Houston Open PGA Leverage Lane | DraftKings & FanDuel DFS | Single-Entry GPP Strategy

0:00Tyler Reddick here from 2311 Racing. Victory Lane? Yeah, it's even better with Chamba by my side. Race to chambacacino.com, let's Chamba. No purchase necessary, VTW Group, Boy We're Prohibited by Ma, CTNC's, 21 Plus, sponsored by ChambaCacino. Creating the coffee flavor you love. But without the caffeine, Cachava's got you covered with their newest coffee flavor. This all-in-one nutrition shake delivers bold, authentic flavor, crafted from premium, decaffeinated Brazilian beans with 25 grams of protein, 6 grams of fiber, greens, and so much more. Treat yourself to the flavor and nutrition your body craves. Go to cachava.com and use code news. New customers get 15% off their first order. That's K-A-C-H-A-V-A.com code news. Craving the coffee flavor you love. But without the caffeine, Cachava's got you covered with their newest coffee flavor. This all-in-one nutrition shake delivers bold, authentic flavor, crafted from premium, decaffeinated Brazilian beans. Quality nutrition shouldn't be complicated.

1:00Just two scoops of Cachava's all-in-one nutrition shake and you've got 25 grams of protein, 6 grams of fiber, greens, and so much more. Whether you're craving that coffee taste to kickstart your morning ritual or as a nutrient-packed reward to round out your afternoon, Cachava keeps you fueled and satisfied wherever your day takes you. Plus, it actually tastes delicious. No fillers, no nonsense. Just the good stuff your body craves. And for the times you feel like switching it up, you've got seven flavors to choose from, all with the highest quality ingredients. Treat yourself to the flavor and nutrition your body craves. Go to Cachava.com and use code news. New customers get 15% off their first order. That's K-A-C-H-A-V-A.com code news. All systems go. Clear the lift up.

2:15What's up, everyone? Tyler Timberlain here, A-K-A-Totag and Tambo. Back for another edition of Leverage Lane here on the Shippet Nation YouTube station. Got my guy, Alex Blickel here with me, as always. Gonna be breaking down all things. Texas Children's Houston Open on the PGA Tour this week. We've got a good one here. The Scotty WD congrats to him and his family. Baby number two coming through. So we've got that. He's out, but his pricing was in. So we'll be talking about that. We're going to teach you how to play, not just who to play and try and put it all together. We'll have our Leverage Lane at the end. We'll talk some one and done. Have a quick betting segment. And the topic for today, we're going to talk a little bit about when there's a certain course narrative. Like this week is probably heard the word. Bombers a few times, if not more than that. But we'll talk a little bit about that as well. Alex, I'll bring you in. First man will recap last week a little bit. Talk through some weather, course fit, and then get into the topic. But what's going on, my friend? How are you doing? Doing very well in New York City this week, visiting grandparents. Hopefully sirens are too minimum.

3:16And obviously have the old school set up here today. But it's going to be a full one to talk through. And yeah, there's there are kind of lots of wrinkles to it, the Scotty wrinkle, as you mentioned. And the fact that everyone's all in on this bomber narrative. And it's largely supported by the data. Not just last season where it was softer conditions. So we really saw a boost. I think last year we saw driving distance about 250% more predictive than usual, which is just an absolutely massive number. It's not usually that high here. But it is always boosted here. And so we're talking through, do we get different within bombers? Or do we go to a different skill set? How do we respond to the field being on the same kind of course fit narrative that we are? It's a fun conversation app. Yeah, I think last week a lot of people liked the topic of going through sort of the roster construction stuff and funny enough, just like not recap the whole thing. We will have a minwoo conversation this week shortly as well. But just to note it, like Matt Fitzpatrick, almost 30% last week at a $9,800 price tag. He goes out just a week after coming in second at the players

4:19and gets the job done and wins last week. But the lineup, if you looked it, by the way, shout out to you on the the Sanjay call. I was on my boy head like seven or eight percent. I didn't get as much as I would have liked. And he didn't come through on Sunday. But Sanjay was looking good through three rounds at least. And for his price tag paid off. But if you looked at the winning lineup, again, it just, you know, we talked a lot about skipping the nines or and I went hobbland and Xander and Xander came through. But in the end, it was, you could play Matt Fitzpatrick. Funny enough, how could you play Matt Fitzpatrick differently? Don't land in the mid-7s. Well, what it ended up being, it was Xander Fitzpatrick. And then you had like $7,300, $7,000, $7,100, Sanjay and like a $6,500 lip ski. Or you could have landed like one more guy down in that lower 7K range. But that would have been a way that you could add lower owned options in the bottom of the 7Ks, still used a popular Fitzpatrick. But then up over the top with Xander mixed in there. So I don't know if he had any follow up on that. But I thought a lot of people really liked the roster construction conversation that we had there.

5:20And then I'd posted out this article last week on a lot of action. People loved it just the most misunderstood concept. I said like, this is a big one where people focus so much on these picks and plays and not putting it all together. Again, another puzzle last week that had Fitzpatrick, like most thought, but played in a completely different way than the rest of the field. Any thoughts on that just last week's conversation leading into this one? Yeah, I think one of the really cool thoughts that I had afterwards was just what would a Xander and Fitzpatrick lineup have looked like where you would have started in that really contrarian pairing. Obviously, they both ended up doing quite well with Xander playing super well on Sunday. But would that pairing have worked because of who else you needed to use along with them? And I think that segway's pretty well into this week where it is worth having this conversation of where does the Scotty ownership go. But I think a big point here is there wasn't going to be much Scotty ownership. So I don't think it flows through to the rest of the board now very much where we're really going

6:22to see a massive change in ownership or anybody because when we think about it, the Scotty ownership itself is going to be distributed pretty evenly through the top of the board. Basically, like the whole 9K upper 8K range, they're all getting just a little bit more ownership than they would have. And then where we potentially would have seen the most changes, like let's say Scotty was 40%. Well, if he was going to be 40%, then OK, there would have had to be at least somebody down in the 6, 7K range that was going to be 15% or something like that because they would have been in a third of Scotty lineups or something like that. And then that person may have gone from 15% to 5% or from 15% to 7% or 8% something like that. But Scotty wasn't going to be owned enough for that to happen. And so I really don't think anything changes a ton here and we're pretty much just left with the exact same puzzle. Because I think Scotty would have been 10% on certainly the lowest that we had seen this year. That's what I wanted to clarify, too.

7:22And I know you were getting there with it. So I'm glad you said that at the end because if someone were wondering, we were never thinking Scotty was going to be, oh, that's the whole point. He's basically has turned into now. I think it's been enough people to see it. Mind you, the last few tournaments, you still got him at like 20 plus. But he's kind of turned into the rake now because the people are realizing that even if Scotty wins, and it sounds weird to say or like whatever people want to call they could say what they want. I'm not even shitting on Scotty. Scotty could win a tournament and not be needed the way it's set up right now and the way things have gone. So just noting it, it's like at the end of the day, if he was going to be 10% to 12% or whatever, like people are looking at it, like go out, it's almost 15%, 17% somewhere that range, it might just be like the rake. Now that goes away. But for everyone's like, oh, now Min Wuchok, I hate to tell you this in verse your ball. Min Wuch went from like 32% to 40. It's like he was never going to be 15% or something. It's like this all just landed on Min Wuch. He was already going to be popular because he was almost $5,000 or $4,000 in change cheaper than Scotty. So you got to keep that in mind. This is a good one from Ryan. Blakel has a macro and every week, the international man of mystery. New York wouldn't stand up. So yeah, shout out to everybody here in the chat.

8:22We appreciate you guys. Make sure to hit the thumbs up. If you are watching on mobile, just close out the chat with the X in the top right corner. Hit the thumbs up quick. And then you can bring it right back up and get in on the conversation. Make sure you're subscribed as we keep moving here towards 12,500 subscribers. Now we'll answer some of these questions as well. But we'll get to Min Wuchok, Scotty, weather, everything that we're going to do as usual, the Chalk lineup, how to leverage it, betting segment, one and done in our lane. But I wanted to start today with this topic. You and I chatted a little bit on it yesterday and you'd brought it up. Is, you know, new ones is kind of leading us there with the Segway, says bombers that are actually accurate. Maybe you can bomb all day and still play bad. I want to ask you, when you have a week so prevalent to one narrative theme, course skill set, I should say, actually, or it could be of course fit. And so we're going to stick to skill sets. We're talking about the word bombers. And this has been the thing. We're looking at club head speed. We're looking at all these different factors, driving distance, off the tee, et cetera, et cetera. So everyone's looking at all that. When you have that, do you have a thought around,

9:23you know, sticking with it and just pivoting to different bombers? Or is there, you know, an alternative for you where you say, well, why don't we go playing from the fairway good with long irons? Because that might be the way or whatever you feel. Obviously, it doesn't mean what's right, wrong, or indifferent. Just kind of getting your thoughts on this as a topic in a whole. I think it depends on the course fit model. And basically, it depends on what other skill sets are translating to success. So to directly answer this question, I don't think the answer is that you focus on bombers who are also accurate. Because accuracy is 50% less predictive than usual here. It's just not a separating skill. And actually, when you look at guys, instead of when, so the less than 50% compared to normal, that's including guys who are missing cuts. And so like one of the things that we have found about the predictive value of accuracy is a lot of the time it's more of like a floor indicator. In other words, being inaccurate hurts players more than it helps the accurate players.

10:24That makes sense. So we already have that asymmetry where it's not a separating skill set. And then that predictive value is even diminished more here. So instead, what we see at this course is a big boost in approach place predictive value and a big boost in puddings predictive value as well. So all three skill sets distance, approach play in pudding matter a lot more than usual. Around the green place, pretty neutral here. And then accuracy off the tee matters a lot less. So one of the ways that we can approach this is so we can say, all right, let me find the guys who are long off the tee who are also good either with their irons or pudding. And so like maybe you say, I need at least two of those three to be good. The other thing you can do is you can actually look for the guys who aren't long off the tee but are good with both their approach play in pudding. And you basically say, look, there are multiple ways to play well here. It's a lot harder to do if you don't have the distance. But we at least know who's going to be the most capable

11:25without the distance. It's the guys who are good with both their irons and pudding. I like that. And I think you could take some other things from it as well. I like the point you made about the floor. Peace, the reason I bring that up is because I think it was the players, right? Like remember, Moira Cala withdraws after one hole. That's a 43% on guy. I'd not to open up any wounds that are still there. Hashtag too soon maybe, but just noting it, what happened that week is a bunch of the chalk made the cut. But very few of those were actually needed. Like they all had mediocre results, but they got through for you. So taking on some of these risks, like somebody said earlier, like Lipski last week or think about back to the week too. I'll use Lipski from last week, but also Niko. The week that he ended up coming out and getting the win, Etch of Maria, that is, that I'm telling you, there's a different Niko this week that I got interest as we usually do in Hogard there. But just noting it, these are the guys that you take on for the potential of the upside. The week of, I forget what I think was the players week as well, like Homa, Brooks, Speed, JT, not a lot of love for all those guys that week. Three of them at least were in the mix at one point.

12:27And so it's like, sometimes you are just taking the risk on that because while they're not the chalk portion and they may not have the floor those do, it's the ceiling outcome and that opportunity that can lead to the winning lineups. Remember, it's a very ceiling, think about the prize pool and the way the structure works, very much ceiling oriented. This building starts with a roof this big and gets skinny at the bottom. Unlike most buildings have a good foundation and then gets skinny at the top. You think about the buildings in New York City and places like that, they're not built like that. These buildings are built with very wide top end ceiling. So you've got to play for that and putting some of those guys into your pool is important. You kind of hit on this one and I'll rapid fire a couple of these. We'll note though, people got a really bad tension to this and it's been there, but it's whether or not you're looking or thinking about it this way. It doesn't mean it's right, just noting it. They're putting like seven to 10 guys at the seven K price points. So you'll have seven guys at seven K. You'll have eight more guys at 7,100. Like it's not really distributing like, you know, Alex said earlier, if he was gonna be 10%,

13:29it was just all those guys in the bottom would have been dispersed. You could still play all those guys, what it really does though and I wanted to tie it to this and get your thoughts is the 6K range going to spread out enough that no one breaks 10%. You're saying 6K Bryant, the truth here is the seven K range. Well, it will have maybe five or six guys that are double digits. It just, it makes it really hard for the six Ks to get anything and the seven Ks still with, like I said, how many golfers are in the seven K range, it barely gets to 15 on many these days. You might see one at 17, one at 15, a couple at 12, but it falls off quickly and remember 12 is 88 out of 100 aren't playing that golfer and then you still need to put five more golfers into said lineup that we're talking about. So it's like, there's a ton of different ways that you can go there. But do you have any thoughts on this question from Bryant? Tyler Reddick here from 2311 Racing. Victory Lane? Yeah, it's even better with Chamba by my side. Race to chambacacino.com, let's Chamba. No purchase necessary, VTW Group,

14:31boy, we're prohibited by law, CTSC's, 21 plus, sponsored by ChambaCacino. Craving the coffee flavor you love, but without the caffeine, Kachamba's got you covered with their newest coffee flavor. This all-in-one nutrition shake delivers bold, authentic flavor, crafted from premium, decaffeinated Brazilian beans with 25 grams of protein, six grams of fiber, greens, and so much more. Treat yourself to the flavor and nutrition your body craves. Go to Kachamba.com and use code news. New customers get 15% off their first order. That's KAC, H-A-V-A.com, code news. Yeah, so I think where I'll start is kind of just addressing the first one, which is just like asking about the distribution of Scotty ownership. The first point I'll make here is, and I kind of made this point already, like I don't think a lot has changed based on the fact that Scotty withdrew. I do think the way that the pricing works now has affected ownership, where if draftings had priced this contest,

15:31this tournament without Scotty to begin with, we'd see very different prices for some of these players, and that, of course, would affect ownership. And so I think that's something you were kind of touching on there, but I'll expand on it a little bit where, let's think of last year, like what the pricing was like. I think one of our complaints last year was that it was just way too easy to use him. They did a nice job getting Scotty to a price point that was, you know, that he was worthy of, but they didn't do a good enough job of making that price itself prohibitive, because there were just too many guys who, you know, deserved to be $8,500, that were $7,600, or something like that. And consequently, it was just really easy to build Scotty lineups. And so what they've done this year is they've kind of thinned out that $7,000 range where they've made like the $7,000 range, go up into the eights, but they've also then brought like the 10 and the 9K guys down a little bit where it's like a, they're compressing everything. So like guys who used to be here are now here in price. So there's less of a difference there, and the thing that that does is it says,

16:32not only is Scotty this much more expensive than everybody else, but you also now have a bit of a discount on these other really good players, and it's why we've seen Scotty's ownership kind of consistently come down a little bit in a little bit each tournament, and why it seems like you and I agreement that he would have been really alone to this week. And I still don't think I would have had interest because you build significantly better lineups without him. So even if you said like, I believe that Scotty's getting a bounce back, and I think he's still the guy that he was last year, still don't think he would have been a good play at $14,800 given the pricing of everybody else. And so all of this is essentially to say, I think we were already going to see not a ton of ownership in the sixes and sevens because this like upper seven K to 10K range is all full of guys that you can make a pretty good argument that they are technically underpriced. And so that's where the field was going to go regardless. That's where the field's going to go now. Yeah, and I want to add one more point to that. I'm not sure if you were just saying in a different way, but I've note that's important to me at least

17:33and that I think people forget is even at 13.2 and 13.5 that Scotty was last season a lot. People are forgetting that even at one point, there was a 5K range involved and it was not about the ability to play 5K guys because you didn't need them, but it was even worse to what Alex just talked about. You had $8,800 golfers getting pushed down to $7,500. You had $7,900 golfers getting pushed down to $7,100. Well, if you take Scotty at a regular week like this and have around $7,100 left to play five guys, imagine you could play $5,8,000 golfers last year at that price, but then the fact that Scotty was $1,000 less. So you were actually in like the 8K rate, like upper 7K, mid 7K range, but you had all these 8K golfers pushed down. It made way more sense last year and that's why people could get away with it more. Hindsight's 2020, we figured out now, not even though on the results of, but Scotty was winning then and right now he hasn't been. It's not even about that, I'm just talking no results.

18:35Just process wise, it made, now when you see it, you're like, oh yeah, now he was $1,000 less and the golfers were all $1,000 less. It's like that was just made for the perfect storm of why now we're like, maybe we were probably foolish to fade Scotty ever if at all if you did because you're like, that makes a ton of sense. Even if he didn't fully win back then, that's why you still results where Scotty was finishing 5th and 6th and 8th or whatever it was and you'd still see him in the mix because you could just get really, really good Scotty lineup. So I think it answers that one quite nicely. Do you have any thoughts on this? Just somebody talking about building a single entry, obviously that's your expertise and you get your four guys is kind of what they're saying. And I know we've talked in the past about playing a three max like a single entry where you can't really be sure and instead of playing a $50 single entry, maybe you play a $20 three max, it's 10 bucks more but you are able to funnel through a couple of different variations on the same core. But if you are down to having a hard time choosing between the safe, safe make the cut guy or the high upside guy, what kind of philosophy do you suggest? And then I will add to it for them

19:36but how much of your process is based on the rest of the lineup because I think that also matters as well. Yeah, it's basically all the rest of the lineup where there isn't a consistent answer here. It's what, what are you asking over the rest of your lineup? What type of players do you have in the rest of your lineup? So like let's say for example, that you start your lineup with, let's go with Ricky Fowler. Okay, if Ricky Fowler someone that you have conviction on this week, Ricky is somebody who's very valuable from a DFS perspective because of his floor because you're consistently getting a good chunk of points from him but he's not someone who's contending very often. He's not somebody who is very likely to win. He's writing the same ballpark as the guys around him in terms of our expected throw scheme projections and he's at like half the win equity as a lot of the guys around him. So with Fowler, you want somebody who does have that upside and maybe he does come with some more miscut risk but you want that guy who, when he hits,

20:39he's going to do really well. Conversely, if you have Sahib Fagala and Wyndham Clark already in your lineup and you're saying I know that these guys have a really shaky floor and they can, they can, man, when they play poorly, it looks awful and then I feel like my line is dead on Thursday afternoon but when they play well, they're in fifth place and they're making a ton of birdies and so maybe they're in fifth place on the actual leaderboard but they're in third and draft king scoring things of that nature. Those kinds of guys should be paired with a high made cut equity guy and you don't really have to worry about the ceiling of that last man in. So very much depends on the lineup and then I'd also say it depends a little bit on what you're already getting from an ownership perspective. Like even if you have a really high, you know, win equity player in your lineup, maybe you even have two. If those guys are chalky, then they're not what we what we now call separators, right? And so if that's the case, even if they do well, you still need somebody else in your lineup to really help separate you and if you're not getting that from your other three,

21:40you know, maybe non chalky guys or non high win equity guys, then makes sense for the last guy to be another high upside guy. Yeah, like that quite a bit. And I figured that's where you'd go they just want to make sure answer a couple more quick ones. I just had the cognizant, right? And we just had this, you know, kind of turned into that. As Alex said, a lot would have changed if the pricing wasn't done before the Scotty WD because then you would have had the minimum, minimum would have been 10, 8 or 10, 5 or something. It would have changed up kind of everything, but just got to note that. But now you can kind of play it like that week. It doesn't mean he's going to work out the same way, but I think that's a content conversation for another minute or two. Dennis, we appreciate you being here, man. Every week 10, 30 a.m. Eastern, which I think is 9.30, CST, but I'm not the best of time zones. And I'm in one that doesn't even exist in the United States. So I'm not the best to help you with that there. Jason talks about, yeah, not much of a penalty missing the fairway. We'll talk about that when we start going through what people are landing on. One thing I'll say about this. I know Stat, you brought up yesterday in the Discord as well. There is some, again, if you have like an MME approach,

22:41which is my side of things here on the show, I definitely think that's a great call out. And obviously, anything you can do in that, you can do in single entry. I'm just saying what becomes challenging, almost like when people go Scotty is what I was call a Yatsi Shephard. You're just counting Scotty as the high score. And I know you're not talking about Scotty. I'm combining two things here. But when you count Scotty, you got to roll the other five perfect dice. And it's like, oh, I rolled four, but I didn't roll Lipski in my dice. Let's use like a regular week where you know, like last week, if you needed Lipski, Scotty wasn't there, but just to notice. Like it's same thing here. If you do lean into the 6K guys and you only have one lineup, the minute you get like one thing wrong. And I know people say, well, that's the same for everything. It's not necessarily you can get like Alex has said, especially in higher dollar, single entry stuff too. You could still play like a really good lineup. Like I've showed off on the show multiple times, winning me big tickets and things like that and still get pretty good scores out of them where it is a bit of a safer approach, but it's like nobody over 15, nobody under eight. You're all talking about these guys. You just didn't find this construction to put them all together this way. I'm not worried about being duped or anything like that.

23:42So I think it is definitely a way to go this week, but definitely think something to consider. All this stuff is built into the projections, right? So when you account for this type of stuff, it's all built in in the back end, part of the formulas that we put together. And I'm sure it's the same for Alex. And I think that's kind of the majority. But yeah, like Toasty is the conversation. Jesper, yeah, he had them there listed at the bottom. Yeah, those two might get the five to eight again in a vacuum horrible because if it was a matchup play in like one guy's 0.5% and Toasty's 8%, then yeah, you want the 0.5. Now you can add that to your full lineup conversation, but I get it. But it's more so the overall conversation to me, Alex, of like, why is Toasty popular? He's coming off seven miscuts. But wait, then he came 30th in what was that? Puerto Rico? Seven out of one, yeah. What did he play in like a, what's this one? Anyway, it might even have been better than that. But my point is like, you know, people track this stuff. It might have been at the Houston Open just past, right?

24:44Yeah, the other way that I'll answer this question is that it shows up a lot in ceiling projections, at least for us over at FTN where like, these guys who make a ton of birdies, they're still going to have events where they don't make birdies. I think that that should be pretty intuitive, but like essentially what you're saying is, no matter how well or poorly this guy plays, we expect him to make a little bit more birdies than you would expect given his actual performance. But if his actual performance is bad, you're still expecting very, very, very few birdies. And so it doesn't really affect the floor a whole lot, but what you're also saying is, when this guy plays well. Tyler Reddick here from 2311 Racing, another checkered flag for the books. Time to celebrate with Chamba. Jump in at chambacasino.com. Let's chamba. No purchase necessary, VTW Group, Voidware Prohibited by Ma, CTNC, 21 Plus, sponsored by Chamba Casino. Craving the coffee flavor you love. But without the caffeine, Chachavas got you covered with their newest coffee flavor. This all-in-one nutrition shake delivers bold, authentic flavor, crafted from premium,

25:46decaffeinated Brazilian beans with 25 grams of protein, six grams of fiber, greens, and so much more. Treat yourself to the flavor and nutrition your body craves. Go to chachava.com and use code news. New customers get 15% off their first order. That's K-A-C-A-V-A.com code news. He's not going to be playing really well because he's doing a great job of avoiding bowies. He's going to play well because he is scoring. He's converting all the par-fives. He's maybe getting an eagle or two, something like that. And the other thing is the more birdies you're making, the higher your odds of a streak are and things of that nature. And so it shows up a lot in ceiling projections. So for example, I'm staring at Michael Thor Bjornson versus Shane Lowry. They're almost identical in our projected points. But Thor Bjornson's almost four points ahead of Lowry in our ceiling projection. So you really see it separate in that regard. Both of these guys high volatility players. So the ceiling is there in that regard. But Lowry's slightly negative birdie rate over expectation Thor Bjornson has one of the best

26:48at plus 2.2%. Yeah, and Brian, I know this. This is what I'm saying. This is what the bubble exists though. When people are talking about picks and plays all day, instead of actually digging into stuff like, this is my whole point. I literally don't care what he did last year in the year before here. It has nothing to do with it. And everyone just leaning on last week because he's cheap and a bomber. He's probably got the safety to make the cut here. Like it's toasty. He bombs it. I get it. He's done well here in the past. But the last week at the Valspar, the 30th, just again. It's the only tournament he's even made the cut in in his last like 10 events. OK, what happened? Round one, par and lost almost a stroke. Where was it? He's sort of gained almost a stroke putting. Round two, he sneaks in to make the cut, gaining almost three strokes with the putter. This is not even his gain. That's just, you know, that's part of it. If it happens, it happens. He gets hot. Round three, he lost stats across the board, except for off the tee, which is what you expect him. But literally did nothing, lost over a stroke entirely across the board, and then had a pretty decent round four. But it was actually not the best off the tee.

27:50So it's like, all this stuff is random. What we're trying to say is off of one event. It does it. Like that's where I'm saying it runs me into more trouble than like trusting a guy up top, where it's like the 30 to 40% I have top is probably going to make the cut and then get through for you. It's just then, how do they compare against those around him? We saw it a couple of weeks ago with outside of the WD on Morakawa, but Morakawa and Siwu, you could just play Zander and Hideki in between. And maybe Morakawa, the Adam and Healthy comes through and does really well, and that changes that too. But it's kind of just pointing out of where you can make these choices. All I'm saying is I'd be less likely to do this down low, banking on, but Toasty did well here too the last two years and played good last week one time. When you have literally 40, 50 golfers within $300 of either way and you can easily find a different lineup. Could Toasty still do it? Absolutely, he can. So think about that when you're building your lineup, but this is not the reason to lean on him. That's just the excuse of why you are leaning on him. The nice thing about Toasty is we at least have seen

28:52that like this is his style of course. When distance matters a lot more than accuracy, that's when we've seen him do well. He also finished 10th in Mexico last year. But also true last year is that his approach play was actually pretty good leading into this event. It was pretty good at Mexico and it was even good at the players when he didn't drive the ball well. So he missed the cut there last year. But he was great here last year because his approach play was great. He gained over a stroke per round. His approach play has been atrocious this year. So he goes from someone who last year was probably projecting pretty well in our stuff because distance and approach play. That's what he does or that's what he was doing last year. So he was going to project well. This year he projects horribly because yeah, the distance is there, but the approach plays awful and approach plays even more predictive relative to the baseline than distance is here. So yeah, I have no interest in Toasty and not because of some kind of ownership thing. It's not like he's going to be anywhere near popular enough where you have the fan and base on ownership just because distance is not all that matters here.

29:54You still have to be a good golfer. And right now he's just not that. Yeah, and there's somebody like, I would honestly rather play your boy Jesper than him for a little bit more. And he's with talking just guys that have ownership. Like still, then there's like 40 names. Like I said, legit 40 names to Ryan's point there of all around him that you can roll into. But all my point was I do believe data is super important in golf. It literally can push you in the right direction. I understand that the club head speed and the driving distance and the course fit that like all that stuff would lead to him. I'm saying you still have to then consider the 8% ownership. If that's what it ends up being or 5% or whatever it ends up, probably comes in like five or six realistically. But my point being, it's not saying I wouldn't play him. I'm saying it's, I'd be very cognizant of when I do play him, what the rest of my lineup looks like. Because if you're just going to plug him in with Menwoo and God are up and nap and whoever else adjured and all the chalk, which we're about to get to, it'll be a good segue. Then that makes your lineup not really look up as good, right? And I think this is just, you know, J.M. Eagle says this and people were talking about Myzner,

30:57Mao, these types of guys, anyone else, not talking about it. No matter who talks about these guys, outside of like Spenson and Toasty, I don't think any of them will get ownership. So literally just play whoever you want and build your lineup accordingly with what you've got in there. Because the result will matter in the end, but we don't know the result going in. So we're working fully off of process. And that's the key to the show and what we go through. So you want to tie that quickly to Menwoo? I just think there's an interesting conversation around that. And that's a good starting point for this. Then we could talk some weather and anything else. I think Coursefit has been kind of hammered through. But like the Menwoo factor, like I was trying to say earlier, he was going to be owned anyway. He was 40 to one here last year when he won. Like it wasn't like he was some shocker surprise. I mean, it wasn't a 10 to one like he is now, but that's Scotty related. I think he was 19 when it opened up. It was like, so it's all baked in. But a lot of people like heard me mention yesterday. I thought I said in my discord over at Chibin Asian. I said, man, it was some interesting comments. It was like people were talking about Lowry at the cognizant where it was this type of set up of a $9900 golfer and then nobody down below.

31:58And he got to 40%. Gerard got to 41 for Lowry and 40 for Gerard and Hogard was 30 and stuff like that. But like Menwoo coming in, I'm not on the opposite of what I just said about the toasty thing. Like I legit say I'm the same on it. I should say like I'm more on the opposite side but I don't care that he won here last year. I think it's more impressive. The second, the 12th, the sixth, results he's putting up in the field strengths. He's been in of the signature events and things and now coming in here and getting a field like this to himself where yeah, people say it is a little bit stronger. For sure, if you look up the numbers, it's a little bit stronger on paper too. But I'm just saying you can build linems with Menwoo this week and get different elsewhere. It's definitely still a possibility. Plenty of ways actually. You can go with building with him. Menwoo to me is all about whether you're buying the approach improvement or not because it's only six events so far this year, one of which we didn't even have shot link data for two of his rounds at the MX.

32:59So he's gained in four of the six events with his approach play. He's gained significantly in two of the six. He's lost pretty significantly in two of the six. Are you buying the improvement or are you saying this is a six event sample? It's not even like he's been consistently great. He's had two really bad events with the approach play. He's just spiked twice. And that's why it looks good. And we've seen him spike in the past. And then it goes from a full stroke gain to a full stroke loss per round in the next event and the next three events, things of that nature. And so whether or not you're playing Menwoo, I think just all comes down to your belief in the approach play improvement. If you're all in on the approach play improvement, you think this is the new Menwoo. He's actually going to gain quite frequently. Then he's not bad chalk at that number. It doesn't mean you have to play him. Like I wouldn't say that makes him a core play or a priority by any means. But if you're at all hesitant on the approach play, if you're all skeptical, then I think he's a pretty easy fade. And that's the category that I'm in.

34:00Yeah, the bigger thing too is also what's around him that you can still go to. I'm just saying again, another point like the other side, like don't be shocked if he comes through. It's like people will get so mad if he comes through. It's like you watched Lowry almost win at that ownership. You watched 30% fits win last week. Like it wouldn't shock me if he does come through. I don't think it'll be because he won here. Last year will end up being, like you said, probably because he still does vomit off the tee and can do that. But his approach play has been better. It was mediocre. Last event out and he was still in the mix. But the events before that, like the API and Pebble, it was dialed in and everything else was too. And obviously those resultant like second and sixth place. If that happens, you're going to be in pretty good shape. But I think the other thing around him is like, you know, God are up. If you're just going to God, you're just at that. To me, when someone's like, I'd rather have God or have that do that or play him both or whatever you decide. But my point being, you're not like getting some ownership discount really. Like it looks like both of them in high stakes could be 25 to 35 range. And I'm putting a wider range on just to say it's, you know, somewhere in that middle ground.

35:00So it's kind of like pick your poison at that point. So well, God are upwinds more. God, it was one more recently. It's all those factors are true. And if that's what you like, I would roll with it. But then you also have Sam Burns, right below it. You've got the Brooks Kepler factor where what I mean by that, the Brooks Kepler factor is the median projection is not going to show up. When we talked earlier about safe versus the upside, one thing about Brooks, the only thing that's really been off for them these last is the driver. And this thing that you can be off with a little bit more here is the driver, the way it sets up. So maybe that's better for him. And he comes through at 9600, where he just can't be old, right? You've got Jake Napp, you've got God or up, you got Lee. So you've got Burns and Capcus kind of squeezed in between that I think are pretty interesting. If you're going into that 9K range there as well, anything else you want to talk about on this current topic, if not, let's talk a little. Just anything you see with the weather or anything more you want to add with Corsfit and then we'll go into the chalk build. Tyler Reddick here from 2311 Racing. Victory Lane? Yeah, it's even better with Chamba by my side. Race to ChambaCasino.com, let's Chamba.

36:02No purchase necessary, VTW Group. Boy, we're prohibited by law. CT and Cs, 21 plus sponsored by Chamba Casino. Craving the coffee flavor you love. But without the caffeine, Cachamba's got you covered with their newest coffee flavor. This all-in-one nutrition shake delivers bold, authentic flavor, crafted from premium, decaffeinated Brazilian beans with 25 grams of protein, six grams of fiber, greens, and so much more. Treat yourself to the flavor and nutrition your body craves. Go to cachava.com and use code news. New customers get 15% off their first order. That's KAC, H-A-V-A.com code news. It does look like we might get a wave advantage this week. It depends on the weather model that you're looking at, but it seems like the windiest conditions are gonna be tomorrow afternoon, so Thursday afternoon. And then it seems like Friday afternoon might actually be a little bit calmer than Friday morning. And so we might get the peak winds on the PM-AM wave and the lightest winds on the AM-PM wave.

37:05So if we get kind of that double duty, if you will, then we get a really nice wave advantage for the AM-PM group. So that currently is very much on my mind and in our ownership over at FTN, I do have that factored in a little bit where I do anticipate the field having a preference for that wave, but it doesn't look like it's gonna be anything remotely close to even what we had at Sawgrass where 13% of lineups were heavier on one of the waves and something like 60-some percent was heavier on the other wave. I think it was even more. I think it was like 67% was heavier on the one wave. So I don't think we'll see anything close to that. And that means that if you wanna go in on this wave stack, I think it's a very viable path this week. Yeah, and it's funny, but you know, people do it on the weeks when everyone's talking about it and they don't do it on the weeks. And I've done it forever. It's been a part of my success in the PG-ADFS streets. It's certainly just been doing that or if it just lands that way.

38:06And I think that can be like tie breakers and stuff as well. We've had these conversations on previous shows. I think it was two weeks ago. We had this conversation, the big wave advantage one. So if you wanna go back and check that out, you guys can. It's just the first part. The timestamps will be there. Just look up leverage lane and the Shippet Nation YouTube channel. But if you see that, I usually like it when it's PMAM. Just naturally, I think about the mental state of a golfer, which again, it's not like I could get into that mind. I know you could personally be a pro yourself. But like, I think it's when you just got, when you gotta go on a decent Thursday afternoon or good enough and you gotta go out Friday morning and just set the tone, it's like, look, I don't have to chase a number. I don't know what I need to be at exactly. I kind of have an idea and let me go set the tone and see what happens versus, oh shit, I need to get the three under and I got five holes left. Pressure, pressure, pressure, it's golf. Anything could happen, right? It's a mind game. So I think that's something to think about. But I usually like it when it's that way. If it is AMPM and you're looking at your linux and you are going that route. Anyway, I got no problem finishing out your build that way if you land there. All right. So with all that said, let's go look at the chalk build

39:06and see what you think. I think the setup looks pretty straightforward at least somewhat, but what are you seeing and thinking off the top? What's your first thoughts on what the chalk build looks like? We just have so much chalk in the 9K range that I think what we'll see is either one of Minwoo and God are up and then one of NAP Fowler, Kidiama, Nikolai. Or we might see people try to get three of that second group where it's a more balanced lineup and it's three of NAP Fowler, Kidiama, Huigard. Or maybe they can't do that. So it's two of those guys and then one of Griffin, Thor Bjornson, Gerard, that group. But I mean, we're obviously locked into balanced builds because you can't spend on anybody over $10,000. So it's a little pointless to say, we're going to see a lot of balanced builds this week. But I do, I think we're going to see a lot of lineups that bottom out in the 7K range maybe only have one or two guys in that range and they just hammer the 8 and 9K range

40:07because they're, as we talked about, there are so many guys in this 8 and 9K range who if this tournament was priced without Scotty involved, they'd all be $500 to $1,000 more. Like we'd see Minwoo Lee would be 10, 5 minimum or something like that. We'd see Ben Griffin would probably be like 92, 93. We'd see Thor Bjornson at 90 or 91, something like that. And so all of these guys are really compressed because of Scotty. And it's just going to make it a lot easier to kind of jam-pack them all together. Yeah, this question came up because I just asked it. But I'm curious, yeah, what is your take on it? And I don't know if I fully agree with new ones anyway. I'm not that there's something to agree with you. Just noting like, to me, when you start in the PM on Thursday, I don't really feel like you're chasing a leader, even though factually you are. But it's like, when we think about it, it's DMS related. So it's always like, you got to make the cut for anything to matter. So I always feel like the PM AM guy is the one that sets the tone. And it's actually the AM PM guy that now knows

41:08when he goes out on Friday, I have to basically hit a number to even have a chance to worry about a leader board on the weekend. But what's your thoughts on? I'm curious now what we got you here. I like the late early, more than the early late, but not for the reasons that have been discussed. It's, I don't think it's about when you're on the course and tracking down the cut line. Because for one thing, even when you're pulling in the morning, you have a very good sense of what the cut's going to be. So like, and if the whole idea is that it might be a little bit harder to play well when you're under the pressure of making the cut like you, you get that in the morning too. You get it just as much because you know you're at least around the cut, where I think it's a lot favorable. And I think most guys would agree with this is that it's just the, the short a turnaround. Like it's, it's not an issue on Thursday morning to have to wait till the afternoon to tee off. Because the tournament hasn't started yet. It's really nicer than play.

42:10Go get dinner, sleep, wake up and play. You stay in rhythm. You don't have to think about your, your round too very much. When you play early Thursday, then you have to figure out what to do with the rest of your day. Then you sleep, wake up in the morning, figure out what to do with this morning. All the, like, because the thing is for all of Thursday, afternoon, evening and then Friday morning, your mind can't leave the fact that you're in a golf tournament and that you have to, you know, perform the next day. And so it's, that's what's on your mind. It's not like you can just go have a really fun day and not think about it and then, you know, refocus the next day once it's time to. That's on your mind the whole time. Just like anything in life that you're stressed about is always constantly there on your mind. And so that just becomes a little bit tiresome and then at the other point, it's like if you played really well on Thursday morning, you want to get right back out there. And similar, actually, if you play poorly, if you play poorly, you want to immediately go change that mojo, so well, and you just have to wait so, so long. It almost feels like you took, you know, a full day off by the time you're back on the course Thursday afternoon.

43:12So I prefer laterally, but it's for a different reason. And I also think too that I've always thought about this as well. Again, I don't know anything about this. I just think it's the way I think about it and would think about it. It's like you also, when you start PM on Thursday, you get to see how the course plays in the morning to know how to play in the afternoon. Again, it doesn't mean it'll be that way, but even when you play the next morning, you've also seen how it's played in the, if the conditions are similar using a week like that, where it's kind of a better thing for you, it's just kind of give more information as well. And then you just go and do it like you said, it's play, eat, sleep, eat, play, or whatever that looks like and then move on. It's like you get to kind of roll through with all the momentum. So the chat's talking about it. I mean, I could see where it's like a minwoo and then maybe people do go to like a Thor with Gerard or something, but I guess I do think more will start with two nine cases. So if you think that, do you think it's NAP or Kidiama that gets more love as the second guy in or do you think it's all the way up to God or up? Just because they're both so popular that they'll become popular as a combo. I mean, I've got all of NAP Fowler,

44:12Kidiama, Nikolai, all 20 plus in single entry and between 22 and 26%. I think Nikolai might actually be the most popular of that group, but we're splitting hairs here. I mean, they're all gonna be popular. They're all gonna be in a lot of different lineups. The one that I wouldn't be shocked to be slipped to the cracks would be Ricky. And then the other one would potentially be either Brooks or NAP just because if people really get in on the wave stack idea that, hey, you know what, there is gonna be an advantage for the AMPM group then NAP and Brooks could slip to the cracks, but again, like, I think Brooks certainly has a chance to be fairly low. NAP Fowler, Kidiama. I don't believe any Brooks ownership right now anyway, because the project, again, we live in a bubble, you will hear more people talking about him this week. You will actually hear more people betting him this week and that's because the odds are all related to that and for good reason. He's gonna win, let's just have the betting rights, betting out right on him, but also it's like they people have already bet him for the masters.

45:14People have already got ahead on all the majors. People were betting him last week. So it's like, that's the difference and then don't forget, some people then rely on that to say, okay, I've already bet this guy, don't need to play him in DFS or I'm gonna move to this instead. So I can definitely, I don't see anywhere where he actually gets the ownership because I just think it has to go to Menu, Gatorup, NAP. And even if NAP comes down, I think it leads more to Nikolai and Kidiama and those like whoever projects the best. So yeah, I don't see that. And I actually think Burns could be a little bit overlooked as well. So I guess like I wouldn't hate starting lineup with Burns or even like a Gatorup Burns if you wanted to or something like that, but that's another unique way to go this week. I think that would be different. Yeah, one of the things I will say about this week is because ownership so kind of condensed up top and there are so many guys who are popular, there is higher than usual risk of guys who are projected at least comparatively low ownership to the guys around them than steaming like crazy. Because anybody who's looking at the top of the board is gonna say, oh, if I want to get contrarian up here,

46:16I'm either using Sam Burns or Brooks Keppka. So if enough people just make the decision that they want to get contrarian, they're only two guys they can go to. So both of those guys have a chance of coming in a lot higher than we are currently estimating. And I think it could happen to both of those guys, but I'm really worried that it's gonna happen to Burns where we all think we're getting Burns 15, 17% something like that, he ends up 25 to 30 just because everyone had the exact same thought. So that's definitely something to watch out for this week. Tyler Reddick here from 2311 Racing, another checkered flag for the books. Time to celebrate with Chamba. Jump in at chambacasino.com. Let's Chamba. Don't purchase necessary, BTW Group. Boy, we're prohibited by law. CT and C, 21 plus sponsored by Chamba Casino. Craving the coffee flavor you love, but without the caffeine, Cachabas got you covered with their newest coffee flavor. This all-in-one nutrition shake delivers bold, authentic flavor crafted from premium decaffeinated Brazilian beans. Quality nutrition shouldn't be complicated. Just two scoops of Cachabas all-in-one nutrition shake

47:17and you've got 25 grams of protein, six grams of fiber, greens, and so much more. Whether you're craving that coffee taste to kickstart your morning ritual or as a nutrient-packed reward to round out your afternoon, Cachabas keeps you fueled and satisfied wherever your day takes you. Plus, it actually tastes delicious. No fillers, no nonsense. Just the good stuff, your body craves. And for the times you feel like switching it up, you've got seven flavors to choose from, all with the highest quality ingredients. Treat yourself to the flavor and nutrition your body craves. Go to cachava.com and use code news. New customers get 15% off their first order. That's K-A-C-H-A-V-A.com code news. I'm just trying to see if there's one more version of what I can find and I can't. Man, it is tricky, like it makes me wonder about like, if the, do you think there's any possibility that Min Woo ends up coming like third highest-owned? Because of like, you know, people do land on like,

48:18the naps of an equalizer, something like in the A-K, like, meaning that they'll just help boost it some because if you build like a, like a Jagger, Fox the Gala, like, do a bottom-up build here. I'm like, okay, who are kind of the popular seven K guys? And then you go to like a mid-range in Gerard or whoever, like, you still kind of land on like, you could get like, nap, hogard. And Gerard, for example, here's an example. You could get nap, hogard, Nikolai, that is Gerard. And then that would get you the Gala, Jagger, Fox. Yeah. And yes, there's variations of this certainly. I'm just saying like, if your Fox is a seven K guy, then yes, you can immediately move from nap up to Min Woo. And I guess that's kind of the thought process. Who's your most popular guy if I take out Fox and nap? I think the Gala and Jagger will definitely be popular in the 7.1 range of like, bez, and who else is down here? Man, not many people. It's Yellow Maraju at 7200.

49:20And I just can't quite fit them. That's why I was trying to get to 100 marks off. I mean, beyond that, there's no one over 5% for us in single entries. So there you go. Even then Min Woo becomes Gatorup in that example. But you could have Gatorup, Nikolai, and then you'd get Gerard, Jagger, Jagger, and Yellow. And that kind of rounds it out. So I guess my point would be too. And then I guess the other thing about that is, if the tea time thing does become talked about a little bit more, I could see where this all pulls Min Woo down just a little bit. I'm saying, and it's like, okay, then people will settle on stuff. Well, plus there's going to be people that just hate Min Woo at an ownership. Like I said, all right, that's stupid. It's only because of this I get all that. So like to me, I could definitely see where these end up the builds. So let's just say that there's multiple variations. If it's Min Woo for you, you can obviously find a hundred bucks. I'm just using this with Gatorup. I'm just saying you can get a Gatorup. Nikolai with Gerard, Jagger, Thigala, Yellow. Whatever you disagree with us on in this example, and I'm putting us in the bucket here just to make time fly.

50:22But I'm saying like, whatever you disagree with, you can obviously find it. What we're seeing though is probably two nine-kays with three seven-kays is kind of popular. And maybe there's a two eight-k version where people switch it up, right? Whoever that is, they go to and you end up with that. But I do think this is going to be a little bit more popular that we see this, right? Yeah, and to your point, so I think number one, to answer your question, yes. I think there's absolutely a chance that Min Woo wins up like only the third highest on Guy. And to that point, we only have him at 31.4% in single entry. You talked earlier about the fact that like, he might go from 30 to 40 because of Scotty, we don't have him projected to do any more close to that. I think for us, he went from 30.6% to 31.4% in single entry. So really small piece of the pie in. And part of that is, I was talking high stakes, too, just to note, like, I think he'll, we have him at 28 right now in the lottery. But it's like, I don't know what, I mean, I'm sure he's over 30 when it comes, currently when it comes to high stakes

51:22or like the satellites and the big time stuff like that. So it's really just where does he actually end up? Now I'm starting to think it does stay lower 30s, even in that stuff. And it could come down to like the 25 range, 28 range, somewhere in there for the lottery's and stuff, just because there's so many other ways you can go. And to your point, we have him at 32.2% in our new high stakes ownership. And part of that is because I'm already projecting a little bit of a field preference towards the other wave that he's not a part of. And so if the field gravitates towards that route, even more than that 31 and 32% in single entry and high stakes could end up, you know, 25 and 25, or maybe even 20 and one of them. And that's one of the things that like we'll see that effect more prevalent in high stakes than single entry because the high stakes players are more likely to take these, you know, advanced CFS strategies. Not that stacking is that an advance of a strategy, but they're more likely to take a DFS strategy approach than a picking their favorite players approach. And so wave stacking obviously falls under that umbrella.

52:24And so maybe we'll see a much lower on minimum than the field is currently expecting. Again, that wouldn't necessarily mean that I want to play him just because he's still going to be somewhat owned. And as you mentioned, like he's, he very much profiles as one of those guys that you play him when he's contrarian, now when he's chalky because of how volatile he is. Yeah. And Timmy just brought it up. I think Fox will be more popular than Jordan Smith at 7400. But if you just pick your poison there, whatever you want to do, my takeaway would be that lineup. So you can get Minouli Jake nap. It still fits the same thing we said. 2937 is going to be very popular because you have Minou Jake nap. Then you go to Gerard, and then it's Thigala, Fox, and Yellow. And that would round it out as well. So I mean, either way you can see what's happening here is one to two eight K guys. I'll talk more when I get to my lane later, which people could probably pick a power up. But it's not just for that reason. I just want to note it for other reasons when we get there. But there's definitely ways to leverage this. And I think, you know, just one of the key things too is when there's so many nine K guys, people do a lot of decision making. Like, oh, it has to be gotter.

53:25We've talked about plenty in the past. We've got to be gotter up versus Lee. There's not a matchup bet here. Like you're building a lot of what six guys and you, of course, there are salary constraints. So you have to consider that. But it could be Minou nap. And then you land with 7.7. We just saw how that played out. Well, what if you add, I don't know, let's see what we can do here, Ricky. And then you go to like Ben Griffin. Well, that's 6.2 K. Maybe that's not good enough. All right, let's go down. Let's go to Sam Stevens. Well, now you have 6.7 K left to round it out. You've got an upper 7K guy where most aren't landing. If they are, they're landing on Jagger, who's 78. You have someone who's not him. And then you still have two guys in the upper 6K range that if you found something there, you could get there. But just noting it from that perspective. And coach, you've been with me a very long time. We never say who we're doing what with. Like it's at the end of the day, there's all, I'm going to talk about Toasty. And I'm sure in MME and my 150 set, he'll end up in Toasty lineups. Meaning there'll be ones that I build accordingly. But there's no specific mention to it

54:26because it's like, all just, what can you do? You pick your lane, right? You decide. So that would be the build, Alex. So any other ways you can think to leverage it in a single entry perspective that you want to bring up. And then if you hit my lane, it's fine. I already know what I like anyway. So it's going to be pretty clear cut for me this week. Well, I'll add something else instead. And that is there's a group of guys, NAP, Thor Bjornson and Kudy, whose ownership is all really, really tied to what the field decides to do with the waves. Because they're all in this, quote unquote, wrong wave. And so if the field is not, if the field doesn't care about the wave that I, in the way that I currently expect them to, all of those guys are going to end up a lot more popular than I currently have them projected. And they all could end up being amongst the most popular on the slate. Minwoo is also in that group as well. So we could end up seeing a 40% Minwoo, a 30% NAP, a 25% Thor Bjornson and a 20% Kudy, for example, if I'm wrong about the wave currently.

55:27And so the other thing there is like, I'm phrasing this me being wrong currently, but I might change what I'm expecting from the field tonight if the forecast change. And so by tonight, I might have all those guys projected where I just mentioned. And so that's very much something to look for. And that would change the common build. Because if all of the sudden Kudy and Thor Bjornson are really, really popular plays, those guys are even easier to fit than some of the guys that we were talking about earlier, like the Nikolai and Kidiama and Fowler grouping. So yeah, that would make it even easier for people to then just kind of cram as many guys in the eight to 9K range so they possibly can't. Yeah, and I'll definitely be talking about the 6K range more in a second when I get there. So, you know, definitely that. And again, because it's not, again, this is what we say all the time, Andrews. Like it's what people talk a lot of shit. They're not about it. You go to just go to a game when somebody's talking shit to you at the sports place that you're at and they start talking shit and then see if a fight actually happens.

56:27It doesn't often happen. It's a lot of talk. So just keep that in mind in DFS. There's a lot of people talking about a lot of things. Not a lot of people actually execute or action them. Some people actually talk about DFS and don't even play. So keep watching those shows too while you're at it. But just noting it, I think it's important to remember. It's not always just that narrative. It's in this case, people would look at it as a price play, right? $8,400 for Gerard, he's the average price. Basically, he fits any style of build. That's where people feel safer because they should. He's probably way more, I mean, I got it up here now. I can pull it up just let me see. If we go to Gerard, he's the highest odds to make the cut. We actually have him higher odds to make the cut than pretty much anyone up to the 9K range, right? Like right there, like he's for making the cut. What he actually ends up doing and what are the results? Because of that, if he's needed all of those factors, that's the prime example of somebody earlier where we talked about the example of the safety versus the ceiling. It's like people will definitely take him for the safety play

57:28because he feels a lot better than clicking Wyndham Clark right there. But what can Wyndham Clark do if it's a Wyndham Clark week? And he's actually on while the sky's the limit, right? You'd have to wait and see. So that's kind of the thought process there. The Rasmus is the Keith Mitchell's all that. And by the way, the ownership is not like super high on Gerard right now. And we just showed you how he doesn't even really, he fits those builds exact. But after that, it's not like people are using him a ton. So I think that's something to consider as well. Anything else you want to talk about with How To Leverage It? If not, I do want to talk a little bit about one and done this week. I think we've had some good conversations around it in the past. But anything else from the DFS perspective that you wanted to bring up here? No, my leverage lane is going to be How To Leverage It. So we don't need to talk more about that. Looking for excitement? Chamba Casino is here. Play any time, play anywhere. Play on the train, play at the store, play at home, play with your board. Play today for your chance to win and get daily bonuses when you log in. So why are you waiting for Don't Delay? Chamba Casino is free to play. Experience social gameplay like never before.

58:29Go to Chamba Casino right now to play hundreds of games, including online slots. Ingo, slingo, and more. Live the Chamba Life at chambacasino.com. No purchase necessary VGW group void for prohibited by law on 21-plus terms and conditions apply. Access to affordable credit helps me pay my employees. But I don't really need it. Inflation is killing me. Who cares? Big retailers and making record profits. That's why we support the Durban Marshall credit card bill. See? Banks and credit unions help small businesses make payroll. This bill would cut the vital resources they need. While increasing megastore profits. They deserve it. Don't they? Tell Congress, stop the Durban Marshall money grab for corporate megastores paid for by the electronic payments coalition. All right, let's talk about one and done. One thing I'm really realizing, and that's like the kind of thought process back. It kind of does tie in what almost became our topic today of like safety versus what people are talking about, what others are doing and all that. I know you've talked about it in the past. I'm certain that the bombers are going to be popular

59:30in one and done this week because it's been talked about a ton, and it just makes sense. We get it. We explain that and beat the horse to death, if you will. But just to note it, these events that don't have the big paydays, it kind of does pay to just collect the money and move on, right? Like we saw it. I'm not sure if I fully went into it last week, I can't remember, but I even sent it to my dad to show him. And I thought it was really interesting. It's like the winner of the one and done the last couple of years. It's like, it's all just tied to signature events, right? It's you got to hit those. And you could be the winner last year in the big one on splash had like no, but had a million dollars or less in the first eight to 10 events. Like by players, they didn't even have a million bucks yet or just over, then one five signature events and picked up another 1.2 or 1.5 down the stretch across some of the weaker tournaments. Didn't even have the strong finish at the big tournament, like the big tournaments at the end, and still won the whole thing by 2.5 million. So at these events, I do think there is some like collecting go, but then factoring in the things you always talk about of, okay, but will you get, I don't know, like MinWoo's

1:00:33a good example, where else are you using MinWoo? I get he's any super popular in his people. Where else are you using MinWoo? And on top of it, it's like even if he doesn't win, but he collects you 200 grand or something like that, like that might be better than you're off the wall pick. Now it matters a little bit where you stand currently all that, but what are your one and done thoughts this week? I'm always curious to hear those. Yeah, I think I'm with you in the sense that I care a little bit less about the ownership of the play this week. And much more about am I going to want this player at some elevated event later in the year instead of having used him this week? And so that latter variable is what's going to keep me off players more than high expected ownership. But I also think that some of the most popular players this week, I don't really want to use them. So like MinWoo Lee, for example, I think he's going to be so overwhelmed that I just don't have interest, because I don't think he's that much more likely to win or more likely at all than some of the guys that I can get at much lower ownership. And I do think the kind of corollary to that is,

1:01:36it's probably a good idea to try and find a really good player who isn't a bomber this week and just use him. So maybe it's Fowler. Maybe it's Harris English or somebody along those lines where you're just saying this guy competes in contends because he's a very good golfer despite the fact that he's not super long off the tee, because ownership is going to be driven by distance for sure here in one and done. I can't remember we used Fowler that week or not in ours. Did we? Let me see. Do we have 20 brought him up? I was definitely a little bit interested in Fowler here just for a few reasons, like you said earlier, but just looking at it from the perspective of playing OK right now. I think he's very capable here. You talk with his T-time, anything you want to roll with, there's a lot of different angles to pursue, but also just so close to the masters. I think Ricky needs a top 20 here or better this week to be able to get into the masters. And I think he's trending in the right direction. So it's like, I feel like everything he's done lately, he can still set up well for this course.

1:02:37Yeah, we did use him at the AMX. So we can use him, unfortunately, but maybe English, maybe Shane Lowry. I'm not going to want Shane Lowry at a signature. I know I can tell you that much. He doesn't have the stuff, it seems. So beyond that, man, what about Adam Scott? The chat said, Adam Scott is my one and done picture. He's super popular and the man has super strength at his age. I always said this about Adam Scott. Now I've kind of like soured on him a little, but I guess at this event. But in these weaker field events, again, I know people we know all the names and whatnot, but like in general, overall weaker field, that's when he seems to pop the most. Because it's like they forget that yes, he comes 40th in all these tournaments, but it's now even worse, but it's because he's playing against the best in the world where there's like 20 names right off the hop that he can't compete with. So when I'll see you playing, Adam Scott. I love Adam Scott this week. And I can't figure out why he's not popular because he's a bomber off the tee now.

1:03:37I mean, his ball speed is just incredible for his age, but it's great regardless. Like you don't even need the qualifier for his age to be really impressed with his distance now. And the approach play has been unbelievably good. He's gained 0.6, 0.8, 0.6, 1, 1.1, and 1.8 strokes per round in every event this year with his irons. How is this not one of the industry's favorite plays of the week? I don't get it, but that makes him a target for me in DFS. And the one thing I'll say about him as well, this is kind of an extension of just betting thoughts, if you will. If you want any hope of betting him at a good number, at Augusta, you probably have like a week and a half to do that. Because as soon as we get two masters week, especially if he continues to play like this, the number's going to crater. 90 to one is available right now at Bad MGM, and he's going to be like 40 the week of if he continues to play like this. What about a blickle beat down real quick? What do someone says this? Scott's off the T stats are horrible.

1:04:39What do you say to that? Which Scott? Adam Scott? Yeah. The guy who he was bad at the players, he lost 0.8, but he gained 0.8, 5, 1.0, 5, 1.1, and 0.95 at the Sony MX farmers insurance in Genesis. He's been really good off the T. I don't know what that's referencing. There's Michael on Levin's violence. He got him in the chat. Sorry, guys. I had to have a little fun with it down the stretch. We love Jason. We appreciate it being here. I was interacting. But like, again, even when you see that, it's I always just going with a grain of salt, but it's like that's the toasty example from earlier. Oh, but he played good last week. Did you even look in or did you just see 30th on the sheet and say, well, he had a good result? That's what it's DFS related to. You know what I mean? People have had a good result in DFS and gave a ton of money back and away and never showed up again. There's people win millimakers and give all the money back. You know, because it's like they just don't, it was a good result. How they got there and processed wise, probably nothing to be able to repeat it and stick around and longevity and stay in the game and adapt and get better. So there's a lot of different things.

1:05:40So what though, there's actually a greater conversation to be had about Adam Scott. So now that I'm looking more at some of his other data, like I understand at least where this thought came from. So let's take a look at the farmers and the Genesis, for example, if you look at a data golf's accuracy number, he lost 2% of fairways hit to the field at the farmers and lost 1% at the Genesis, but he gained 1.1 and 0.94 strokes off the tee. And he was gaining 15 and 17 yards to the field. For example, 15 to 17 yards is gonna be right around 0.4 strokes worth of distance gained and he gained 1.1 and 0.94. So he gained more than half of his strokes in those two events with his accuracy off the tee, despite the fact that he hit fewer fairways than usual. What that should tell most people is that percentage of fairways hit or fairways gained is not a good representation of accuracy off the tee.

1:06:41It doesn't tell you how quality the misses were, doesn't tell you whether he was hitting his line very often because a lot of the time, if there's big trouble left, you're aimed down the right edge of the fairway. If you miss your line by two yards and you're in the rough, you just hit a super accurate drive. But the statistic that so many people use to measure accuracy doesn't know where you were aimed. Stroke's gained off the tee does and consequently, our stroke's gained driving accuracy does. Yeah, these stats are way off too. Like you're using some old data or something like that. You said it, he lost point at you, you just go on data golf, it's like free to check out. You can see it all, that's what the industry gold standard is for like sort of looking at this stuff and minus point eight off the tee. And he still made the cut and got through. It wasn't like that's gonna do much here for you, but just noting, he still was there. And then before that, he had point nine four at the Genesis plus one point one at the farmers, plus one at the American Express, plus point eight five. And then all the reasons you just broke down why it doesn't matter considering it.

1:07:41But when you say like the notes is like, his off the tee stats are horrible and then the correction is, well, last event this. And so that's my whole point, like toasties, you're playing really good right now. Last event, he came 30th. All right, we just broke it down for, he's been horrible, but he was good here two years ago and he was good here last year. So it has to happen 12 months later in the exact same event this year. It's all randomized. It's all the such a small variance, a small sample size and high variance. And I will admit, like yeah, he did not drive the ball well with the players, but that's also one of the absolute hardest tests in the world off the tee. This is not, this is not even close to that. So even if Scott wasn't accurate this week, even if he has a poor driving week, he's still not gonna lose a lot of strokes off the tee because of his distance. And the approach play in the putting is good enough to still make him a good play. So even if you're, even if you are of the mind that his last week's struggle off the tee

1:08:44or two weeks ago now at the players, even if you are of the mind that that is going to continue and he's not going to be accurate this week, that didn't enough itself is not enough where I think number one that it's worth not playing him nor is it enough historically to make the field come off of him. So again, I'm still very confused as to why he's not a more popular play. I feel like it's just because of his age. Age and in price as a nine in front of it, right? So it's like that's gotta be private too. I think people just factor that in when you already have, like again, we already named it with Minu and God are up and Naph and Nikolai and Kitiyama and even Fowler and people are going to like a little bit hotter right now that people are seeing, okay, he's looking good coming in, needs to resolve all that. Like I just think people are so much more likely to land there. But again, we're always trying just to learn from each other and talk about it from the game. It's not really coming down on anyone. I'm just saying this is the prime point that I made earlier on the Toasty stuff. So I brought it up again with the Scott stuff. It's like, what is that? Like if you're actually gonna use data, then use it. Don't just use like last week or the week before and then not dig into it because you, like you said, the players too off the tee can be water balls off the tee.

1:09:46It can be different things like that. Oh, someone lost approach at the players. Yeah, go look, they went in the water four times in a row on 17, Russell Knox at year, whatever it was. Like, you know, guess what? His approach didn't look very good there, but yeah, it's all relative. But that's like an excuse after the fact. When the result comes out at the end, you could say, oh, it is Ryan C. Crest here. There was a recent social media trend, which consisted of flying on a plane with no music, no movies, no entertainment. But a better trend would be going to chumbacacino.com. It's like having a mini social casino in your pocket. Chumbacacino has over 100 online casino style games, all absolutely free. It's the most fun you can have online and on a plane. So grab your free welcome bonus now at chumbacacino.com. Sponsored by Chumbacacino. No purchase necessary VGW group void for prohibited by law on 21 plus terms and conditions apply. Access to affordable credit helps me pay my employees. But I don't really need it. Infliction is killing me. Who cares? Big retailers and making record profits. That's why we support the Durban Marshall credit card bill.

1:10:49See, things in credit unions help small businesses make payroll. This bill would cut the vital resources they need. While increasing Megastore profits, they deserve it. Don't they? Tell Congress, stop the Durban Marshall money grab for corporate megastores. Pay for it by the electronic payments coalition. I knew Adam Scott wasn't going to be good because two weeks in a row, I saw his off the tea was bad. All right, do it every week then. Take whatever magic thought that got you there and apply it and start winning at DFS every week. Because it's not even a plikum. It's just the thought. So we can dig into the granular all day, but just a little thing that way. Anything from the betting standpoint that you want to bring up, I think you brought up like Adam Scott at the Masters could be part of it. Do you want to go get that number now that we've talked through it so much for anything else you want to bring up? Not really. I don't have anything yet this week. I'm hoping to have some tonight where maybe I can say that I'm expecting a stronger weather effect than the market is and I can find an edge that way. But at the moment, I don't actually have anything for this week. Yeah, I don't know.

1:11:49Like I said, what sites these guys are using? They got me all going in on it. I only get on here once a week now. I don't get as much camera time to go through it as what you're saying. But again, I just don't see how that's even possible when it's for 2026, specifically, when he was dialed for every event but the players and a little bit off at the API. I would also even need, like here, you can get away with a lot off the T2. So it's all going to come down to more to me of what else he could do with that stuff. But I'm sure of Adam Scott has a bad week. We'll see everybody back here next week saying that's terrible and told you so and all that and who cares. But yeah, I just like to help people learn the perspective I think about it from. And then if that can help them apply it, then great. But all right, I got nothing else. I definitely don't have betting. Somebody asked for a first round leader pick earlier. I got nothing on that. So for me, let's talk about our lanes. And I'll go, but just because you may have the same but you can put your spin on and adapt it. But I definitely have noticed it and I already liked it. Coming in, you and I talked a little bit about it pre-show. But I'm going to tie it in in a different way. So I definitely think at least two if not three 8K guys

1:12:53is going to be my lane for my main single entry. Like what I'm going with this week and what we kind of relate it back to. And MME, I'll take on some more risk and different things and across my portfolio. I'll cover more angles. But the reason I want to bring it up is because it's the guys in the 8K, I'm still fine with winning this thing. Like I don't think the win equity spreads that far. Like obviously I think Min-Moo has the highest win equity but what is it? 5%, 4%, like I can look it up. But I'm saying that's just what they're giving him. I think you could spread that down the board even further. So I think there's that factor that the winner can come from the 8K range. So I'll try and spray more options in there that way. If I'm going that way, yes, I could end up on a bunch of guys to get, you know, 2018, 15, 15, 12, 10 even. Like something like that could happen. But like you say, I always say it's not who you play. It's how you play them. In your case of it's not just who you play. It's who you don't play. It's I wouldn't have a very high-owned Min-Moo. I wouldn't have a very high-owned guy. And these guys could start my lineup. So I shouldn't say that. But just noting, I wouldn't have all of them with Min, I wouldn't have multiples of Min-Moo, NAP, Gauterup, Kiteam, who ever else is up there

1:13:54with Fowler, et cetera. So I'm looking at it from that perspective. But also, I think what I talked about earlier with like Yacht C. Sheffler on a Scotty week where you got to get the stuff right down below, I think playing 6K guys this week can work. Obviously, there's going to be a 6K guy that comes through and has a good week. There could even be multiples. But I think people forget that saying that and then figuring that out or having enough lineups, Steve, even with 150 to figure that out, what if I put 50 and dedicate them towards that? It's still only 50 lineups in a very large field tournament. And you still have to take some stands and figure it out this that and the other is spread it out. Some of you want to just go spray and pray. But then now you only have like last week. I had Lipski in there for two or three percent. That's not very many lineups. So it's like what if they had the Miss Cut in them or whatever, they're all dead anyway. So I think it's more challenging to figure that out. So I already like the 8K range. I think the winner can come from the 8K range. You can still play 9K guys with 8K guys and play multiples. So I'm fine with that. So I'm definitely going to be looking to play

1:14:54at least two if not three 8K guys and potentially four, depending on how my lineup shake out for what my main actually ends up looking like. So yeah, heavy on the 8K range for two different reasons. I like that. My leverage lane is going to be a bit of an answer to a question that was asked at like the very beginning of this show, which is what do we do when the industry is all over one skill set. And my answer is, well, that's not the only skill set that matters. And this coursefit model is very clear that yes, distance matters a ton this week. And the industry is 100% correct about that. But approach play also matters a ton, putting also matters a ton. And so one of the ways that I'm going to look to be different this week and to try and find separators this week is guys who are not long off the tee, but they are great with their irons and they are great putters. And the, I think really important point here is, I was actually, I brought up this idea in my discord and one of my discord members asked, I thought was a really great question. He's also a member of FTNs. We see all the projections, the ownership,

1:15:55the GPP scores. And he said, if we already have the GPP scores which already tell us who's under-owned and who isn't, does it really matter why they're under-owned? Does it matter if they're under-owned despite being a bomber or if they're under-owned because they're not a bomber? And the answer is, yeah, it actually does matter because just like we understand that every player has a range of outcomes in terms of what his performance is going to be and what his drafting scoring is going to be, every player also has a range of outcomes for what his ownership is going to be. And so when I say I want to find guys who are not long off the tee but they are great with their irons and putting, one of the things that I'm saying there is, I know that this guy has some protection for his team, right? We talked earlier about the fact that I think Burns and Brooks Kepka could both end up a lot more popular than their current ownership projection. Another guy like that, Wyndham Clark, has a very good GPP score for us right now. But he's a bomber. There's a very good chance that people who are looking in that range that you just talked about, that 8K range saying, all right, I really want to hammer this range but I want a bomber and I want someone who's not that high-owned.

1:16:57There aren't many options. Wyndham Clark is one of the clearest options there. So if you open the DraftKings app and you see Wyndham Clark at 20%, you should be a little bit surprised but you shouldn't be shocked. Whereas you're not going to see that on a, let's say like a Harris English for example, or there are some value plays who really are not bombers at all. They're great with their irons, they're great putters. There's no chance that we're going to be 5% owned. So that's the type of play that I'm going to lean into this week. And it does, by the way, it doesn't mean that I'm not going to have bombers in my lineup. I absolutely will. But I'm also going to have probably, let's say, like two to three of these guys who are very clear separators, protected from a ownership perspective because they don't have the number one skill set that people are looking for, even though they're still very good fits for the course. Yeah, that's perfect, man. I like that. And I think that's important for the people to take away is like that's what we've talked about a ton on these shows and the concept of putting it all together, but still knowing the tournament that you're in and then applying it towards that and using things like wave stacking, even when there's not a wave advantage to your advantage,

1:17:58using a couple of clear separators that fit in a range that people are talking about, but they're not being about, where they're mentioning a bunch of these guys and they're all eight to 12%, but nobody's clicking them. But then you've got two five percenters in there as well that fit the construction, but also not the quote unquote plays that people are on. And that stuff is way more important to me when I'm looking at the total roster construction or what the actual build them submitting looks like versus who are the plays that I'm on to get there with it. It's like it's so little about that for me that it really doesn't matter. Like it's all gonna be built based off of that. And then to your point of the like over-owned under-oh, we get that a lot too because with the stone, people can see the optimal rate when we do our simulations to say, okay, this is how optimal this play is as a standalone, but it's how often they're showing up. And so that's thinking of everything as a whole within those rosters. So if you have Min Wu to be optimal 30% of the time and he's 28% on, maybe he's not that bad. It's just you're gonna still have to think about it though and how you're playing him. But if you have somebody who's 15% to be optimal

1:19:02and they're 32% owned, well then you're probably looking at a bad play because that's like the difference of like the, when people talk about like good-shock, bad-shock, anything can happen in a result, but that's probably bad-shock. I mean, he's optimal 15% of the time but people are putting them in 30% of the time. That's a little bit over the top. How can I adjust for that? It doesn't just mean pivot to the next guy. It could be a different construction, it could be something that doesn't have that type of play in it, whatever it might be with CourseFit, skill set, wave advantage, all these different things can factor into your favor. So I think that was a good one, man, breaking it all down. If anybody has any follow-up questions for next week or any topics they want us to discuss, make sure to leave them in the comments. At the end of the show once we're done or if you're watching it on playback, you can do so already. Make sure to hit that thumbs up, subscribe to the channel. Alex, let the people know where they can find you, anything else he got going on for the week. At Alex, click a one on Twitter. You can find all the FTN links and links to my discord. And baseball starts tomorrow and so it's been an awesome season for Pickham.

1:20:02And I keep kind of saying the same thing, but I think what people maybe don't quite understand about Pickham is it's just such an awesome alternative to cash games where you just build a really nice bankle from it and I can't wait to test our luck in the Pickham streets there for baseball as well. So check it out if that kind of thing interests you. Love MLB, I'm excited for that to be back. The thing I like about it is again, I like NBA as well, but I know you and I have talked about this in the past and you've talked about your discord with other people as well. But when you get the projections dialed in and you're down to this 2v2 or this 3v3 or whatever that looks like, and it's like also then having to stick around for all these different setups and all the late news and all the different stuff when it comes to load management and tanking and all this gets a little bit much. I love baseball, the lineups come out early, it's fun building lineups. You can make anything look like an all-star lineup, but it's a lot of fun when you're actually building and it reminds me of golf and football,

1:21:03which we talk about so often of like the process can sometimes be more fun than the outcome. You love watching it and when you get a sweat, there's nothing better. I can't say that, but I'm saying building the lineups and talking through the puzzle and figuring out, well, if this, then that, and the field's doing this and then you're trying to adapt for that and playing these single entries where you kind of know, okay, the field's all in, I like heavy, I should say, on the Yankees tonight and that means this pitcher becomes popular. Well, I probably don't want to go against, I don't want the pitcher against the Yankees. I think they are likely to put up six runs, but if they only put up six runs and this other team does this, what can my roster look like that sort of competes with this? So I love baseball. I think that's important to remember. Our guy Aaron says hope to see, we'll have title, G Ryzen Ham and then we'll also have our guy Belman, who's who's hopping on now with us as well and joined us in the off season for basketball. So we're going to have a lot of MLB stuff rolling out. The masters, the special is on, but the big thing I want to talk about quick, just before I get out here, you guys can find me on X at Totech and Tam Ballman. I'm probably going to put a new article by don't this week.

1:22:03I'll try and do it at least like every two weeks or something I want to just work on behind the scenes and then put it together in a nicer format, but just noting it, I did want to bring this up. This is a big deal. I don't think enough people know this, but if you are wanting to use Sabersim, you can only get all access at Sabersim. It's not a shot like a bad thing. It's just a note. You can only get starter or ultimate at Sabersim. So I'm going to start talking about this a lot more so that you guys know, the reason I bring that up is because if you're playing PGADFS and you're like, well, I'd like Sabersim, but I don't need all access. I don't want to pay a hundred bucks a month or whatever it might be, you can get 79 or as little as 29 if you pay annually per month to include Sabersim on a single sport. If you're looking at baseball on a single sport, you can get 49 bucks a month, including Sabersim that you can't get single sport Sabersim. So it's a huge advantage. We do have the winner's circle program. If you guys haven't checked that out, just go to shipnation.com, click winner's circle. The rules are all there, the logos, but we've got a ton of people win a ton of money and get their membership for free

1:23:03because of that, along with some other prizes. So hopefully this was helpful. You guys know where to find me on X at TotalTag and Tambo. Hit me up if you have any questions or want to get in over at Shipnation. Alex, always a pleasure, man. I appreciate you popping on to get through this with me. We had a good one here this week and then we've got some really big events coming up. I think you guys have heard of it. The Masters in just two weeks will sell the Valero Texas Open next week back at 10.30 a.m. Eastern. That's going to do it for this one guys for Alex and for myself, TotalTag and Tambo. Let's ship it. let's fly! Hey, líderetek here from 23.11 Racing. Game nights fun until someone spends five minutes lining up one shot. Chuck breathe, aren't you shocked? Still aiming. While we figure it out, I fire up Chambac稚eno. I can spend anywhere, anytime, and there's always a new social casino game every week.

1:24:07Spins happen way faster than that shot. Play now at chumbacacino.com. Let's chumbac. Sponsored by Chumbacacino, no purchase necessary. VGW Group Fortware prohibited by law, 21 plus terms and conditions apply. Access to affordable credit helps me pay my employees that I don't really need it. Infliction is killing me! Who cares? Big retailers are making record profits! That's why we support the Durban Marshall Credit Card Bill! See? Banks and credit unions help small businesses make payroll. This bill would cut the vital resources they need. While increasing Megastore profits. They deserve it. Don't they? Tell Congress, stop the Durban Marshall money grab for corporate megastores. Paid for it by the Electronic Payments Coalition. Access to affordable credit helps me pay my employees that I don't really need it. Infliction is killing me! Who cares? Big retailers are making record profits! That's why we support the Durban Marshall Credit Card Bill! See?

1:25:07Banks and credit unions help small businesses make payroll. This bill would cut the vital resources they need. While increasing Megastore profits. They deserve it. Don't they? Tell Congress, stop the Durban Marshall money grab for corporate megastores. Paid for it by the Electronic Payments Coalition.