PGA FORUM

Comments

  • whodat2

    When: May 9-12

    Where: Dallas,Texas

    Course: Trinity Forest Golf Club | A par 71 playing at 7371 yards.

    Last Year’s Winner: Aaron Wise at -23

    Last Year’s Cut: -4

    Coverage: PGATOURLive | Golf Channel | CBS

    Google Doc

    RG Golf Forum League

    Happy Meal Standings

    Admin Note: The mod team is working to keep these daily threads more on topic – Golf strategy talk for this week’s contest. Post referring to last week’s contest will be moved to the correct thread. Any off topic posts or posts containing full lineups will be deleted..

  • BIF

    @yisman said...

    a lot of people lost out there because of the unusual circumstances of round 3 finishing Sunday morning and MDF not being determined until after that

    True but Burns fate was sealed a few hours ago or you could say yesterday (for the non-optimistic folks).

  • BIF

    @timusbr said...

    You have said this… this weekend. Somehow you talk about your model and you didnt have any Kang in LU you played your money on. I just dont get it. Maybe because if you totaled all the % to win it equals over 1000% or some other number. You also said earlier that Every was at the top of your model. LMFAO at your statistical ability.

    His model looks at a guy’s chance of winning after each round. It has nothing to do with DFS unless you want to use it to build Showdown lineups. Simply put it’s the same type of thing DataGolf.ca does on their Predictive Index page

  • neogamer

    • x2

      2013 FanDuel WFBBC Finalist

    • 2015 FanDuel NBA Playboy Mansion Finalist

    Pat Perez Tracker on the 13th…

  • yisman

    @BIF said...

    True but Burns fate was sealed a few hours ago or you could say yesterday (for the non-optimistic folks).

    Most people probably don’t think about MDF or calculate the odds a player avoids MDF or not.

    I figure they just picked Burns because he was in the player pool without the designation so they figured he was playing.

  • NoLimits0

    @timusbr said...

    You have said this… this weekend. Somehow you talk about your model and you didnt have any Kang in LU you played your money on. I just dont get it. Maybe because if you totaled all the % to win it equals over 1000% or some other number. You also said earlier that Every was at the top of your model. LMFAO at your statistical ability.

    I honestly have no idea what you are even talking about. Never said anything about Every at the top of my models either. You should go back and read my posts. They have been very consistent. I did get the -3 MDF wrong though but did get the -2 cut right (where you kept on making fun of me it’s gonna be -3). As for my players I’ve stayed consistent on who I’ve been rooting for. I have never said I had any Sung Kang or Matt Every in any of my posts. My model just updates win probabilities and it’s something I just built because we were talking about Denny McCarthy and how I had him at 1-2% after Thursday despite leading.

    I understand your post is jsut a hate post of me but that’s fine. I’ve always been consistent in my posts.

  • neogamer

    • x2

      2013 FanDuel WFBBC Finalist

    • 2015 FanDuel NBA Playboy Mansion Finalist

    Pat Perez en fuego. Other then the three putt from 3 feet on 13 lol.

  • Steverino01

    WTF is up with Mitchell on this par 5?

  • BIF

    @neogamer said...

    Pat Perez en fuego. Other then the three putt from 3 feet on 13 lol.

    -5 thru 7 with an Eagle and a Streak 🔥

  • neogamer

    • x2

      2013 FanDuel WFBBC Finalist

    • 2015 FanDuel NBA Playboy Mansion Finalist

    @BIF said...

    -5 thru 7 with an Eagle and a Streak 🔥

    Yes.. and he is on the back 9.. Must have eaten his Wheaties this morning.

  • timusbr

    @NoLimits0 said...

    I honestly have no idea what you are even talking about. Never said anything about Every at the top of my models either.

    I guess this wasnt you that posted this????

    My “model” I’m trying out that I talked about earlier this week had Every only 12% chance to win going into R3. Kang was 33% for reference as … Read More

    No hate, just the facts. I like your posts, Dont believe a word of them but you throw stuff out there that should be pondered. I just dont like inflation of your own opinion and redacting of information to make yourself look smarter. your smart enough, but If I want to read fantasy, I prefer books.

  • BIF

    Not really a fan of Kang’s swing changes – takeaway is a bit weird and the club is way across the line at the top – I’d like to see some shot tracers on him to see how much he is moving the ball R to L off the tee.

  • timusbr

    @BIF said...

    His model looks at a guy’s chance of winning after each round. It has nothing to do with DFS unless you want to use it to build Showdown lineups. Simply put it’s the same type of thing DataGolf.ca does on their Predictive Index page

    thanks BIF,
    I guess there is a rhyme and reason to his numbers. I just dont get it
    100% is all, he tosses out 33% like nickels in a dollar. So either I need to adjust my dictionary or his translation needs to have an appendix.

  • BIF

    Keith Mitchell ST on 14 looks like a Geometry assignment I was given in high school

    Nice Triple

  • BIF

    Tyler Duncan with the solid 4-putt for bogey on par 5 first hole after hitting green in two 😂

  • NoLimits0

    @timusbr said...

    I guess this wasnt you that posted this????

    My “model” I’m trying out that I talked about earlier this week had Every only 12% chance to win going into R3. Kang was 33% for reference as … Read More

    No hate, just the facts. I like your posts, Dont believe a word of them but you throw stuff out there that should be pondered. I just dont like inflation of your own opinion and redacting of information to make yourself look smarter. your smart enough, but If I want to read fantasy, I prefer books.

    Lol again please post where I said I played Every and Kang. Never said I did. Obviously you don’t understand the difference between players I played and the win probability model. Maybe if you read my posts you would understand but I see you cherry pick 2 sentences…

  • tristanwolf

    killa keith and michael thompson killing me

  • MrBreeze

    I chip better than that Kang, cmon man

  • timusbr

    @NoLimits0 said...

    Lol again please post where I said I played Every and Kang. Never said I did. Obviously you don’t understand the difference between players I played and the win probability model. Maybe if you read my posts you would understand but I see you cherry pick 2 sentences…

    I think I said you didnt play Mr. Dung, and that is interesting because your “model” said he was a hi probability. You need to learn to read yourself and not think everyone is out to get you. I only cherry picked a direct reference you denied. Your right I dont understand what you think your doing. Dont get it, I thinks its a load of houhy. Which is OK, Pick your teams you want, I dont care how you do it. But bragging on your model and not using it seems………like BS to me

  • Kingspark35

    @MrBreeze said...

    I chip better than that Kang, cmon man

    Agreed. What a terrible chip attempt.

    His SG – approach stat shows that this is his weak point.

  • timusbr

    @timusbr said...

    I only cherry picked a direct reference you denied.

    So was I right…..more importantly and to the direct reference of your posting. Did you make a reference to Every was hi in your model???? Which you called me out as wrong, not reading your posts and hating on you for it.

    this in a nutshell

  • timusbr

    Thursday showdowns had winners around the 350 mark. I didnt cash with 264 pts. maybe my highest showdown total of the year. LOL, what a week to have a guy wd for 0 points on the week. Everyone who played yesterday scored well. BIF’s reference of Burns’s total pts was one of the highest he has seen from an MDF could be used in many catagories. The mean pts scored(without finishing bonus) for rd 3 = 20.5
    rd1 = 17pts
    rd2 = 14.5pts
    rd 3 is scewed because less golfers but still very hi.

  • NoLimits0

    @timusbr said...

    I think I said you didnt play Mr. Dung, and that is interesting because your “model” said he was a hi probability. You need to learn to read yourself and not think everyone is out to get you. I only cherry picked a direct reference you denied. Your right I dont understand what you think your doing. Dont get it, I thinks its a load of houhy. Which is OK, Pick your teams you want, I dont care how you do it. But bragging on your model and not using it seems………like BS to me

    Just FYI it’s “high” not “hi”. But I didn’t expect you to know that after you completely misunderstand my posts.

    1. I have never bragged about my model. You must be the only one reading the forums to think I’m bragging. Every post I’ve basically said my model isn’t perfect but here it is. When people gave me datagolf odds% and live bet odds% I was like wow I’m actually surprised it was fairly close since I don’t think my model is that good. I think I’ve pointed that out many times. Only you because you seem to not grasp what I’m saying would think I’m bragging.

    2. Lol my model is live probability after a known event. I didn’t have Kang 33% or 55% before the tournament started. It’s sad you actually think that when I’ve said it multiple times. I clearly replied to posts saying I never had Kang. If I really “wanted to brag” I coulda just easily said I had Kang. The fact I’m saying I don’t shows you clearly don’t even understand what I’m talking about.

    3. It’s all relative. Everyone knows Kang has a high chance. I had him 55%, live odds had him 58%, datagolf had him 60%. In this case you want to go slightly underweight on him. Just like you want to go slightly overweight on others you think are priced too low. No one is denying Kang has a good shot to win. But it’s all relative.

    4. It’s the same argument about the cutline. You and many others in the forum had it at 100% -3 when I said 50/50 -2 and -3. Turned out to be -2 and barely -2. It’s all about the probability. Nothing is a certainty. If it was someone could easily never lose.

  • NoLimits0

    I really can’t believe anyone would read my posts and think I had 33% EXPOSURE to Kang or 55% Kang. That is absurd. I’m not sure a 10 year old would interpret my posts that way…

    Why anyone would have any exposure to Matt Every is beyond me too. He has some shot at winning but not that I had him at that ownership . I clearly had 0 Every it’s pathetic you read my posts and think I have some >0% Every and thus I’m “bragging” about this.

    As I said from day 1, the only two guys I have near the lead are Piercy and Brooks. I would love it if one of them one instead of Every or Kang. I would LOVE it if the 55% on Kang is wrong (or whatever Vegas, liveodds, or datagolf had which was like around 60%).

  • timusbr

    No limits cannot admidt when he is wrong. Calling me out when I just did what he asked for….showing him the posts he posted again. Still explaining to me why I am wrong, And teaching me how to write in English. Show you the posts….LMAO, I did but I guess I am still wrong and you will convolute everything so that what “he said” is basicly what you have always believed. End of conversation

  • NoLimits0

    @timusbr said...

    So was I right…..more importantly and to the direct reference of your posting. Did you make a reference to Every was hi in your model???? Which you called me out as wrong, not reading your posts and hating on you for it.

    this in a nutshell

    Omg lol you don’t even know what my “model” is. It’s a live probability model and the only reason I’m posting about it is because of the discussion on Thursday. It’s not who I chose!!!!! I DID NOT choose Kang or Every and I’m NOT BRAGGING that I did.

    I have 80% Brooks if you want to do the “exposure” model. I said that from day 1 (read my post and durhams post in response).

    How do you not understand the difference between my model for choosing players and a live probability model???

    I freaking had 0% Kang. I don’t freaking want Kang to win. I’m just saying that the live probability model gave Kang a 55% chance going into R4 which is consistent or close to other models. No one freaking chose Kang at 55%. Please get that otherwise you’ll keep think I’m “bragging”

  • X Unread Thread
  • X Thread with New Replies*
  • *Jumps to your first unread reply

Sites mentioned in this thread

Use our links to sign up and deposit on sites listed in this thread to get these bonuses:

Subforum Index

New RotoGrinders Sports Betting Section!

Are you a DFS player who wants to get into sports betting?

If you have access to New Jersey sports betting, then use our DraftKings Sportsbook promo code and our FanDuel Sportsbook promo code to get the best bonuses in the NJ industry.

Those who can take advantage of PA online sports betting should use our SugarHouse PA promo code to get the best sports betting bonus in Pennsylvania.

If you don't yet have access to an online sportsbook, check out Monkey Knife Fight, a prop betting platform available in 31 states. Use our Monkey Knife Fight promo code to get a fantastic bonus.

RotoGrinders.com is the home of the daily fantasy sports community. Our content, rankings, member blogs, promotions and forum discussion all cater to the players that like to create a new fantasy team every day of the week. Our goal is to help all of our members make more money playing daily fantasy sports!

Disclosures: All RotoGrinders content contributors are active DFS players. Contributor screen names can be found on their respective RotoGrinders profile pages. Contributors reserve the right to use players or strategies not discussed in their content on RotoGrinders.