WEBVTT - 3M Open: Odds, Best PGA Bets, and One-And-Done Picks (Ep. 731)

0:00:01.320 --> 0:00:04.640
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to the Betting Pros PGA Podcast. I'm Pat Fitzmorris

0:00:04.680 --> 0:00:07.480
<v Speaker 1>along with Bau mcbrair. We've got a betting preview of

0:00:07.520 --> 0:00:09.920
<v Speaker 1>the three m Open on tap for today. It's the

0:00:09.960 --> 0:00:12.680
<v Speaker 1>second last event on the PGA Tour calendar before the

0:00:12.680 --> 0:00:17.000
<v Speaker 1>FedEx Cup playoffs. But first let's quickly touch on the

0:00:17.120 --> 0:00:21.360
<v Speaker 1>final major of the year, the Open Championship. Scotti Scheffler

0:00:21.600 --> 0:00:23.919
<v Speaker 1>is your champion Golfer of the year. He wins the

0:00:23.960 --> 0:00:27.319
<v Speaker 1>opening a runaway at royal Port Rush. Scotty opened with

0:00:27.360 --> 0:00:29.920
<v Speaker 1>a sixty eight on Thursday and was one shot behind

0:00:29.920 --> 0:00:32.320
<v Speaker 1>the pack. He grabbed the thirty six hole lead with

0:00:32.360 --> 0:00:35.960
<v Speaker 1>a sterling round of sixty four on Friday. He stretched

0:00:35.960 --> 0:00:38.279
<v Speaker 1>that lead to four with the sixty seven on Saturday.

0:00:38.600 --> 0:00:40.479
<v Speaker 1>Then he birdied three of his first five holes on

0:00:40.520 --> 0:00:43.720
<v Speaker 1>Sunday to effectively grab the claret jug with both hands.

0:00:43.960 --> 0:00:46.440
<v Speaker 1>Scotty's only hiccup on Sunday was a double bogie in

0:00:46.479 --> 0:00:48.199
<v Speaker 1>the eighth hole when he had some trouble with a

0:00:48.200 --> 0:00:50.880
<v Speaker 1>fairway bunker, but by then his cushion was so big

0:00:50.920 --> 0:00:54.360
<v Speaker 1>that not even a crooked number could introduce some drama

0:00:54.400 --> 0:00:58.400
<v Speaker 1>to the proceedings. Harris English finishes second, four shots back

0:00:58.800 --> 0:01:01.360
<v Speaker 1>Chris Goderup, who had won the Scottish Open a week earlier.

0:01:01.400 --> 0:01:05.000
<v Speaker 1>He finished solo third at royal Port Rush, Hot tong Lee,

0:01:05.240 --> 0:01:08.640
<v Speaker 1>Matt Fitzpatrick and Wyndham Clark tie for fourth, and twenty

0:01:08.680 --> 0:01:12.240
<v Speaker 1>twenty four Open champion Xander Schoffley and favorite son of

0:01:12.280 --> 0:01:15.880
<v Speaker 1>Northern Ireland Rory McElroy finishing a tie for seventh after

0:01:15.880 --> 0:01:20.920
<v Speaker 1>acquitting themselvesselves pretty well all week. Bow Your takeaways from

0:01:21.000 --> 0:01:25.520
<v Speaker 1>Scotti Scheffler's first Open championship victory, Well.

0:01:25.400 --> 0:01:27.880
<v Speaker 2>We can't call it flawless, but it was as close

0:01:27.920 --> 0:01:30.760
<v Speaker 2>to flawless as you're going to get for an Open championship.

0:01:31.480 --> 0:01:34.080
<v Speaker 2>The scoring was pretty favorable. That Royal Port Rush is

0:01:34.120 --> 0:01:36.800
<v Speaker 2>just a really tough golf course, so even with premium

0:01:36.800 --> 0:01:39.840
<v Speaker 2>scoring conditions, it wasn't that easy unless your name was

0:01:39.840 --> 0:01:44.160
<v Speaker 2>Scotti Scheffler. Uh, he's just so good. He's he's a machine,

0:01:44.200 --> 0:01:47.080
<v Speaker 2>and that's from tee to green. You expect him to

0:01:47.120 --> 0:01:49.520
<v Speaker 2>be the best in the field. But last the week

0:01:49.560 --> 0:01:52.240
<v Speaker 2>before last at Scottish he was one hundred and eighteenth

0:01:52.320 --> 0:01:57.840
<v Speaker 2>in strokes gain putting. He finished number one in total

0:01:57.880 --> 0:02:00.360
<v Speaker 2>putts and number two in strokes game put in the

0:02:00.360 --> 0:02:04.320
<v Speaker 2>whole field at the at the Open Championship, if Scotty's

0:02:04.400 --> 0:02:07.800
<v Speaker 2>in the top five of putting, nobody has any chance.

0:02:07.840 --> 0:02:08.200
<v Speaker 1>Period.

0:02:08.280 --> 0:02:11.440
<v Speaker 2>That's just it. Like, even if Scotty's in the top forty,

0:02:11.800 --> 0:02:14.840
<v Speaker 2>he's probably gonna win if he's putting well enough to

0:02:14.840 --> 0:02:17.200
<v Speaker 2>be in the top forty, if he's putting number one

0:02:17.280 --> 0:02:20.359
<v Speaker 2>or number two in the field, it's a it's a

0:02:20.400 --> 0:02:23.280
<v Speaker 2>shock that he only won by four. Honestly, that's that's

0:02:23.320 --> 0:02:26.080
<v Speaker 2>how good he is. From Teita Green and we thought

0:02:26.320 --> 0:02:28.840
<v Speaker 2>for sure that he couldn't read the greens as well

0:02:28.919 --> 0:02:33.600
<v Speaker 2>as other stateside greens. But he figured something out. And

0:02:33.919 --> 0:02:36.680
<v Speaker 2>if if happy he learned how to putt, it's no

0:02:36.800 --> 0:02:41.400
<v Speaker 2>stopping him. Scotty Scheffler might not celebrate his win too long,

0:02:42.080 --> 0:02:45.440
<v Speaker 2>but he's he's gonna celebrate, And I mean, it's just

0:02:45.800 --> 0:02:47.679
<v Speaker 2>it was fun to watch. He's a lot of people

0:02:47.720 --> 0:02:51.080
<v Speaker 2>call him boring. I think it's the opposite. We're watching greatness,

0:02:51.480 --> 0:02:55.040
<v Speaker 2>and anytime we're witnessing greatness, I have to pinch myself

0:02:55.080 --> 0:02:59.920
<v Speaker 2>because I get so excited to watch just how pristy

0:03:00.320 --> 0:03:03.760
<v Speaker 2>his game is. From every club in the bag, his

0:03:03.800 --> 0:03:07.400
<v Speaker 2>mental game is insanely strong. This guy is just he's

0:03:07.400 --> 0:03:10.960
<v Speaker 2>an all time great already and it's a privilege to

0:03:11.360 --> 0:03:13.760
<v Speaker 2>watch that unfold at the Open Championship.

0:03:14.639 --> 0:03:18.520
<v Speaker 1>Yes, Scotty, he wasn't great on the tee all week.

0:03:19.160 --> 0:03:20.880
<v Speaker 1>He caught some good breaks. There were a couple of

0:03:20.919 --> 0:03:23.280
<v Speaker 1>times where balls could have gone into the thick stuff

0:03:23.320 --> 0:03:26.440
<v Speaker 1>and bounced and stayed up in the light stuff. But man,

0:03:26.520 --> 0:03:31.120
<v Speaker 1>the distance control on his irons and wedges, the scrambling,

0:03:31.360 --> 0:03:33.760
<v Speaker 1>I mean, the gamer on the green and like you said, bo,

0:03:33.880 --> 0:03:36.160
<v Speaker 1>I mean he I know he was vexed by the

0:03:36.200 --> 0:03:39.960
<v Speaker 1>faescue greens at the Scottish Open. Not so much a

0:03:40.080 --> 0:03:43.400
<v Speaker 1>royal port rush. He was dialed in. It was a

0:03:43.440 --> 0:03:45.640
<v Speaker 1>sight to behold. Do we think it might have been

0:03:45.680 --> 0:03:48.680
<v Speaker 1>closer if we had gotten some more Scottish weather because

0:03:48.720 --> 0:03:51.160
<v Speaker 1>it looked like San Diego out there on the weekend.

0:03:51.600 --> 0:03:53.920
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, And that's kind of what surprised me is that

0:03:54.240 --> 0:03:59.560
<v Speaker 2>Scotty Scheffler dominates when the weather is good, and I

0:03:59.600 --> 0:04:04.320
<v Speaker 2>think is his game strategy hasn't really played out for

0:04:04.680 --> 0:04:09.040
<v Speaker 2>Scottish weather or Northern Irish weather. The Open Championship is

0:04:09.120 --> 0:04:12.920
<v Speaker 2>usually marked by great scoring conditions when the weather's perfect

0:04:13.280 --> 0:04:18.160
<v Speaker 2>and then unplayable conditions darn near when the weather's it's

0:04:18.200 --> 0:04:19.960
<v Speaker 2>just when the wind is up. And Royal Port Rush

0:04:20.040 --> 0:04:22.360
<v Speaker 2>is a brutally difficult golf course when the wind is up.

0:04:22.520 --> 0:04:25.320
<v Speaker 2>We just didn't get any wind, and so Scotti Scheffler's

0:04:25.360 --> 0:04:27.800
<v Speaker 2>high ball flight. He's good at flighting it down, but

0:04:28.360 --> 0:04:31.760
<v Speaker 2>his real strength is when he's just better than everybody

0:04:31.800 --> 0:04:33.960
<v Speaker 2>else at gauging distance and hitting the center of the

0:04:33.960 --> 0:04:36.960
<v Speaker 2>club face with his irons, and there's really no extra

0:04:37.240 --> 0:04:40.200
<v Speaker 2>calculus to it when there's no wind to factor in.

0:04:40.279 --> 0:04:43.120
<v Speaker 2>Where you might see a Tommy Fleetwood or Rory McIlroy

0:04:43.520 --> 0:04:46.360
<v Speaker 2>or Harry Hall kind of kick it into gear. Those

0:04:46.400 --> 0:04:49.279
<v Speaker 2>are the Shane Lowry's of the world. Those guys need

0:04:49.480 --> 0:04:53.800
<v Speaker 2>inclement weather to kind of equalize the field. Against Scotti Scheffler,

0:04:54.240 --> 0:04:56.760
<v Speaker 2>we didn't get that, and honestly, it was his off

0:04:56.760 --> 0:05:00.400
<v Speaker 2>the tea game that made it a mercy kept it

0:05:00.400 --> 0:05:04.000
<v Speaker 2>from being a mercy. Rule Like the two thousand Open

0:05:04.080 --> 0:05:07.240
<v Speaker 2>Championship when Tiger blitz the field with nineteen under, it

0:05:07.520 --> 0:05:10.040
<v Speaker 2>reminded me of that. It was not quite as dominant,

0:05:10.200 --> 0:05:12.400
<v Speaker 2>but it was more of like, okay, if the wind

0:05:12.400 --> 0:05:14.640
<v Speaker 2>doesn't pick up. Nobody's got a chance to even catch him.

0:05:14.680 --> 0:05:16.960
<v Speaker 2>And even how tong Lee was just like, I'm playing

0:05:17.000 --> 0:05:22.240
<v Speaker 2>for second place here, I'm being realistic and that's refreshing

0:05:22.320 --> 0:05:24.800
<v Speaker 2>to hear that you really did. He didn't know that

0:05:24.880 --> 0:05:26.599
<v Speaker 2>he wasn't going to have a chance, but he also

0:05:26.680 --> 0:05:29.880
<v Speaker 2>figured chances are Scotty's not going to beat himself.

0:05:30.960 --> 0:05:33.880
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, definitely not. And what a change in weather at

0:05:33.920 --> 0:05:37.640
<v Speaker 1>Royal Port Rush from twenty nineteen one of the saggiest

0:05:37.680 --> 0:05:41.680
<v Speaker 1>Open championships in history probably to you know, sun and

0:05:42.240 --> 0:05:45.520
<v Speaker 1>looked like they were in Fiji or something for much

0:05:45.520 --> 0:05:49.719
<v Speaker 1>of that tournament. But before we move on, Scotty's performance

0:05:49.760 --> 0:05:53.400
<v Speaker 1>sort of rekindled the Scotty versus Tiger debate. We touched

0:05:53.440 --> 0:05:56.360
<v Speaker 1>on that earlier this year. Briefly, where do you think

0:05:56.360 --> 0:05:59.719
<v Speaker 1>Scotty stands visa v. Tiger in terms of all time

0:05:59.760 --> 0:06:01.120
<v Speaker 1>golf greatness?

0:06:02.040 --> 0:06:05.040
<v Speaker 2>I don't think he could attain what Tiger attained. Tiger

0:06:05.279 --> 0:06:08.520
<v Speaker 2>completely reinvented the game of golf. Tiger saved the game

0:06:08.560 --> 0:06:12.080
<v Speaker 2>of golf in the mid nineties. It went from a

0:06:12.720 --> 0:06:15.520
<v Speaker 2>very much a fourth or fifth level sport on TV

0:06:15.680 --> 0:06:19.680
<v Speaker 2>to must see TV in the majors and anytime he

0:06:19.760 --> 0:06:24.280
<v Speaker 2>teed it up. So the level of greatness is probably comparable,

0:06:24.600 --> 0:06:28.360
<v Speaker 2>especially since Scotty's doing this against stronger competition on tougher

0:06:28.400 --> 0:06:31.680
<v Speaker 2>golf courses than Tiger did. At the same time, what

0:06:31.760 --> 0:06:36.200
<v Speaker 2>Tiger did for the sport as greatness, I count that in.

0:06:36.680 --> 0:06:39.120
<v Speaker 2>And I don't think Scotty has the personality or the

0:06:39.960 --> 0:06:43.240
<v Speaker 2>want to to be a Tiger Woods, and that's fine.

0:06:43.880 --> 0:06:45.839
<v Speaker 2>I just I want to say the game is on

0:06:45.960 --> 0:06:50.200
<v Speaker 2>par with Tiger, but what he's doing to invigorate the

0:06:50.360 --> 0:06:53.599
<v Speaker 2>entire sport, it's just not there because it's it's not

0:06:53.680 --> 0:06:55.400
<v Speaker 2>that he wants to be there, and there's so many

0:06:55.440 --> 0:06:59.160
<v Speaker 2>other talented players that can carry that torch for Scotty,

0:06:59.360 --> 0:07:01.320
<v Speaker 2>and Scotty can just go out and keep winning tournaments

0:07:01.360 --> 0:07:05.039
<v Speaker 2>and be ho hum family guy. That's his place in

0:07:05.080 --> 0:07:07.080
<v Speaker 2>the sport. And I don't fault him for it. I

0:07:07.080 --> 0:07:09.600
<v Speaker 2>just don't think that we need to be putting those

0:07:09.640 --> 0:07:12.480
<v Speaker 2>two side by side, because if you're saying vis a

0:07:12.600 --> 0:07:16.520
<v Speaker 2>vis Tiger is not reachable, He's He's a seven hundred

0:07:16.600 --> 0:07:20.360
<v Speaker 2>yard par five into the wind. He's not reachable for anybody,

0:07:20.680 --> 0:07:23.080
<v Speaker 2>that's just not going to happen. And I don't think

0:07:23.120 --> 0:07:28.160
<v Speaker 2>Scotty is interested in reaching Tiger status, and Tiger's still Tiger. Like,

0:07:28.320 --> 0:07:31.480
<v Speaker 2>if Tiger showed up to a healthy to a tournament tomorrow,

0:07:31.880 --> 0:07:34.480
<v Speaker 2>we'd be talking all about him and not about Scotty.

0:07:34.600 --> 0:07:36.240
<v Speaker 2>What does that tell you at fifteen?

0:07:37.400 --> 0:07:41.360
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, it does remind me sort of the Jordan Lebron debates.

0:07:41.560 --> 0:07:44.040
<v Speaker 1>And you know, a lot of the people who bring

0:07:44.080 --> 0:07:47.240
<v Speaker 1>it up and people who sort of think that Scotty

0:07:47.360 --> 0:07:50.240
<v Speaker 1>is on par with Tiger were maybe, yeah, people from

0:07:50.240 --> 0:07:52.840
<v Speaker 1>the younger generation who weren't around for the best of Tiger.

0:07:53.400 --> 0:07:58.560
<v Speaker 1>And yeah, like to me, Jordan was the competitive fires

0:07:58.640 --> 0:08:01.600
<v Speaker 1>burn brighter in him than an any other NBA player ever.

0:08:01.640 --> 0:08:03.640
<v Speaker 1>And I think he could say the same of Tiger Woods.

0:08:03.680 --> 0:08:07.000
<v Speaker 1>And there were times when we saw it wasn't necessarily

0:08:07.040 --> 0:08:11.360
<v Speaker 1>the best players of Tiger's arab besides Tiger who gave

0:08:11.440 --> 0:08:14.360
<v Speaker 1>him the best battles. I mean, he got his best

0:08:14.360 --> 0:08:19.840
<v Speaker 1>fights from some unexpected people Rock Omediate, Bob May, Chris DeMarco.

0:08:20.400 --> 0:08:24.080
<v Speaker 1>But like, those guys were playing the best they had

0:08:24.120 --> 0:08:27.400
<v Speaker 1>ever played in their lives, and like it took a

0:08:27.480 --> 0:08:31.160
<v Speaker 1>heroic effort from Tiger to beat those guys, and he

0:08:31.240 --> 0:08:33.840
<v Speaker 1>still managed to beat all those guys when they brought

0:08:33.880 --> 0:08:34.520
<v Speaker 1>their finest.

0:08:34.920 --> 0:08:37.120
<v Speaker 2>I don't think this is quite the lightning rod of

0:08:37.240 --> 0:08:43.240
<v Speaker 2>topic like Lebron and MJ. Because where I see Lebron

0:08:43.320 --> 0:08:47.320
<v Speaker 2>is certainly an all time great. I see him as

0:08:47.520 --> 0:08:50.599
<v Speaker 2>the catalyst for that debate because he came into the

0:08:50.640 --> 0:08:54.000
<v Speaker 2>league as a high school graduate straight in wearing number

0:08:54.040 --> 0:08:56.760
<v Speaker 2>twenty three. Wanted to be like MJ. He wanted to

0:08:56.760 --> 0:08:59.200
<v Speaker 2>be Air Jordan. He wanted to be the next Air Jordan,

0:08:59.240 --> 0:09:01.640
<v Speaker 2>and he shot for the moon and for a lot

0:09:01.640 --> 0:09:06.040
<v Speaker 2>of people he reached that status. He read he reinvented

0:09:06.080 --> 0:09:08.480
<v Speaker 2>the game of basketball like MJ did in his era.

0:09:08.920 --> 0:09:10.960
<v Speaker 2>So I think that those two are a lot closer

0:09:11.480 --> 0:09:14.959
<v Speaker 2>than Scotty trying to reach a level of notoriety and

0:09:15.480 --> 0:09:20.240
<v Speaker 2>all that that Tiger reached through complete dominance. Like Scotty's

0:09:20.280 --> 0:09:23.160
<v Speaker 2>winning tournaments and he's winning majors. But it's only been

0:09:23.200 --> 0:09:26.840
<v Speaker 2>three four years and Tiger did this for a decade

0:09:26.840 --> 0:09:30.320
<v Speaker 2>and a half straight. Yeah, So yeah, if Scotty wants

0:09:30.320 --> 0:09:32.559
<v Speaker 2>to be the legend of Tiger, he's going to keep

0:09:32.600 --> 0:09:36.480
<v Speaker 2>up this pace for another decade straight. Good luck. I

0:09:36.840 --> 0:09:38.760
<v Speaker 2>hope you do it. I don't know if he actually

0:09:38.800 --> 0:09:41.280
<v Speaker 2>wants to, though, you might be riding off into the

0:09:41.320 --> 0:09:42.760
<v Speaker 2>sunset long before that.

0:09:43.679 --> 0:09:47.040
<v Speaker 1>Great point, all right, closing the book on the Open Championship.

0:09:47.080 --> 0:09:49.679
<v Speaker 1>And by the way, Ryan Girard won last week's Barracuda

0:09:49.800 --> 0:09:51.760
<v Speaker 1>Championship here in the state. It's a nice win for

0:09:51.840 --> 0:09:55.040
<v Speaker 1>the twenty five year old Girard. Now we're on to

0:09:55.160 --> 0:09:57.680
<v Speaker 1>the three M Open. We'll get to it and the

0:09:57.679 --> 0:10:00.200
<v Speaker 1>betting preview in just a moment, but first.

0:10:00.559 --> 0:10:03.600
<v Speaker 2>Download the free to Betting Pros app for iOS and Android.

0:10:03.840 --> 0:10:06.920
<v Speaker 2>With Sportsbooks Sinc. You can automatically track your bets across

0:10:07.000 --> 0:10:10.800
<v Speaker 2>all major sportsbooks in one spot. Easily monitor your bet

0:10:10.800 --> 0:10:14.520
<v Speaker 2>performance by sport and bet type, including game picks, props

0:10:14.559 --> 0:10:17.720
<v Speaker 2>and parlays. Go ahead and crete your own custom betting

0:10:17.760 --> 0:10:21.560
<v Speaker 2>systems to find winning trends and profitable opportunities. Get your

0:10:21.600 --> 0:10:24.199
<v Speaker 2>own seven day free trial of Betting Pros Premium by

0:10:24.280 --> 0:10:27.760
<v Speaker 2>downloading the app at Bettingpros dot com, slash apps using

0:10:27.840 --> 0:10:31.320
<v Speaker 2>code juice and activating your trial on the upgrade screen.

0:10:32.480 --> 0:10:35.120
<v Speaker 1>So after two weeks of links golf in Northern Europe,

0:10:35.160 --> 0:10:38.680
<v Speaker 1>we are back in the US for more familiar Parkland golf.

0:10:39.040 --> 0:10:41.880
<v Speaker 1>The top players are sitting this one out in Minnesota,

0:10:41.960 --> 0:10:45.680
<v Speaker 1>but it's a reasonably deep field for the threem Open,

0:10:45.720 --> 0:10:47.679
<v Speaker 1>and we're going to see a lot of the mid

0:10:47.800 --> 0:10:50.000
<v Speaker 1>level PGA tour pros teeing it up this week to

0:10:50.040 --> 0:10:53.520
<v Speaker 1>better position themselves for the FedEx Cup playoffs. The three

0:10:53.600 --> 0:10:57.520
<v Speaker 1>im Open will be played at TPC Twin Cities in Blaine, Minnesota.

0:10:57.880 --> 0:10:59.880
<v Speaker 1>It's a par seventy one that will play at seven

0:11:00.400 --> 0:11:03.120
<v Speaker 1>four hundred and thirty one yards. The course was designed

0:11:03.120 --> 0:11:06.920
<v Speaker 1>by Arnold Palmer with input from Native Minnesota Tom Layman.

0:11:07.440 --> 0:11:11.680
<v Speaker 1>TPC Twin Cities certainly isn't a difficult course by tour standards,

0:11:11.679 --> 0:11:15.160
<v Speaker 1>but it's not without danger. There's water water everywhere, not

0:11:15.240 --> 0:11:18.400
<v Speaker 1>a drop to drink. Water comes into play on fifteen

0:11:18.559 --> 0:11:21.720
<v Speaker 1>holes at TPC Twin Cities. A lot of those water

0:11:21.760 --> 0:11:24.840
<v Speaker 1>hazards will threaten players t shots and a lot of

0:11:24.840 --> 0:11:28.160
<v Speaker 1>those water hazards run down the right side of holes.

0:11:28.520 --> 0:11:33.360
<v Speaker 1>Slicers beware lefty hook or lefty hookers. That's right, don't

0:11:33.400 --> 0:11:34.480
<v Speaker 1>want to leave out my left time.

0:11:34.520 --> 0:11:37.360
<v Speaker 2>I'm not a hooker, pat Okay.

0:11:37.960 --> 0:11:41.840
<v Speaker 1>The fairways are pretty generous at TPC Twin Cities and

0:11:41.880 --> 0:11:44.200
<v Speaker 1>it has some big greens. We're going to see a

0:11:44.280 --> 0:11:47.960
<v Speaker 1>higher than usual percentage of greens and regulations, so chipping

0:11:47.960 --> 0:11:51.280
<v Speaker 1>in bunker play scrambling won't be as important this week.

0:11:51.559 --> 0:11:55.040
<v Speaker 1>The greens are bent grass. It's fairly long course three

0:11:55.040 --> 0:11:57.880
<v Speaker 1>to the part. Three of the four par threes are

0:11:57.920 --> 0:12:00.319
<v Speaker 1>longer than two hundred yards, and all three of the

0:12:00.360 --> 0:12:03.360
<v Speaker 1>par fives are between five hundred and ninety and six

0:12:03.480 --> 0:12:06.440
<v Speaker 1>hundred yards. That includes the five hundred and ninety sixth

0:12:06.600 --> 0:12:11.079
<v Speaker 1>eighteenth five hundred and ninety six yard eighteenth hole. It's

0:12:11.080 --> 0:12:14.120
<v Speaker 1>a risk reward par five that plays shorter than its

0:12:14.200 --> 0:12:17.000
<v Speaker 1>length if players are willing to try a risky second

0:12:17.040 --> 0:12:20.240
<v Speaker 1>shot over a pond. Now the defending three M Open

0:12:20.360 --> 0:12:24.040
<v Speaker 1>champ as Jonathan Vegas. Johnny Vegas finished seventeen under par

0:12:24.160 --> 0:12:26.880
<v Speaker 1>last year to beat Max Grazerman by one shot. Lee

0:12:26.920 --> 0:12:29.200
<v Speaker 1>Hodges was a runaway winner in twenty twenty three with

0:12:29.240 --> 0:12:32.079
<v Speaker 1>a score of twenty four under par. Tony Final was

0:12:32.120 --> 0:12:34.720
<v Speaker 1>seventeen under to win in twenty twenty two, and Cameron

0:12:34.800 --> 0:12:38.040
<v Speaker 1>Champ won in twenty twenty one. He was fifteen under.

0:12:38.440 --> 0:12:41.080
<v Speaker 1>The weather forecast for the tournament, high temperatures in the

0:12:41.080 --> 0:12:44.360
<v Speaker 1>low eighties all four days chances for rain each day,

0:12:44.360 --> 0:12:47.400
<v Speaker 1>but no apparent danger of a washout. Light wins in

0:12:47.440 --> 0:12:50.079
<v Speaker 1>the five to ten miles per hour range throughout the tournaments.

0:12:50.800 --> 0:12:52.600
<v Speaker 1>But now that we have a pretty good sample size

0:12:52.600 --> 0:12:54.760
<v Speaker 1>on TPC twin Cities, what are some of the things

0:12:54.800 --> 0:12:57.679
<v Speaker 1>you're keying in on this week when handicapping the field.

0:12:57.960 --> 0:13:01.280
<v Speaker 2>It really comes down to ball striking. The opposite of

0:13:01.280 --> 0:13:03.720
<v Speaker 2>the Open Championship is where you're looking at scrambling and

0:13:03.760 --> 0:13:06.800
<v Speaker 2>around the green stats pretty heavily. I'm not looking at

0:13:06.800 --> 0:13:10.360
<v Speaker 2>those at all this week. It's about off the tee prowess.

0:13:10.400 --> 0:13:13.800
<v Speaker 2>Strokes gained off the tee. Driving distances a bonus in

0:13:13.880 --> 0:13:17.240
<v Speaker 2>this tournament because of its length and the risk reward

0:13:17.240 --> 0:13:19.960
<v Speaker 2>propositions on the par fives as well as some of

0:13:20.000 --> 0:13:23.559
<v Speaker 2>the longer part fours. A birdier better percentage, of course,

0:13:23.600 --> 0:13:26.160
<v Speaker 2>on easier golf course like this, you gotta have guys

0:13:26.200 --> 0:13:30.240
<v Speaker 2>that a have opportunities gained at a high rate as

0:13:30.280 --> 0:13:34.000
<v Speaker 2>well as be the birdier better percentage to convert those opportunities.

0:13:34.000 --> 0:13:36.560
<v Speaker 2>So a lot of overlay there, and then this, because

0:13:36.600 --> 0:13:39.000
<v Speaker 2>of all the water hazards, you got to throw in

0:13:39.080 --> 0:13:42.880
<v Speaker 2>some bogie avoidance trying to avoid the big number below

0:13:42.960 --> 0:13:45.560
<v Speaker 2>up is it's kind of it's kind of killed a

0:13:45.559 --> 0:13:48.840
<v Speaker 2>couple of potential winners like Grazerman, who I bet on

0:13:48.920 --> 0:13:51.439
<v Speaker 2>last year, who probably would have won if he didn't

0:13:51.440 --> 0:13:54.840
<v Speaker 2>find some hazards, some penalty areas during his course of

0:13:54.920 --> 0:13:58.320
<v Speaker 2>the of the tournament. It's it all comes down to

0:13:58.800 --> 0:14:02.280
<v Speaker 2>making lots of birdies and avoiding that really big crooked number,

0:14:03.080 --> 0:14:06.559
<v Speaker 2>and then ball striking, ball striking, ball striking approach, game driving.

0:14:07.520 --> 0:14:09.680
<v Speaker 2>It's going to be really important to get from tee

0:14:09.720 --> 0:14:12.080
<v Speaker 2>to green and then a hot putter. I'm looking at

0:14:12.080 --> 0:14:14.440
<v Speaker 2>the last twenty four rounds of putting on bent grass

0:14:14.960 --> 0:14:17.760
<v Speaker 2>and that should round it out. It's a pretty straightforward

0:14:18.120 --> 0:14:20.520
<v Speaker 2>model this week. Not a lot of filtering. I just

0:14:20.560 --> 0:14:23.280
<v Speaker 2>want to make sure that we get the hottest golfers

0:14:23.320 --> 0:14:26.320
<v Speaker 2>playing the best golf right now, and the guys who

0:14:26.320 --> 0:14:28.080
<v Speaker 2>can convert enough berties to win this thing.

0:14:28.760 --> 0:14:30.920
<v Speaker 1>It'll be interesting because a lot of the players with

0:14:31.000 --> 0:14:34.000
<v Speaker 1>shorter odds are big hitters who are not great in

0:14:34.040 --> 0:14:37.000
<v Speaker 1>the driving accuracy category. We'll take a look at those

0:14:37.040 --> 0:14:39.280
<v Speaker 1>odds in just a moment. Right after Bow tells you

0:14:39.320 --> 0:14:40.920
<v Speaker 1>about no vague.

0:14:40.920 --> 0:14:43.520
<v Speaker 2>Are you looking for a smarter way to play. There's

0:14:43.560 --> 0:14:46.920
<v Speaker 2>a new sports trading platform that's changing the game. It's

0:14:46.960 --> 0:14:51.680
<v Speaker 2>called no Vig. It's legal in most states, including Georgia, California,

0:14:51.800 --> 0:14:55.160
<v Speaker 2>and Texas. It's peer to peer, which means you're competing

0:14:55.120 --> 0:14:58.520
<v Speaker 2>against other users, not the house. You can often get

0:14:58.520 --> 0:15:01.360
<v Speaker 2>better lines than traditional book. You can set your own lines,

0:15:01.480 --> 0:15:04.760
<v Speaker 2>which gives you control. Most sportsbooks just don't offer. There

0:15:04.800 --> 0:15:08.760
<v Speaker 2>are no commissions or hidden fees. Seriously. It uses a

0:15:08.800 --> 0:15:11.760
<v Speaker 2>coin deposit system, but it is real money and you

0:15:11.800 --> 0:15:14.440
<v Speaker 2>can use code daily Juice for fifty percent off your

0:15:14.480 --> 0:15:17.520
<v Speaker 2>first coin purchase up to twenty five dollars. Check it

0:15:17.560 --> 0:15:21.800
<v Speaker 2>out now at bettingpros dot com slash juice. That's bettingpros

0:15:21.880 --> 0:15:25.320
<v Speaker 2>dot com slash juice. Our colleague Mic Mayre is on

0:15:25.360 --> 0:15:28.640
<v Speaker 2>it every day. Is a Novic fanatic, always dropping screenshots

0:15:28.640 --> 0:15:31.920
<v Speaker 2>and picks in our company discord. If you have questions,

0:15:32.880 --> 0:15:36.720
<v Speaker 2>Mic Mayor is happy to help Pat. He's almost insufferable

0:15:36.760 --> 0:15:38.119
<v Speaker 2>in that discord chat.

0:15:39.040 --> 0:15:41.160
<v Speaker 1>And in otherwise too almost talk about.

0:15:40.960 --> 0:15:45.040
<v Speaker 2>Almost it's not just the Novig stuff. But he does win,

0:15:45.200 --> 0:15:48.360
<v Speaker 2>so I guess it balances out. That's right.

0:15:49.080 --> 0:15:51.320
<v Speaker 1>Let's dig into the odds for the three m open.

0:15:51.360 --> 0:15:54.040
<v Speaker 1>All odds are courtesy of DraftKings. As a Monday afternoon,

0:15:54.200 --> 0:15:57.960
<v Speaker 1>Sam Burns opens as the favoritest at plus sixteen hundred.

0:15:58.320 --> 0:16:00.480
<v Speaker 1>Chris got her up was red hot and Sktlin in

0:16:00.520 --> 0:16:03.400
<v Speaker 1>Northern Ireland. In the past two weeks, he's plus eighteen hundred,

0:16:03.720 --> 0:16:07.480
<v Speaker 1>as is Maverick McNeely, Max Grazerman and Taylor Penrith are

0:16:07.520 --> 0:16:11.960
<v Speaker 1>plus twenty eight hundred. Plus thirty five hundred are Michael Thorbiornson,

0:16:12.560 --> 0:16:16.400
<v Speaker 1>Jay Knapp, Tony Finow, Davis Thompson or Ricky Foller. And

0:16:16.440 --> 0:16:19.520
<v Speaker 1>the big group at plus four thousand includes Akshay Batilla,

0:16:19.920 --> 0:16:24.160
<v Speaker 1>Max Homa, Kurt Kitty Yama, Keith Mitchell, Milliano, Grio, Sung

0:16:24.280 --> 0:16:27.640
<v Speaker 1>JM and Seewu Kim. Who do you like from this group?

0:16:27.760 --> 0:16:31.120
<v Speaker 2>Oh? Right off the top? I did see Sam Burns

0:16:31.160 --> 0:16:33.520
<v Speaker 2>recently slip to eighteen to one to be the same

0:16:33.600 --> 0:16:37.880
<v Speaker 2>line as Chris Gottrup. I like Chris Gottrup's form, especially

0:16:38.560 --> 0:16:41.080
<v Speaker 2>his tee degreen game has never been in question. His

0:16:41.240 --> 0:16:44.400
<v Speaker 2>short game has really showed a resurgence, especially last two weeks.

0:16:44.920 --> 0:16:47.360
<v Speaker 2>He's won two point seven million dollars last two weeks.

0:16:47.360 --> 0:16:51.160
<v Speaker 2>Pretty solid for a trip around the links a few times.

0:16:51.800 --> 0:16:53.920
<v Speaker 2>I like him in eighteen to one as the outright

0:16:53.920 --> 0:16:57.440
<v Speaker 2>betting favorite. His te degreen game is really going to

0:16:57.480 --> 0:17:00.280
<v Speaker 2>play here, his distance will definitely play here, and he's

0:17:00.320 --> 0:17:02.240
<v Speaker 2>riding a hot putter. So let's let's get on the

0:17:02.280 --> 0:17:05.360
<v Speaker 2>Chris Gottrup train and ride it until the wheels fall off.

0:17:05.359 --> 0:17:08.080
<v Speaker 2>He's only what twenty four years old, He's got a

0:17:08.119 --> 0:17:11.840
<v Speaker 2>lot of future ahead of him. As far as other

0:17:11.880 --> 0:17:14.920
<v Speaker 2>guys in this range, I'll hone in on another guy

0:17:14.920 --> 0:17:17.520
<v Speaker 2>who's a long hitter who makes a lot of birdies,

0:17:17.600 --> 0:17:21.000
<v Speaker 2>especially in this kype of tournament. I like Michael thorpe

0:17:21.040 --> 0:17:24.159
<v Speaker 2>Jornsen but and Akhabatiya Kurk Kitdem. But these guys are

0:17:24.160 --> 0:17:27.080
<v Speaker 2>all in my model pretty highly ranked. But I'm gonna

0:17:27.119 --> 0:17:29.600
<v Speaker 2>go to Jake Napp. Jake Nap is the kind of

0:17:29.640 --> 0:17:34.080
<v Speaker 2>guy that thirty five to one the handicapped system for me.

0:17:34.440 --> 0:17:36.399
<v Speaker 2>I had him more of his a twenty five to

0:17:36.400 --> 0:17:39.119
<v Speaker 2>one pick in this field, and to get an extra

0:17:39.200 --> 0:17:42.760
<v Speaker 2>ten points out of the bet really sings to me.

0:17:43.080 --> 0:17:44.720
<v Speaker 2>All the other guys that I like are a little

0:17:44.800 --> 0:17:47.520
<v Speaker 2>too short for my liking based on how I handicapped it.

0:17:47.840 --> 0:17:50.200
<v Speaker 2>So I will stick with Jake Nap at thirty five

0:17:50.240 --> 0:17:51.920
<v Speaker 2>to one to round out the favorites.

0:17:52.520 --> 0:17:55.200
<v Speaker 1>Oh, you know, I'm a Jake Nap guy. BO. He's

0:17:55.200 --> 0:17:57.480
<v Speaker 1>finished inside the top thirty in each of his last

0:17:57.520 --> 0:18:02.080
<v Speaker 1>four events, including a Big Cista, Big Siesta, including a

0:18:02.119 --> 0:18:06.479
<v Speaker 1>fourth place finish at the Rocket Classic. Napp did withdraw

0:18:06.600 --> 0:18:09.320
<v Speaker 1>from last year's three M Classic, ostensibly due to a

0:18:09.359 --> 0:18:12.439
<v Speaker 1>shoulder injury or because he was having a miserable third round.

0:18:13.119 --> 0:18:16.840
<v Speaker 1>Nap is a big hitter and ranks twelfth in strokes

0:18:16.880 --> 0:18:19.639
<v Speaker 1>game putting, but he does rank one hundred and sixty

0:18:19.640 --> 0:18:21.320
<v Speaker 1>first in driving accuracy.

0:18:22.480 --> 0:18:22.600
<v Speaker 2>BO.

0:18:22.760 --> 0:18:24.359
<v Speaker 1>That's kind of the same deal with Chris got Her

0:18:24.440 --> 0:18:27.560
<v Speaker 1>Up too. You know, got Her Up is second on

0:18:27.640 --> 0:18:30.280
<v Speaker 1>tour in driving distance, one hundred and fifty seventh in

0:18:30.359 --> 0:18:34.280
<v Speaker 1>driving accuracy. Got Her Up is like, I wonder if

0:18:34.320 --> 0:18:38.080
<v Speaker 1>there's any sort of could he be a little emotionally

0:18:38.160 --> 0:18:42.520
<v Speaker 1>spent after two weeks of you know, winning one and

0:18:42.560 --> 0:18:46.560
<v Speaker 1>contending in another, and you know, then coming back overseas.

0:18:47.160 --> 0:18:50.000
<v Speaker 1>I just I feel like Jake Knapp gives you a

0:18:50.119 --> 0:18:54.439
<v Speaker 1>very similar profile of player at a much better price.

0:18:55.080 --> 0:18:58.640
<v Speaker 2>It's yeah, it's it's definitely there. I like both of them.

0:18:58.640 --> 0:19:00.399
<v Speaker 2>I'm going to bet on both of them. I'm not

0:19:00.440 --> 0:19:02.919
<v Speaker 2>going to be over my skis investing a lot of

0:19:02.960 --> 0:19:05.680
<v Speaker 2>money in any of these guys, but I have enough

0:19:05.720 --> 0:19:07.640
<v Speaker 2>guys that I really like that I'm going to kind

0:19:07.640 --> 0:19:11.320
<v Speaker 2>of buckshot approach it this week with small investments and

0:19:11.400 --> 0:19:14.800
<v Speaker 2>a lot of guys. So with the way I'm spending

0:19:14.840 --> 0:19:18.360
<v Speaker 2>my money this week, I'll take a chance on both

0:19:18.400 --> 0:19:19.879
<v Speaker 2>of them. But I do get your point with the

0:19:19.920 --> 0:19:23.159
<v Speaker 2>line on Nap is unbelievably good and got her up

0:19:23.200 --> 0:19:25.760
<v Speaker 2>as a favorite to eighteen to one. I'm just taking

0:19:25.800 --> 0:19:29.320
<v Speaker 2>a chance that he stays hot. He despite being not

0:19:29.440 --> 0:19:31.879
<v Speaker 2>that accurate off the tea, he still strokes gained off

0:19:31.920 --> 0:19:35.560
<v Speaker 2>the ta number eight in this field, that's actually number

0:19:35.600 --> 0:19:37.520
<v Speaker 2>six in this field, and strokes gained off the tea.

0:19:38.560 --> 0:19:40.720
<v Speaker 2>That's good enough for me. A twenty fifth and overall

0:19:40.760 --> 0:19:44.720
<v Speaker 2>ball striking and riding the hottest putter of his entire career.

0:19:45.280 --> 0:19:47.440
<v Speaker 2>That's where I'm going there. It's just the upside's good

0:19:47.440 --> 0:19:50.040
<v Speaker 2>and payoff for a betting favorite. It doesn't get much

0:19:50.040 --> 0:19:50.960
<v Speaker 2>better than eighteen to one.

0:19:51.560 --> 0:19:54.119
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, the sand Burns couldn't crack the top forty in

0:19:54.160 --> 0:19:56.920
<v Speaker 1>either the Scottish Open or the Open Championship, but before

0:19:56.960 --> 0:19:59.040
<v Speaker 1>that he had finished top twenty and seven of his

0:19:59.160 --> 0:20:03.080
<v Speaker 1>previous eight events dating back to April. Burns has made

0:20:03.119 --> 0:20:06.680
<v Speaker 1>three previous appearances at the three M Open, finishing seventh,

0:20:06.800 --> 0:20:09.760
<v Speaker 1>thirty second and twelfth, and he does rank number one

0:20:09.920 --> 0:20:15.320
<v Speaker 1>in strokes gained putting. Now, Maverick McNeely played reasonably well

0:20:15.359 --> 0:20:18.000
<v Speaker 1>in Europe the last two weeks, twenty second in Scotland,

0:20:18.160 --> 0:20:20.960
<v Speaker 1>twenty third at Royal Port Rush. He finished third at

0:20:20.960 --> 0:20:23.680
<v Speaker 1>the three M last year. McNeely ranks inside the top

0:20:23.720 --> 0:20:26.600
<v Speaker 1>forty most strokes gained off the tee and strokes game putting.

0:20:27.000 --> 0:20:30.520
<v Speaker 1>What about Wyndham clarkbow heated up in Europe, eleventh at

0:20:30.520 --> 0:20:33.000
<v Speaker 1>the Scottish Open, then surged into fourth place at the

0:20:33.000 --> 0:20:36.080
<v Speaker 1>Open Championship with that sixty five on Sunday, But he

0:20:36.160 --> 0:20:38.560
<v Speaker 1>ranks one hundred and thirty eighth in driving accuracy, one

0:20:38.640 --> 0:20:41.400
<v Speaker 1>hundred and fifty seventh in strokes gained on approach.

0:20:42.400 --> 0:20:45.880
<v Speaker 2>Not interested at all in Wyndham Clark. He's just too

0:20:46.080 --> 0:20:49.800
<v Speaker 2>spray happy. He got the benefit of some light wins

0:20:50.520 --> 0:20:53.000
<v Speaker 2>on a wide open golf course like Royal Port Rush

0:20:53.080 --> 0:20:56.120
<v Speaker 2>wasn't difficult to find the fairways. It was just kind

0:20:56.160 --> 0:20:58.920
<v Speaker 2>of like the you just only missed him if you

0:20:59.000 --> 0:21:00.920
<v Speaker 2>ran through him, like you carried the ball too far.

0:21:01.200 --> 0:21:04.359
<v Speaker 2>Wyndham Clark really fits that link style play better because

0:21:04.359 --> 0:21:07.320
<v Speaker 2>he plays along the ground a little bit more. I

0:21:07.400 --> 0:21:10.919
<v Speaker 2>just don't think he's accurate enough on approach for this tournament.

0:21:10.920 --> 0:21:12.680
<v Speaker 2>I think you'd be fine off the tee, but his

0:21:13.119 --> 0:21:16.720
<v Speaker 2>approach game has not been good. So I'll take a

0:21:16.880 --> 0:21:20.600
<v Speaker 2>hard pass on Wyndham Clark, especially since he's just kind

0:21:20.640 --> 0:21:24.600
<v Speaker 2>of been streaky and in the worst way where just

0:21:24.640 --> 0:21:26.800
<v Speaker 2>when we think he's gonna get hot, he throws out

0:21:26.840 --> 0:21:29.679
<v Speaker 2>a miscut by five shots and you'res like, Okay, happened.

0:21:29.720 --> 0:21:31.359
<v Speaker 2>What happened to Wyndham Clark? All of a sudden He

0:21:31.760 --> 0:21:33.800
<v Speaker 2>went from number six in the world to twenty in

0:21:33.840 --> 0:21:37.520
<v Speaker 2>like two week span. So I don't think I want

0:21:37.560 --> 0:21:38.520
<v Speaker 2>anything to do with that.

0:21:39.840 --> 0:21:41.560
<v Speaker 1>Just to mention a few of these other guys. Max

0:21:41.560 --> 0:21:44.200
<v Speaker 1>Grazerman runner up at the Three of Them Open last year.

0:21:44.400 --> 0:21:46.280
<v Speaker 1>He missed the cut at the Scottish Open and the

0:21:46.320 --> 0:21:49.119
<v Speaker 1>Open Championship, but had been playing pretty well before that.

0:21:49.560 --> 0:21:52.280
<v Speaker 1>He's one hundred and forty ninth in driving accuracy, but

0:21:52.600 --> 0:21:55.760
<v Speaker 1>his driving didn't really hurt him here. Last year, Taylor

0:21:55.840 --> 0:21:58.639
<v Speaker 1>Pendrith missed the cut at the Open Championship. He'd been

0:21:58.680 --> 0:22:01.159
<v Speaker 1>playing well before that too. He was fifth at the

0:22:01.160 --> 0:22:04.000
<v Speaker 1>three M last year, ranks seventh and strokes gained off

0:22:04.040 --> 0:22:06.240
<v Speaker 1>the tee, but he's outside the top one hundred and

0:22:06.320 --> 0:22:09.520
<v Speaker 1>strokes gained putting. Emiliano Grio is a pretty good track

0:22:09.560 --> 0:22:11.840
<v Speaker 1>record in this event, with three top tens in his

0:22:12.040 --> 0:22:16.760
<v Speaker 1>last five appearance appearances plus a twenty fourth last year,

0:22:17.040 --> 0:22:20.800
<v Speaker 1>and really Grio's worst The worst thing about his game

0:22:20.880 --> 0:22:23.840
<v Speaker 1>is is scrambling, and that weakness is sort of negated

0:22:23.880 --> 0:22:27.560
<v Speaker 1>here with the big greens and high greens of regulation percentage.

0:22:28.080 --> 0:22:31.240
<v Speaker 1>And Ricky Folerball quietly finished top twenty five of his

0:22:31.320 --> 0:22:34.640
<v Speaker 1>last eight events. His best finish other than that's over

0:22:34.680 --> 0:22:37.600
<v Speaker 1>that stretch, though, was only a seventh at the Memorial.

0:22:37.880 --> 0:22:40.280
<v Speaker 2>I will keep tabs on Taylor Pendrith. I hate his

0:22:40.359 --> 0:22:43.080
<v Speaker 2>line right now plus twenty one hundred way too short.

0:22:43.760 --> 0:22:45.760
<v Speaker 2>But if he slips, he's number three in my model.

0:22:45.840 --> 0:22:48.120
<v Speaker 2>So if Pendrith gets to thirty five to one, I'll

0:22:48.119 --> 0:22:48.720
<v Speaker 2>be interested.

0:22:49.720 --> 0:22:51.440
<v Speaker 1>All right, Let's look at some more of the odds.

0:22:51.480 --> 0:22:54.560
<v Speaker 1>Adam Scotts plus forty five hundred, Luke Clanton, Kevin You

0:22:54.760 --> 0:22:58.760
<v Speaker 1>and Cameron Champ are plus five thousand, Alex Smalley, Matt Wallace,

0:22:58.840 --> 0:23:02.760
<v Speaker 1>Lee Hodges, Yesters Fencing, Vince Whaley and Rico Hoye are

0:23:02.800 --> 0:23:05.520
<v Speaker 1>plus fifty five hundred, and at plus six thousand our

0:23:05.560 --> 0:23:10.719
<v Speaker 1>Patrick Fishburn, Nicholas Norgard, Johnny Vegas, Jacob Bridgeman, Hatong Lee,

0:23:10.760 --> 0:23:14.240
<v Speaker 1>Sam Stevens and See Thagala, And at plus sixty five

0:23:14.320 --> 0:23:17.760
<v Speaker 1>hundred Alex Nora and Maddy Schmidt and Peterson Coody. What

0:23:17.880 --> 0:23:19.720
<v Speaker 1>about the mid range options.

0:23:19.320 --> 0:23:22.520
<v Speaker 2>Bo Luke Clanton all the way number one in my

0:23:22.600 --> 0:23:26.680
<v Speaker 2>model by a long distance. Really yeah, Luke Clinton, by

0:23:26.760 --> 0:23:29.120
<v Speaker 2>far number one in my model. He is no worse

0:23:29.200 --> 0:23:31.600
<v Speaker 2>than forty ninth in any stat which happens to be

0:23:31.640 --> 0:23:34.119
<v Speaker 2>bogey avoidance. He happens to be a very aggressive player,

0:23:34.359 --> 0:23:36.480
<v Speaker 2>so not the greatest at avoiding the big number, but

0:23:36.560 --> 0:23:39.160
<v Speaker 2>forty ninth is still top half of the pack. He's

0:23:39.240 --> 0:23:41.359
<v Speaker 2>number one, and Birdie's are better. Gain number five an

0:23:41.359 --> 0:23:43.800
<v Speaker 2>opportunities gained, so he's given himself lots of chances and

0:23:43.920 --> 0:23:47.240
<v Speaker 2>he's converting them at an extremely high clip. Number two

0:23:47.280 --> 0:23:49.800
<v Speaker 2>in ball striking twenty fourth and putting on my model

0:23:49.960 --> 0:23:52.720
<v Speaker 2>and number four on approach. He hits all the boxes

0:23:52.760 --> 0:23:56.880
<v Speaker 2>for me. There's there's just one concern that he might

0:23:56.920 --> 0:23:59.800
<v Speaker 2>make some crooked numbers, but he's been really good at

0:23:59.840 --> 0:24:03.360
<v Speaker 2>make enough birdies to counteract that. If he could put

0:24:03.440 --> 0:24:05.840
<v Speaker 2>four days together rather than three, I think Luke Clinton

0:24:05.920 --> 0:24:08.280
<v Speaker 2>runs away with this. Saying fifty to one is a steal.

0:24:09.280 --> 0:24:11.200
<v Speaker 2>I kind of had to flip a coin between him

0:24:11.240 --> 0:24:14.440
<v Speaker 2>at fifty and Thorby Jornsen at forty and the tiebreaker

0:24:14.480 --> 0:24:17.200
<v Speaker 2>with Thorby. Jornsen can't make a putt lately, so I

0:24:18.000 --> 0:24:20.480
<v Speaker 2>was all over that Clinton line, getting extra bit of

0:24:21.000 --> 0:24:24.119
<v Speaker 2>value there. And then Patrick Fishburne another guy. It's just

0:24:24.200 --> 0:24:27.240
<v Speaker 2>a great ball striker. He's number one in strokes gained

0:24:27.280 --> 0:24:29.600
<v Speaker 2>off the tee in this field, fourth and overall ball

0:24:29.640 --> 0:24:34.480
<v Speaker 2>striking fifteenth and birdie or better percentage. Just great odds

0:24:34.480 --> 0:24:37.359
<v Speaker 2>for a player that's playing really well. And then eighty

0:24:37.400 --> 0:24:39.199
<v Speaker 2>to one. I have Kevin Roy because he's got all

0:24:39.240 --> 0:24:42.360
<v Speaker 2>the upside in the world. He's playing a little bit

0:24:42.440 --> 0:24:46.159
<v Speaker 2>shaky on the link style, but when it comes to

0:24:46.359 --> 0:24:50.119
<v Speaker 2>playing on bent grass, Kevin Roy's got some upside to burn.

0:24:51.200 --> 0:24:53.520
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, interesting, you might be talking me in to Clinton

0:24:54.200 --> 0:24:57.480
<v Speaker 1>hasn't really gotten it going yet, but like you said,

0:24:57.520 --> 0:24:59.399
<v Speaker 1>there have been moments and he just can't seem to

0:24:59.400 --> 0:25:01.840
<v Speaker 1>string four rounce together in a tournament. So maybe this

0:25:02.000 --> 0:25:06.200
<v Speaker 1>is the week. Adam Scott at plus forty five hundred

0:25:06.359 --> 0:25:08.479
<v Speaker 1>seems like a bargain. We're getting a big name at

0:25:08.520 --> 0:25:11.600
<v Speaker 1>relatively long odds. But if this event is going to

0:25:11.600 --> 0:25:14.920
<v Speaker 1>be largely a putting contest, and maybe it does turn

0:25:14.960 --> 0:25:16.840
<v Speaker 1>into that, do we want to back Adam Scott in

0:25:16.840 --> 0:25:17.680
<v Speaker 1>a putting contest?

0:25:17.760 --> 0:25:18.080
<v Speaker 3>I don't.

0:25:19.440 --> 0:25:20.400
<v Speaker 2>Yeah.

0:25:20.520 --> 0:25:22.919
<v Speaker 1>Cam Champ is a pretty strong history at the three M.

0:25:22.960 --> 0:25:25.679
<v Speaker 1>He won this event in twenty twenty one. In the

0:25:25.720 --> 0:25:29.040
<v Speaker 1>two three am appearances since, he's finished sixteenth and twelve

0:25:29.760 --> 0:25:32.480
<v Speaker 1>Before missing the cut at the Barracuda last week, Champ

0:25:32.520 --> 0:25:35.479
<v Speaker 1>had finished top twenty and three of his previous four events,

0:25:35.480 --> 0:25:37.840
<v Speaker 1>so he's going to keep an eye on Nora cal

0:25:38.440 --> 0:25:40.920
<v Speaker 1>hatong Lee is kind of interesting after the strong showing

0:25:40.920 --> 0:25:43.600
<v Speaker 1>at the Open, but it seemed like he was barely

0:25:43.640 --> 0:25:47.320
<v Speaker 1>in control of his driver and Hatungley hits everything left

0:25:47.320 --> 0:25:50.040
<v Speaker 1>to right bo like that is kind of a scary

0:25:50.080 --> 0:25:52.480
<v Speaker 1>proposition on a course that has so much water on

0:25:52.520 --> 0:25:54.080
<v Speaker 1>the right side of holes.

0:25:54.440 --> 0:25:57.200
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, yeah, it's a great story though.

0:25:57.480 --> 0:26:01.000
<v Speaker 1>It is. And Johnny Vegas not only did he win

0:26:01.040 --> 0:26:03.560
<v Speaker 1>here last year, he also finished second here in twenty

0:26:03.640 --> 0:26:07.240
<v Speaker 1>twenty one. Maybe driving accuracy isn't that big a deal here.

0:26:07.480 --> 0:26:09.439
<v Speaker 1>Johnny Vegas was one hundred and twenty eighth in that

0:26:09.520 --> 0:26:13.440
<v Speaker 1>category last year. He's one hundred and fifty sixth this year.

0:26:13.680 --> 0:26:15.439
<v Speaker 1>All right, let's talk long shots, bo, who do you

0:26:15.480 --> 0:26:18.000
<v Speaker 1>like at odds of seventy to one or longer?

0:26:18.480 --> 0:26:21.960
<v Speaker 2>I jumped the gun a little bit with eighty to

0:26:22.000 --> 0:26:25.280
<v Speaker 2>one on Kevin Roy. But I do like Hayden Springer

0:26:25.320 --> 0:26:27.639
<v Speaker 2>again this week. He finished top ten at the Barracuda.

0:26:28.840 --> 0:26:31.440
<v Speaker 2>But Springer just a really solid golfer one hundred and

0:26:31.480 --> 0:26:34.399
<v Speaker 2>ten to one, just an overall solid player, doesn't really

0:26:34.440 --> 0:26:37.360
<v Speaker 2>have any weak spots. Chan Kim is playing really well

0:26:37.440 --> 0:26:39.320
<v Speaker 2>right now. He's at one hundred and seventy to one,

0:26:39.840 --> 0:26:42.680
<v Speaker 2>and I'll take another norcou guy at two hundred to one.

0:26:43.080 --> 0:26:45.200
<v Speaker 2>I actually got to chat with him at the barracudah

0:26:45.200 --> 0:26:49.200
<v Speaker 2>on Saturday. Isaiah Selinda talk about a birdie making machine

0:26:49.280 --> 0:26:52.119
<v Speaker 2>that kid can make him in bunches. He hits the

0:26:52.160 --> 0:26:56.280
<v Speaker 2>snot out of the ball. Yeah, Selinda is a kind

0:26:56.320 --> 0:26:59.560
<v Speaker 2>of a fun five dollars bet to throw down two

0:26:59.680 --> 0:27:02.040
<v Speaker 2>hundred to one win a thousand bucks off a five

0:27:02.080 --> 0:27:04.359
<v Speaker 2>dollars bet. He's already won us money at the Zurich

0:27:04.440 --> 0:27:07.479
<v Speaker 2>this year, next to Kevin Vello. I just like him

0:27:07.520 --> 0:27:09.880
<v Speaker 2>a lot. He's He's such a fun guy to have

0:27:09.960 --> 0:27:12.960
<v Speaker 2>on tour, and I'll keep betting on him because that's

0:27:13.320 --> 0:27:16.160
<v Speaker 2>just that's good. It's incentive to watch more.

0:27:17.160 --> 0:27:20.119
<v Speaker 1>All right, I'll throw out three long shots at various

0:27:20.119 --> 0:27:23.320
<v Speaker 1>price points at seventy to one. Andrew Putnam, He's done

0:27:23.359 --> 0:27:26.000
<v Speaker 1>well in some recent events with lesser fields. Eighth at

0:27:26.040 --> 0:27:29.120
<v Speaker 1>the Rocket Classic, eleventh at the Barracuda. He was also

0:27:29.200 --> 0:27:31.480
<v Speaker 1>sixth that the Canadian opened, so he can go against

0:27:31.520 --> 0:27:35.439
<v Speaker 1>some stronger fields. He's finished eleventh and nineteenth in his

0:27:35.520 --> 0:27:38.439
<v Speaker 1>last two to three m appearances. One of the shortest

0:27:38.520 --> 0:27:41.119
<v Speaker 1>hitters on tour, but Putnam does rank fourth and driving

0:27:41.160 --> 0:27:45.720
<v Speaker 1>accuracy in fifteenth at Strokes Gained Potting Thriston Lawrence bo

0:27:45.880 --> 0:27:48.320
<v Speaker 1>the South African, pretty good driver of the ball, and.

0:27:48.280 --> 0:27:50.240
<v Speaker 2>He's almost made my card. He almost.

0:27:50.880 --> 0:27:53.160
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, he's had some good showings in America this year,

0:27:53.160 --> 0:27:56.080
<v Speaker 1>twelfth at the US Open, eighth at the Rocket Classic,

0:27:56.280 --> 0:27:59.400
<v Speaker 1>and I'll throw in one deep sleeper Englishman David Skins

0:27:59.480 --> 0:28:02.280
<v Speaker 1>at two hundred to one. Skins was fourth at the

0:28:02.400 --> 0:28:05.480
<v Speaker 1>ESCO Championship two weeks ago, eighth at the Barracouda this

0:28:05.560 --> 0:28:07.959
<v Speaker 1>past week, and he finished twenty fourth at the three

0:28:08.160 --> 0:28:11.160
<v Speaker 1>M Open last year. All right, bo let's compare early

0:28:11.160 --> 0:28:13.199
<v Speaker 1>betting cards. Who do you have on yours?

0:28:13.520 --> 0:28:15.679
<v Speaker 2>So I got a lot of small ones here at

0:28:15.760 --> 0:28:18.600
<v Speaker 2>Chris gottr Up at eighteen to one, Jake Napp thirty

0:28:18.600 --> 0:28:21.400
<v Speaker 2>five to one, Michael Thorbjorn sent at forty to one.

0:28:21.560 --> 0:28:23.399
<v Speaker 2>If I can get him a little longer, I'm still

0:28:23.440 --> 0:28:26.240
<v Speaker 2>I haven't put a lot on him yet. Luke Clinton's

0:28:26.240 --> 0:28:29.440
<v Speaker 2>getting the full ladder at fifty to one, Patrick Fishburn

0:28:29.560 --> 0:28:32.480
<v Speaker 2>sixty to one, Kevin Roy eighty to one, Hayden Springer

0:28:32.520 --> 0:28:34.760
<v Speaker 2>one hundred and ten to one, Chan Kim one hundred

0:28:34.800 --> 0:28:37.840
<v Speaker 2>and seventy to one, and finally Isaiah Selinda two hundred

0:28:37.880 --> 0:28:38.920
<v Speaker 2>to one.

0:28:39.080 --> 0:28:42.640
<v Speaker 1>I'm keeping my card relatively light for now. You've almost

0:28:42.680 --> 0:28:44.920
<v Speaker 1>got me talked into Luke Clinton, But for now it's

0:28:45.320 --> 0:28:48.959
<v Speaker 1>Jake Napp at thirty five to one, emiliano'grio at forty

0:28:49.000 --> 0:28:50.800
<v Speaker 1>to one horse for a course, I kind of like

0:28:50.840 --> 0:28:53.720
<v Speaker 1>Grio This week, Thriston Lawrence at one hundred and twenty

0:28:53.720 --> 0:28:57.080
<v Speaker 1>to one, and David Skins for probably two dollars at

0:28:57.080 --> 0:28:59.840
<v Speaker 1>two hundred to one. Now for our one and done picks,

0:28:59.840 --> 0:29:02.400
<v Speaker 1>I took Tyrrel Hatton last week. He felled on the

0:29:02.480 --> 0:29:05.440
<v Speaker 1>leaderboard on Sunday, finished tied for sixteenth, earning me one

0:29:05.440 --> 0:29:09.000
<v Speaker 1>thy eight hundred excuse me, one hundred and eighty five thousand,

0:29:09.360 --> 0:29:12.760
<v Speaker 1>two hundred and fifty seven dollars. Bo took Rory McElroy.

0:29:12.800 --> 0:29:15.560
<v Speaker 1>He tied for seventh, good for four hundred and fifty one,

0:29:15.920 --> 0:29:18.840
<v Speaker 1>eight hundred and thirty three dollars. Bow UPS's lead on

0:29:18.880 --> 0:29:21.080
<v Speaker 1>me to about eight hundred and fifty thousand dollars, and

0:29:21.080 --> 0:29:23.120
<v Speaker 1>we only have a few weeks left. Since we're not

0:29:23.320 --> 0:29:27.760
<v Speaker 1>including the Tour Championship in our competition, I'm up first

0:29:27.840 --> 0:29:32.240
<v Speaker 1>this week. Bo. I have some concerns that he might

0:29:32.240 --> 0:29:34.440
<v Speaker 1>be out of gas after the two great weeks in Europe,

0:29:34.440 --> 0:29:36.280
<v Speaker 1>but I do have to go with the blazing hot

0:29:36.360 --> 0:29:38.440
<v Speaker 1>Chris Godder up. Who are you taking?

0:29:38.640 --> 0:29:42.680
<v Speaker 2>That's who I was gonna pick. Let's see. I want

0:29:42.680 --> 0:29:45.080
<v Speaker 2>to make sure I haven't used him. I used him.

0:29:45.280 --> 0:29:52.360
<v Speaker 2>I used him. Man, this isrough. He I burned through

0:29:52.400 --> 0:29:54.720
<v Speaker 2>all my good guys. This is not great.

0:29:55.200 --> 0:29:57.480
<v Speaker 1>I still have Jake Nap in the bag. If you

0:29:57.520 --> 0:29:58.480
<v Speaker 1>want a double down.

0:29:59.280 --> 0:30:03.440
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, let's do it. Jake Nap all right, nagaham or

0:30:03.440 --> 0:30:05.240
<v Speaker 2>fishburn and I don't think I want to do that.

0:30:06.280 --> 0:30:09.040
<v Speaker 1>Jake Nap for bo and Chris Godder up for me.

0:30:09.240 --> 0:30:12.640
<v Speaker 1>That's all for this week's Betting PROSPGA podcast. Please join

0:30:12.720 --> 0:30:14.760
<v Speaker 1>us again next week when we'll be previewing the final

0:30:14.800 --> 0:30:18.520
<v Speaker 1>tournament before the FEDECS Cup playoffs, the wind Them Championship.

0:30:18.640 --> 0:30:20.720
<v Speaker 1>Until then, so long everyone.

0:30:20.920 --> 0:30:23.520
<v Speaker 3>Thanks for listening to the Betting Pros podcast. If you

0:30:23.600 --> 0:30:25.960
<v Speaker 3>love the show, the best freeway to support us is

0:30:25.960 --> 0:30:29.360
<v Speaker 3>by leaving a positive review on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

0:30:29.640 --> 0:30:32.280
<v Speaker 3>Follow us on x and TikTok at Betting Pros and

0:30:32.360 --> 0:30:36.040
<v Speaker 3>Instagram at Betting Pros NFL. Also subscribe to our YouTube

0:30:36.080 --> 0:30:50.080
<v Speaker 3>channel at YouTube dot com slash Betting Pros