WEBVTT - Golf: US Open Wagering (Ep. 91) 0:00:00.240 --> 0:00:15.400 It's time to place your bets. Let's talk to the pros. 0:00:16.000 --> 0:00:18.640 Welcome in, everybody to betting pros. It's me Joey p 0:00:18.880 --> 0:00:22.160 Joe Piezapia, and today we're gonna take a little tour 0:00:22.280 --> 0:00:25.600 of Tory Pines. That's right, because we've got some golf 0:00:25.640 --> 0:00:29.080 to talk about today, and we've got another major right 0:00:29.160 --> 0:00:32.200 on the precipice. And there's nobody better to talk about 0:00:32.640 --> 0:00:35.160 golf with than my good friend. He's back on the show. 0:00:35.159 --> 0:00:39.160 He's made time for us, despite moving, despite figuring out 0:00:39.159 --> 0:00:41.800 his new studio. It's very difficult to be famous, but 0:00:41.920 --> 0:00:44.840 somehow he always gets by. And the us open here 0:00:44.960 --> 0:00:47.040 is going to be broken down by our goodpal, the one, 0:00:47.080 --> 0:00:49.840 the only, Pat Mayo. Pat, Welcome back to the show, 0:00:49.880 --> 0:00:53.000 my friend. How are you? How's how's the transitional studio 0:00:53.120 --> 0:00:54.360 life treating you these days? 0:00:54.680 --> 0:00:57.160 I don't like working from my house is the main 0:00:57.240 --> 0:00:59.080 thing that I figured out when you have two kids 0:00:59.120 --> 0:01:01.640 running around and my wife just thinks that now that 0:01:01.680 --> 0:01:04.640 I'm at home, that you know everything, that when I'm 0:01:04.640 --> 0:01:07.000 at the office, i'm working, And it doesn't feel that 0:01:07.040 --> 0:01:08.399 way when you work inside your house. 0:01:09.400 --> 0:01:11.680 As someone who works inside their house with two kids 0:01:11.680 --> 0:01:15.319 for their entire career. I can assure you I understand 0:01:15.360 --> 0:01:17.720 what you're talking about. Mine or older, though you still 0:01:17.720 --> 0:01:19.480 got the little guys, so a little bit of a 0:01:19.520 --> 0:01:22.560 different scenario, a lot more needy mineor kind of off 0:01:22.600 --> 0:01:24.360 on their own doing their things. But someday you'll get 0:01:24.360 --> 0:01:26.800 there someday. But yes, it's time to get to business, 0:01:26.840 --> 0:01:28.520 and you're right. Before I even do this, I just 0:01:28.560 --> 0:01:30.399 want to it's been a while since we chatted, so 0:01:30.440 --> 0:01:31.960 I just want to get your take on the Phil 0:01:32.040 --> 0:01:34.119 Micholson win of the PGA a couple of weeks ago, 0:01:34.160 --> 0:01:36.720 because that was certainly a crazy story. I don't think 0:01:36.720 --> 0:01:38.640 anybody saw coming, and I just wanted to kind of 0:01:38.640 --> 0:01:41.680 get your feel for it. Was this good for golf 0:01:41.720 --> 0:01:44.679 in that sense that you got the old standby name 0:01:44.760 --> 0:01:47.160 brand guy coming out of nowhere and winning that, or 0:01:47.560 --> 0:01:49.240 was a bad in a way because you know, we're 0:01:49.240 --> 0:01:51.400 still trying to manufacture stars at the same level of 0:01:51.400 --> 0:01:52.440 Phil Nicholson. 0:01:52.680 --> 0:01:56.680 Coming out of nowhere is never a good thing unless 0:01:56.880 --> 0:02:00.000 you're the most marketable star who's left in the game 0:02:00.080 --> 0:02:01.760 that's not named Tiger Woods. But he's not in the 0:02:01.760 --> 0:02:05.000 game right now. So because it's Phil is actually a 0:02:05.040 --> 0:02:08.959 great thing for golf. The problem is when you watch 0:02:09.000 --> 0:02:11.600 the CBS coverage, like they could have been showing like 0:02:11.760 --> 0:02:14.839 nine or ten guys who weren't necessarily going to win, 0:02:14.880 --> 0:02:16.679 but like someone like Harry Higgs, for example, one of 0:02:16.720 --> 0:02:18.840 the most could be marketable players, but no one knows 0:02:18.880 --> 0:02:21.320 who he is. He needed to finish inside the top 0:02:21.360 --> 0:02:23.799 five at the PGA Championship in order to get a 0:02:23.840 --> 0:02:26.160 secure spot in the Masters next year, a tournament which 0:02:26.160 --> 0:02:28.880 he has never played and would not qualify for unless 0:02:28.880 --> 0:02:32.160 he won a tournament or he ended up elevating himself 0:02:32.200 --> 0:02:34.320 to a certain part of the world rankings, which he 0:02:34.400 --> 0:02:37.080 just probably isn't going to do. And he did qualify 0:02:37.120 --> 0:02:39.600 for the Masters, but the broadcast didn't even touch on it. 0:02:39.680 --> 0:02:42.320 We wanted to see Phil chewing gum walking down the fairway. 0:02:42.680 --> 0:02:44.440 I get that's how they've always done it, But when 0:02:44.480 --> 0:02:47.000 we talk about creating new stars, how didn't feel like 0:02:47.080 --> 0:02:49.280 the ratings were through the roof because Phil was involved. 0:02:49.560 --> 0:02:51.720 It was like Tiger at the Masters. Tiger, Oh my god, 0:02:51.760 --> 0:02:54.239 Tiger's in the lead at the Masters. Everyone is tuning 0:02:54.280 --> 0:02:57.040 into that, and that becomes the perfect recipe in order 0:02:57.120 --> 0:02:59.520 to create these new stars, because if it's Brooks running 0:02:59.560 --> 0:03:02.600 away with it against like Brendan Grace, who was also 0:03:02.680 --> 0:03:04.280 up on the top of the leader board, like that's 0:03:04.360 --> 0:03:06.600 not a ratings drop by any means. Like people are 0:03:06.600 --> 0:03:09.960 familiar with Brooks, but no one really cares. People cared 0:03:10.120 --> 0:03:12.720 that Phil was going to win. So what the broadcast 0:03:12.760 --> 0:03:15.720 could have done was used that spotlight with all these 0:03:15.760 --> 0:03:19.080 new eyes tuning into the PGA Championship to elevate some 0:03:19.120 --> 0:03:21.040 of your guys like Patrick Kantley was making a run 0:03:21.080 --> 0:03:23.480 at it early on, just guys that were moving themselves 0:03:23.600 --> 0:03:26.480 up the leaderboard that are the future stars of the 0:03:26.480 --> 0:03:28.480 PGA Tour. They just CBS was like, screw it, we 0:03:28.480 --> 0:03:30.040 don't want to give you any pointing time. Sorry. 0:03:30.440 --> 0:03:32.320 I think that's a phenomenal point and I think it's 0:03:32.320 --> 0:03:35.120 a huge miss. By then you're absolutely right, and you know, 0:03:35.240 --> 0:03:36.800 just for fun, we'll get this out of the way. 0:03:37.200 --> 0:03:40.440 Phil's anywhere from fifty to seventy to one. Can the 0:03:40.440 --> 0:03:43.040 old man do it again? I know you're shaking your head. 0:03:43.080 --> 0:03:45.080 I'm just throwing it out there because people can ask. 0:03:45.080 --> 0:03:46.760 They're gonna ask me that question when they would do 0:03:46.800 --> 0:03:48.880 the show, ask Pat if he thinks Phil has one 0:03:48.880 --> 0:03:50.480 more in him because he's played well this year. 0:03:50.560 --> 0:03:51.840 I mean, I didn't think he had one more in 0:03:51.880 --> 0:03:54.280 him when he won last time, so I know. But 0:03:54.600 --> 0:03:57.320 the fact that he was three hundred to one to 0:03:57.400 --> 0:04:00.680 win the PGA Championship was probably an accurate reflection of 0:04:00.720 --> 0:04:03.400 his odds. The fact that he's between fifty and seventy 0:04:03.400 --> 0:04:05.800 to one, like there's real players who are between seventy 0:04:06.280 --> 0:04:08.400 and fifty to one, like Fella should be three hundred 0:04:08.440 --> 0:04:08.960 to one again. 0:04:09.560 --> 0:04:12.440 All right, well, let's get into the US Open here 0:04:12.440 --> 0:04:14.120 and some of the odds and some of the people 0:04:14.160 --> 0:04:18.040 that are clearly at the top of those odds, John Rahm, Bryson, 0:04:18.080 --> 0:04:20.599 des Chambau, Dustin Johnson, kind of usual suspects up at 0:04:20.600 --> 0:04:24.560 the top. You're getting Rom somewhere around plus ten to fifty, 0:04:24.600 --> 0:04:28.359 like over on DraftKings, Bryson des Chambeau at plus fifteen hundred, 0:04:28.400 --> 0:04:30.799 same with Dustin Johnson. There's a few other guys towards 0:04:30.839 --> 0:04:33.240 his top. Koepka's up around that area as well. So 0:04:33.480 --> 0:04:35.000 in your opinion, when you look at the top, if 0:04:35.000 --> 0:04:36.640 you wanted to go ahead and bet winners, and I 0:04:36.680 --> 0:04:39.160 know we've talked a lot about throwing different things out 0:04:39.160 --> 0:04:40.800 there and how to make money doing this. But let's 0:04:40.800 --> 0:04:43.359 start with the winners. Is there a favorite with this 0:04:43.480 --> 0:04:45.839 course in your opinion? How it plays for the style 0:04:46.200 --> 0:04:48.560 of golfer that we have here towards the top of 0:04:48.600 --> 0:04:49.640 these wagering lines. 0:04:50.120 --> 0:04:52.200 Well, it's funny when you think about all the guys 0:04:52.240 --> 0:04:55.839 and even essentially inside the top ten of the highest 0:04:55.880 --> 0:04:58.839 odds for the lowest odds players or highest odds players. Yes, 0:04:59.040 --> 0:05:03.039 that's the proper termin well bombers at us Open style 0:05:03.160 --> 0:05:05.160 tracks with the way that they have the USGA has 0:05:05.160 --> 0:05:07.400 set up these courses over the past five years. Just 0:05:07.440 --> 0:05:10.599 it's driving distance, driving distance, driving distance. Speak one in 0:05:10.680 --> 0:05:14.919 twenty fifteen at Chambers Bay, but the next nine guys 0:05:15.320 --> 0:05:18.360 on the leaderboard, we're all dominating in terms of driving distance. 0:05:18.520 --> 0:05:21.080 So you have your outliers in speed to someone who 0:05:21.080 --> 0:05:24.400 can accomplish that, Patrick Reid web Simpson, I think all 0:05:24.400 --> 0:05:26.920 follow into that category. Is they are good enough justin 0:05:26.960 --> 0:05:29.080 Thomas even at the same time as well, if they're 0:05:29.080 --> 0:05:31.000 so well rounded at the other parts of their game 0:05:31.320 --> 0:05:33.960 that they can most definitely win. It's just their path. 0:05:34.000 --> 0:05:36.919 The victory is so much more difficult than the guys 0:05:36.920 --> 0:05:39.279 at average three twenty five plus off the tee. So 0:05:39.640 --> 0:05:41.760 I'm just crossing those guys off. The path is too 0:05:41.760 --> 0:05:43.880 hard for them, especially if one of the Bombers actually 0:05:43.880 --> 0:05:46.480 plays well, then they're going to win. I don't like 0:05:46.600 --> 0:05:49.160 ramz Odds, especially coming off with COVID. It's of course 0:05:49.200 --> 0:05:51.599 where he's one before, obviously, but he's never won a major. 0:05:51.839 --> 0:05:54.799 He has one top ten is sorry, two top tens 0:05:55.080 --> 0:05:57.840 at US Opens, but not a great track record overall, 0:05:57.880 --> 0:06:00.880 and he is the bet prohibitive betting. Then he dropped 0:06:00.880 --> 0:06:03.080 down to Dustin who's not playing well. All right, we're 0:06:03.080 --> 0:06:05.280 going to cross him off because you can only take 0:06:05.360 --> 0:06:07.080 one or two of these guys at the top if 0:06:07.080 --> 0:06:08.920 that's how you rant help this week. So it really 0:06:08.960 --> 0:06:12.160 boils down to three guys for me, Rory, Brooks and Bryson. 0:06:12.440 --> 0:06:14.440 Two of those three guys are how you should attack 0:06:14.480 --> 0:06:17.240 this week on DraftKings where I am playing multiple lineups, 0:06:17.480 --> 0:06:19.920 all my lineups will probably start with two of those 0:06:19.960 --> 0:06:22.919 three guys and rotat them through. Obviously, in the betting market, 0:06:23.000 --> 0:06:25.040 you can't really do that. I've already bet on Brooks 0:06:25.040 --> 0:06:28.120 at eighteen to one. I just think he is most 0:06:28.160 --> 0:06:31.440 suited for all US Opens. Just look at his track 0:06:31.480 --> 0:06:34.560 record at the last three win, win, second. It did 0:06:34.600 --> 0:06:37.360 somewhat telling that he thrives under these conditions. He missed 0:06:37.360 --> 0:06:40.200 the cut last week at the Palmetto Championship, but it 0:06:40.200 --> 0:06:42.279 had nothing to do with his driving or his irons. 0:06:42.279 --> 0:06:45.000 He couldn't chip or putt, usually a sign of Brooks 0:06:45.040 --> 0:06:48.360 not caring how he finishes in a tournament. So realistically, 0:06:48.640 --> 0:06:50.400 just better news. He didn't have to stick around the weekend. 0:06:50.440 --> 0:06:52.960 He got over to San Diego. He's acclimated with the 0:06:53.000 --> 0:06:54.880 time zone, he can get some reps in up the course, 0:06:54.920 --> 0:06:57.440 and he's striking the ball as well as anyone right now. 0:06:57.680 --> 0:06:59.599 And when he decides to show up. He was injured 0:06:59.640 --> 0:07:02.400 at the MAP. I was on him then, and then 0:07:02.440 --> 0:07:04.680 it caused me not to take him at the PGA Championship, 0:07:04.680 --> 0:07:06.520 where he came second place. But just look at how 0:07:06.520 --> 0:07:10.680 he's done. PGA Championship second, the WGC at Concession earlier 0:07:10.720 --> 0:07:14.240 this year, second place, Phoenix earlier this year, first place. 0:07:14.240 --> 0:07:16.400 When he decides to show up, he is a legitimate 0:07:16.440 --> 0:07:18.840 threat to win every single time. And he is the 0:07:18.960 --> 0:07:21.320 fifth or sixth in the betting market right now. So 0:07:21.520 --> 0:07:24.200 Brooks is most definitely on the list in terms of betting, 0:07:24.240 --> 0:07:27.119 so that leads me between Rory and Bryson. Now, normally 0:07:27.160 --> 0:07:29.560 I would just say Bryson, Let's go with Bryson, but 0:07:29.640 --> 0:07:32.559 Rory's numbers down in the twenties, and I just maybe 0:07:32.560 --> 0:07:34.680 it's too big of a trap for me to fall into. 0:07:34.720 --> 0:07:36.680 I think Bryson is the safer play. I think Bryson 0:07:36.680 --> 0:07:39.239 has more win equity. But if they're separated by four 0:07:39.680 --> 0:07:42.040 points in terms of the betting market, from like sixteen 0:07:42.080 --> 0:07:45.520 hundred to from sixteen hundred to two thousand, I mean 0:07:45.680 --> 0:07:47.480 those four points are a lot. With the amount that 0:07:47.520 --> 0:07:49.240 you have to bet on guys at the very top 0:07:49.280 --> 0:07:51.239 of the boar, Like it's not the same as someone 0:07:51.280 --> 0:07:53.600 being sixty six to one to seventy to one. The 0:07:53.760 --> 0:07:56.560 amount of your wager just isn't that high at sixty 0:07:56.560 --> 0:07:58.440 to one and seventy seven to one and things like 0:07:58.480 --> 0:08:01.400 that versus sixteen to twenty to one like that, that's 0:08:01.440 --> 0:08:03.400 a big boy wager if you're gonna go in on them, 0:08:03.480 --> 0:08:05.880 especially if you're gonna take two guys from the very top, 0:08:05.960 --> 0:08:07.800 so you need to trim it down. It's gonna be 0:08:07.800 --> 0:08:09.640 Brooks for sure for me in the betting market and 0:08:09.760 --> 0:08:12.360 probably gonna end up being Bryson, you can find them 0:08:12.360 --> 0:08:14.720 as deep as nineteen to one in some spots, and 0:08:14.800 --> 0:08:17.800 that's probably the magic number for me with Bryson, because 0:08:17.840 --> 0:08:20.240 I think, like Brooks, he is very well tailored to 0:08:20.320 --> 0:08:23.760 take on Tory Pines and this complete rough and narrow 0:08:23.760 --> 0:08:24.600 fairway setup. 0:08:25.160 --> 0:08:26.920 And if you are looking for the best odds and 0:08:26.960 --> 0:08:28.880 some of the golfers that Pat sockoo, make sure you 0:08:28.920 --> 0:08:30.960 head over to Betting Pros and get the app as well, 0:08:31.240 --> 0:08:32.800 and you can see the different betting houses where you 0:08:32.840 --> 0:08:34.480 can get those best odds. So if those are the 0:08:34.520 --> 0:08:37.080 favorite guys, we're the ones that might be the long 0:08:37.080 --> 0:08:39.200 shots that might be fun to throw some chips on. 0:08:39.400 --> 0:08:42.000 Is it some young guys like Victor Howland who seems 0:08:42.080 --> 0:08:44.679 like a very well liked fellow these days, or is 0:08:44.720 --> 0:08:47.200 there some other young golfers that might really, you know, 0:08:47.520 --> 0:08:50.640 kind of take advantage of the moment here. Maybe they 0:08:50.679 --> 0:08:53.160 do hit those big long drives you're talking about that 0:08:53.200 --> 0:08:56.200 are the difference maker in this specific tournament, that might 0:08:56.240 --> 0:08:57.760 be able to kind of carve out a niche and 0:08:57.760 --> 0:09:00.000 if they have a good first day or two all 0:09:00.040 --> 0:09:01.440 of a sudden they start to get a little bit 0:09:01.520 --> 0:09:03.160 momentum going into the weekend. 0:09:03.720 --> 0:09:06.720 I think that that entire like twenty to forty, twenty 0:09:06.720 --> 0:09:08.640 to one to forty to one tier is very live 0:09:08.679 --> 0:09:10.679 to win this tournament. The issue is with how I've 0:09:10.720 --> 0:09:13.160 structured my betting card. If I'm going with Brooks and 0:09:13.160 --> 0:09:14.960 one of Rory and Bryce, and I can't afford to 0:09:14.960 --> 0:09:16.839 have any of these guys. You can't just spend all 0:09:16.920 --> 0:09:20.120 the favorites then even if they lose money, And people 0:09:20.120 --> 0:09:22.600 don't seem to realize that when you structure a betting 0:09:22.600 --> 0:09:25.400 card for a golf event. It's not like football. These 0:09:25.440 --> 0:09:28.040 guys pay pretty deep odds in order to win, but 0:09:28.080 --> 0:09:30.000 you don't want to overload yourself at the top. So 0:09:30.559 --> 0:09:35.600 Xander can't lay hovelin few Burger. They're all in this range. 0:09:35.600 --> 0:09:38.400 They're all more than capable of winning this event. They 0:09:38.440 --> 0:09:40.320 will not be making my betting sheet because I've gone 0:09:40.320 --> 0:09:42.720 with two guys around twenty to one, I need to 0:09:42.720 --> 0:09:44.840 go down the list. The Shane Lowry at eighty to 0:09:44.880 --> 0:09:48.240 one is actually the next guy on my betting card. 0:09:48.640 --> 0:09:50.840 We've seen him win an Open championship, so he has 0:09:50.880 --> 0:09:53.200 that major experience. He's won most of his events in 0:09:53.240 --> 0:09:56.560 his career, whether it be in America or overseas, at long, 0:09:56.840 --> 0:10:00.240 difficult courses. He just led the PGA Championship and strokes 0:10:00.280 --> 0:10:02.640 gained off the tee. He's magic around the greens. The 0:10:02.640 --> 0:10:04.640 butter you know that comes and goes. That's why he's 0:10:04.640 --> 0:10:07.720 eighty to one. But his irons right now are firing 0:10:07.800 --> 0:10:10.840 at the best rate of his career on a consistent basis, 0:10:10.880 --> 0:10:13.600 even better than he won the British Open two years ago. 0:10:13.920 --> 0:10:15.679 So I look at himy as three top tens in 0:10:15.679 --> 0:10:17.800 his past four starts. This is the sort of lead 0:10:17.840 --> 0:10:20.280 in form that he had when he won over in 0:10:20.360 --> 0:10:22.960 Northern Ireland two years ago. I think that eighty to 0:10:22.960 --> 0:10:24.280 one is just too big of a number for a 0:10:24.320 --> 0:10:25.960 guy of this class. 0:10:25.600 --> 0:10:28.720 All right, So pivoting off of the winners, and obviously 0:10:28.760 --> 0:10:30.400 that is a much harder thing to do. Let's talk 0:10:30.400 --> 0:10:32.920 about finishing. Let's talk about top twenty, top thirties. That's 0:10:32.960 --> 0:10:35.840 something you tend to put any investment into whill you 0:10:35.880 --> 0:10:37.960 see opportunities where all of a sudden, maybe you see 0:10:37.960 --> 0:10:40.600 somebody a good golfer that you really like, that you think, 0:10:40.640 --> 0:10:42.280 you know what they might play better than you think 0:10:42.280 --> 0:10:44.120 in this one. Maybe you can make some plus money 0:10:44.360 --> 0:10:46.680 on there. Because there's certainly like even on DK where 0:10:46.679 --> 0:10:48.440 you're talking about too. We just talked about Hovlin being 0:10:48.480 --> 0:10:50.320 a plus one ten to finish in the top twenty. 0:10:50.800 --> 0:10:53.440 The Shane Lowry is at plus one thirty five hatt 0:10:53.440 --> 0:10:54.959 and at plus one thirty eight. So there's a lot 0:10:55.000 --> 0:10:57.320 of you know, folks around there in that range where 0:10:57.360 --> 0:11:00.800 maybe it's a little simpler, maybe less less dangerous in 0:11:00.840 --> 0:11:02.840 terms of well, it's all or nothing, but maybe you 0:11:02.920 --> 0:11:04.679 just get somebody that you think is going to play 0:11:04.720 --> 0:11:06.760 well enough to finish at the top twenty or thirty. 0:11:07.000 --> 0:11:09.079 Is that a viable wager for folks who maybe you 0:11:09.080 --> 0:11:11.199 don't want to put all their eggs into a winner basket. 0:11:11.480 --> 0:11:12.920 I mean, it's cowardly way to play. 0:11:14.040 --> 0:11:16.760 What do you really think, Pat, No, I'll just kid 0:11:17.440 --> 0:11:19.280 put threw it out there because that I think people 0:11:19.280 --> 0:11:20.560 look at that board and they go, oh, it's so 0:11:20.600 --> 0:11:22.760 hard to pick out the one winner. Maybe I do that, 0:11:22.800 --> 0:11:24.959 but I want to hedge and have some more skin 0:11:25.040 --> 0:11:27.199 in the game too and do some other things too, 0:11:27.200 --> 0:11:28.800 and that might be a way to maybe make back 0:11:28.800 --> 0:11:30.080 some of the money potentially too. 0:11:30.480 --> 0:11:32.839 I listen, I'm not opposed to top twenties or top tens. 0:11:32.880 --> 0:11:34.719 I do play them almost every single week, but I 0:11:34.760 --> 0:11:36.880 played them with long shots. I'm not looking to bet. 0:11:37.040 --> 0:11:39.280 Like if Victor Hobblin's twenty five to one to win, 0:11:39.320 --> 0:11:41.959 there's really no value in his top twenty plus one 0:11:42.000 --> 0:11:44.920 twenty five like right as, you're basically better if you 0:11:44.960 --> 0:11:46.800 put a big number down. Well, yeah, you have to 0:11:46.800 --> 0:11:48.760 put a big It's you're essentially betting on a football 0:11:48.800 --> 0:11:51.719 game at that point, and that's not what I do. 0:11:51.800 --> 0:11:54.080 That's not how I like to bet on golf. If 0:11:54.120 --> 0:11:55.760 I'm going to be looking at let's say I'm looking 0:11:55.760 --> 0:11:58.320 at the top thirty market right now, what I prefer 0:11:58.360 --> 0:12:00.520 to do. But me being in Canada a lot different 0:12:00.520 --> 0:12:02.400 than being in the United States, and we have I 0:12:02.400 --> 0:12:05.160 mean in Britain it's even better, but we have placement wagers. 0:12:05.200 --> 0:12:08.160 So for example, like I play a lot of each 0:12:08.200 --> 0:12:10.199 way betting on long shots. So there's a bunch of 0:12:10.240 --> 0:12:12.120 guys down the board that I really like this week, 0:12:12.240 --> 0:12:14.600 and it's essentially trying to grab their top eight. So 0:12:14.640 --> 0:12:17.280 that's the placement that's offered. So if I was to 0:12:17.320 --> 0:12:19.679 bet twenty dollars on Let's say Taylor Pendrith, who I 0:12:19.760 --> 0:12:21.880 really like this week. He's five hundred to one to 0:12:21.920 --> 0:12:24.680 win this event. So if I bet twenty dollars on 0:12:24.760 --> 0:12:27.040 him with the each way, what that means is that 0:12:27.120 --> 0:12:29.800 ten dollars would be allocated towards the five hundred to 0:12:29.840 --> 0:12:32.520 one if he won, and then another ten dollars would 0:12:32.559 --> 0:12:36.440 be allocated towards his top eight, which is one fifth 0:12:36.480 --> 0:12:38.520 of the odds of the five hundred, so it would 0:12:38.520 --> 0:12:40.640 be one hundred to one for him to come inside 0:12:40.640 --> 0:12:42.640 the top eight. Now, the reason that I do that 0:12:43.160 --> 0:12:44.959 is because I want to look at his top ten odds, 0:12:44.960 --> 0:12:47.040 and his top ten odds are thirty three to one. 0:12:47.320 --> 0:12:50.240 So essentially I'm losing two placement points but gaining over 0:12:50.520 --> 0:12:53.559 triple the odds in terms of what it actually pays out. 0:12:53.600 --> 0:12:56.800 Plus I still have the upside of him winning, which 0:12:56.800 --> 0:12:58.800 he's not going to win, but he could finish seventh 0:12:58.880 --> 0:13:01.920 or something like that out of the realm. So that's 0:13:01.920 --> 0:13:03.720 why I structure my bets that way. I think that 0:13:03.760 --> 0:13:05.839 there's just more value to spread up your money instead 0:13:05.840 --> 0:13:08.200 of putting twenty dollars on the thirty three to one 0:13:08.440 --> 0:13:10.160 to win six hundred. If I go ten and ten, 0:13:10.200 --> 0:13:12.120 I mean, if my guy wins, I win five thousand bucks. 0:13:12.280 --> 0:13:14.760 If becomes inside the top eight, I win five hundred bucks. 0:13:15.080 --> 0:13:17.800 So that's a better way for me to structure, at 0:13:17.880 --> 0:13:20.439 least in my mind. That's what I'm telling myself is 0:13:20.480 --> 0:13:22.440 the way that I want to approach this, because I 0:13:22.440 --> 0:13:24.959 do like that upside Listen, I'm betting on golf for 0:13:25.040 --> 0:13:27.040 huge payouts. If I can hit a five hundred to 0:13:27.040 --> 0:13:29.840 one winner, it can happen in golf. It's unlike any 0:13:29.880 --> 0:13:32.000 other sports in that way. So there's a bunch of 0:13:32.000 --> 0:13:33.280 guys down the list. If you just want to play 0:13:33.280 --> 0:13:35.800 top tens or top twenties on them, I don't mind that, 0:13:35.840 --> 0:13:37.320 But I don't want to take a favorite at a 0:13:37.320 --> 0:13:40.360 top twenty, because then you're just betting even money. You're 0:13:40.360 --> 0:13:42.800 basically betting on a coin flip in terms of OZ 0:13:42.800 --> 0:13:44.680 and it's probably not even that good, especially at a 0:13:44.720 --> 0:13:47.559 course as difficult as Tory Pines in a tournament set 0:13:47.640 --> 0:13:49.840 up as difficult as the US Open. So if you're 0:13:49.880 --> 0:13:53.440 looking down the list, I would recommend Matt Wallace and 0:13:53.480 --> 0:13:55.880 I have outright wagers on all these guys. So Matt 0:13:55.880 --> 0:13:58.480 Wallace at one hundred and fifty to one, Taylor Pendrith 0:13:58.520 --> 0:14:00.840 at five hundred to one, wyndhom Clark at seven hundred 0:14:00.840 --> 0:14:03.319 and fifty to one, and Cameron Young at three hundred 0:14:03.360 --> 0:14:06.160 to one are probably my four favorite guys from beyond 0:14:06.160 --> 0:14:08.000 one hundred to one in the outright market. Now, if 0:14:08.000 --> 0:14:09.800 you want to play a top thirty on them, a 0:14:09.920 --> 0:14:12.320 top twenty, bet them outright, you can deal with that 0:14:12.320 --> 0:14:14.520 with what you want. I played the outright win with 0:14:14.640 --> 0:14:16.960 the each way in the top eight finishing places. On 0:14:17.320 --> 0:14:19.760 one of those guys finishes inside the top eight, I'm 0:14:19.760 --> 0:14:21.160 gonna make a lot of money this week, even if 0:14:21.200 --> 0:14:22.280 I lose every other bet. 0:14:22.760 --> 0:14:25.400 Now, talk to me about some of the other possible 0:14:25.440 --> 0:14:28.320 wagers too. We've got, obviously the groups you've got, you know, 0:14:28.320 --> 0:14:30.960 there's so many things now you can literally wager on everything. 0:14:31.240 --> 0:14:33.720 But you've got different setups where you've got tournament props, 0:14:33.800 --> 0:14:35.760 you've got make miss cut, you've got all kinds of 0:14:35.760 --> 0:14:37.920 things you can get in on. What else, Even for 0:14:38.000 --> 0:14:41.400 the novice wager going out there this weekend and looking 0:14:41.440 --> 0:14:44.240 at this tournament, do you think is a good path 0:14:44.240 --> 0:14:46.360 where you say, you know what this particular prop or 0:14:46.360 --> 0:14:48.760 this particular wager kind of makes sense to me with 0:14:48.800 --> 0:14:51.040 this player that you actually are high on as well 0:14:51.080 --> 0:14:53.040 that you would advise, or is this something where you 0:14:53.040 --> 0:14:54.520 stay away just focus on some of the things that 0:14:54.600 --> 0:14:56.600 you talked about, which is, hey, it's a big, all 0:14:56.680 --> 0:14:58.680 or nothing kind of thing. That's the nature of the game. 0:14:59.320 --> 0:15:01.440 I tend to be all or nothing type of better 0:15:01.520 --> 0:15:03.200 when it comes to golf because when I win, I 0:15:03.240 --> 0:15:05.320 went really big, and when I lose, I get wiped 0:15:05.320 --> 0:15:07.000 out for the week. That's just the game that I 0:15:07.080 --> 0:15:08.840 like to play. If you want to head yourself and 0:15:09.040 --> 0:15:10.800 you know you have one hundred dollars to invest, do 0:15:10.880 --> 0:15:12.880 I invest a little bit here, invest a little bit there. 0:15:13.120 --> 0:15:15.160 That's a perfectly reasonable way to go about it. It's 0:15:15.200 --> 0:15:18.520 just not the strategy that I end up taking. So 0:15:18.600 --> 0:15:20.600 if you were like looking at props, most of them 0:15:20.640 --> 0:15:23.400 like aren't lined properly. And I hate to throw shade it. 0:15:23.480 --> 0:15:25.760 You know, my favorite sports book in the world, drafting 0:15:25.800 --> 0:15:28.320 sports book. But I'm seeing Taylor Pendrith right now at 0:15:28.320 --> 0:15:31.160 plus four fifty to be top Canadian. I bet him 0:15:31.200 --> 0:15:34.920 at plus eight hundred at another place yesterday and that 0:15:35.000 --> 0:15:37.680 number is still hanging out there, so you shopping around 0:15:37.720 --> 0:15:40.400 finding the best value. I think that's an actual value bet, 0:15:40.440 --> 0:15:43.240 like Corey Connors in terms of the top Canadian market, 0:15:43.320 --> 0:15:45.600 is like minus one twenty or even minus one fifty 0:15:45.840 --> 0:15:47.280 at some spots. And the way that you need to 0:15:47.320 --> 0:15:50.000 think about is this is technically a four ball. It's 0:15:50.200 --> 0:15:52.560 one guy versus three other guys. And you'll see three 0:15:52.600 --> 0:15:56.360 balls get launched every single day and almost no one 0:15:56.440 --> 0:15:58.440 is ever a minus one fifty. And now he has 0:15:58.480 --> 0:16:00.960 to be three other people. He is not. He's better 0:16:01.000 --> 0:16:03.440 than these guys, but he's not significantly better to be 0:16:03.480 --> 0:16:06.720 a minus money favorite against three other players. I just 0:16:06.760 --> 0:16:08.480 see Pendrith. No one knows who he is. He plays 0:16:08.520 --> 0:16:10.960 on the corn Ferry Tour, but he is a massive bomber. 0:16:11.360 --> 0:16:13.720 He is. He has great touch around the greens and 0:16:13.720 --> 0:16:17.160 he's pretty good putters. Irons are absolutely horrible. But he's 0:16:17.200 --> 0:16:19.080 played in two US Opens in his life, the last 0:16:19.080 --> 0:16:21.120 two he's made the cut in both. That's better than 0:16:21.120 --> 0:16:22.960 all the other Canadians, So why not. 0:16:23.840 --> 0:16:25.280 I love it. I love that you could bet guys 0:16:25.280 --> 0:16:27.360 from the countries too. It's just a fun thing to do, 0:16:27.880 --> 0:16:30.120 all right. So if that is the wagering side of things. 0:16:30.160 --> 0:16:31.960 Let's switch gears a little bit and just touch on 0:16:32.000 --> 0:16:36.320 real quick the DFS world of golf. And you have 0:16:36.440 --> 0:16:38.000 really taken us through, I know last time you were 0:16:38.040 --> 0:16:39.840 on a few weeks back, you really kind of took 0:16:39.880 --> 0:16:41.800 us to your thought process on that and how you 0:16:41.840 --> 0:16:44.800 approach that and the reasons why. So now with the 0:16:44.800 --> 0:16:47.240 mix of golfers this specific course, the way you've laid 0:16:47.240 --> 0:16:50.160