest of the game is not bad at least for Mitchell. He's not a standout in terms of his irons or anything, but we saw Mitchell feast off the tee, finished 34th at the PGA Championship, despite struggling around the green. He's $8,300, allows me to get some more mid-range plays with the ability to win. Does this mean June is objecting to Keith Mitchell with the clanging going around the background, or is this an endorsement? No, she's a Keith Mitchell guy. I think something fell, right? Well, she- She hopped off the table. She's trying any which way she can make it. That was her. That was a body. Oh. No. I like Keith Mitchell as well. We know that there's good driving stats there with the distance. The underlying putting date is good. 91st percentile expected putter over the past 50 rounds. No values are safe, but I think Mitchell makes sense. Also, how long we all shout out at $8,400 as well. But in my head-to-head against you, I probably won't go below $8,700 with either Keegan or Mito, so. I don't think I'd get to Keith Mitchell unless I'm talking tournaments. Depends. Because Xander Rory is a pretty high salary combo. It is. I would consider Mitchell, I'd prefer not to. I think easy consideration, I would say, is where I'm at there. Okay, win picks here for the Open Championship. I have three. I'm guessing we're gonna overlap potentially in one, but do you have two in mind? Zalatoris for sure, 27. I think that's just a good enough number. I'm gonna block him, by the way. And because JT's 21, I think I gotta go JT. Okay, so my consideration set with Sheffler, JT, Zalatoris, it is no fun if we both pick the same two guys. So I'll go Sheffler over JT as my win pick. I will block you as Zalatoris though. I think that, I just think he's too long. I think that if we're watching- What Sheffler currently, 16. I thought he was 18. Does he actually 16? Yeah, he's 16. It literally just moved. Was it, was he 18 when I pulled earlier? Yeah, he was 18. Oh, no. Boo. Gosh. I don't know what to pick now. This shows off the rails, man. June's tails, there's like a, there's like a centimeter gap between my camera and my computer. Is it June's fault that Sheffler shortened? Whoa, don't, hey, don't blame June for anything. Sam. I could pivot with someone we didn't talk about. I love that. Is it John Rom? Yeah. Thinking about it. So- Thinking about it. So you prefer Sheffler at 18 to Rom at 16? No, I don't. But like mentally it's tough. And like he was 18, now he's 16. It's like I'm getting the worst number. Mentally it's difficult. So you can understand the position I'm in. I'm just glad you're not going on, Cam Smith. I don't know, man. Oh, this is torture. Yeah, I think- I think JT Zellators and Cam Smith are my three favorite bets. I'm gonna go Sheffler, whatever, who cares? I don't care. All of that for that. I don't like getting him at a bad number that I, like a worse number that I- Do you want me to give you Scottie Sheffler at 17? No. And split the difference with that? No, cause you'll complain about it for decades if I win by a unit. Yeah, I know this. I'd rather lose by a unit and not have the complaining. Well- So I'll go Sheffler at 16 to one.  I mean, yeah, obviously. We all know this to be true, but- I'd rather view it as that I blew a lead than you came back, so. I found a really good bobblehead that I wanted to earmark, but then I forgot, which I think is probably good karma to not have it bookmarked ahead of time, so. Yeah. Anyway, so my picks are Sheffler and Zellators. Gio JT Zellators. I think that's a pretty good card between the two of us. We've had a little streak here, so I think that's good for us to keep the good vibes going between our win picks. Yeah, again, I would go Cam Smith as well. I'd consider him, but again, it's tough because this is, like, I like Rory for DFS over JT, but in terms of betting odds, like, that's not even close. Yeah, I think so as well. Okay, that wraps up our podcast for the Open Championship. Brandon, any final words of wisdom for the good people before they go to fill out their lineups for the final major of the year? Yeah, just be open to pivoting. Again, that's kind of always my takeaway for majors because it sounds like John Rom's probably not gonna be very popular and that's kind of silly, but also if you're gonna do an afternoon podcast, make sure you feed June 1st. Or shut the door, I don't know.  Okay, well, I'm rooting for June. Not you. I'm rooting for June. So is everyone. Yeah, that's true. That is all that we have here for this week on the Heechak Fantasy Podcast, but of course we're here every week, breaking down PGA DFS. We also have MLB DFS, USC, and NASCAR, all in the same feed. So search for the number fire daily fantasy podcast feed wherever you get your podcasts and if you like what you hear, leave us a rating and review as well. Brandon, people have questions for you on your favorite website, twitter.com, where can they follow you there? MacGudula13, G-D-U-L-A-1-3. And I am on Twitter at Jim Sonnis, J-I-M-S-A-N-N-E-S. You can also follow the FanDuel Podcast Network at FanDuel Podcast. Big thank you to everyone for tuning in for today. Good luck to you, your MLB DFS with your PGA, golf, DFS lineups, wow. We'll talk to you once again next week. Enjoy the open championship. This has been the heat check fantasy podcast powered by number fire.


Thank you very much Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I want to rise and join my colleagues in expressing support for the motion before the Honourable House. I think all my colleagues would have expressed our support for the fire and emergency services and the tremendous work that would have been done over the years. And in particular Mr. Speaker, as outlined by the member for Vifort North during the period of the COVID crisis. Mr. Speaker, I think it is no secret that throughout the notion whenever weekends come, we all worry about what can happen on our roads, what can happen in various mass gatherings. And we all know that the first line of response to any incident is the fire and emergency services. And when you listen to the presentation by the member for Casstrees East and Prime Minister, it really gives you confidence in saying that we are recognizing the critical work that has been done by the fire and emergency services and that we are prepared to invest in the services. It is a statement of confidence in the service. It is a statement that we recognize your criticality for the functioning, not just for dealing with fires as well as by the member for Vifort North, the health services and certainly even our tourism sector. My contribution is short, Mr. Speaker. But I want to point out, Mr. Speaker, that when you hear sometimes the criticisms about the health and security levy and forget all the hypocrisy over it, because the member from Casstrees East showed in this house that there actually was legislation passed by the opposition for the introduction of a similar levy. We all know that. But now it is done, they are criticizing it. And there's a lot being said about how it is affecting poor people. The reality is, Mr. Speaker, that this levy is what is going to help us to finance this repeated slow, Mr. Speaker. This is what is going to help us repeat this slow. And the member from Casstrees East announced very soon all ambulance fees will be removed. Think about it, the number of solutions who did not call an ambulance because they could not afford to pay, the amount of persons who were affected because they had to pay fees because of the levy, Mr. Speaker. We are improving the health system in St. Lucia. And St. Lucia's deserve a better healthcare system, deserve it. And when we came into government and we reviewed the figures and saw how much more was needed to ensure that the hospitals can be run, that medication can be sought, and that we can improve the health service, we knew we had no other option. But to say to every single St. Lucia, now is the time for you to contribute to having a better healthcare system. Every single one must contribute to it. I can tell you, and I noted, they were teasing and saying that the health and security levelers introduced because they complained and they complained about people making demands. It showed you the insensitivity, Mr. Speaker, that when you as a parliamentary representative and all of us around this table can speak of constituents coming and asking for assistance with medical bills, for chemotherapy, for MRI, for medication. And when we stand in this house and say because there are people out there not getting sufficient healthcare, we need to put in place a mechanism to raise money to improve the healthcare system, to criticize it, chastise it, and even want to demonstrate against it, Mr. Speaker. That is the nature of the people that we're dealing with. And today, Mr. Speaker, they will find some way to criticize the investment in the fire and emergency services. But we must not be deterred. The member from Cassie's office made some very valuable suggestions to the service as to how they can improve on their service delivery. And I think those were important suggestions, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I want to make one final point and to say to the service how pleased I was to hear the Prime Minister mention that officers will be trained up to the TVET to get TVET certification. Now that's important. We can talk about the psychosocial support and all the equipment that they will get. But it's an opportunity for them to earn revenue by running regular courses for solutions to get certified as firefighters and emergency personnel that they can go and work overseas now having acquired the certification. So it's not just about training prisons for the service. It's about training solutions who wish to have such qualifications. They may never work with the fire and emergency services. They can go to other islands, other countries, and boost that they have a recognized level of qualification and cause them to be more employable. So it becomes for the fire service an opportunity to raise revenue. It becomes an opportunity for us to train our people to become more marketable and of course to gain employment elsewhere. So I was really pleased to hear this and I want to encourage the fire and emergency services to make that a reality and advertise it widely so solutions can get an opportunity and get that level of qualification. So I join all my colleagues and certainly congratulate the Prime Minister and the fire and emergency services for taking his bold step to modernize the service and to ensure that San Lucia gets world-class service. Thank you very much.


Knowledge, passion, vision. We interact with computers every day. By understanding how these technologies work, we can make a difference to the world. Business computing is a degree that allows me to learn about the development of computer systems to focus on how business techniques support business needs, providing a wide range of knowledge in both topics. I love the program at Greenwich, the opportunities ahead of me. It has given me the knowledge to succeed, to understand programming concepts through the vision of the business world. I study shared modules with other degrees, software engineering and computer science. Learning how to program, develop software and the skills and knowledge to operate any business. By studying a business computing degree, I am able to develop my passion for computing into a career in programming and business. At the University of Greenwich, I feel part of a community with its wide range of academics and students to help support me. My name is Natalia Dorado and I study business computing at the University of Greenwich.