- Joined
- Jan 11, 2021
- Messages
- 600
- Reaction score
- 663
An mma betting YT channel suggested that Holland bet against himself in the Brunson fight because of the ridiculous + money Brunson was getting
I was talking about sherdoggers betting on a ton of fights. I already figured most still live at home being taken care of by their mom so the fight bets are their lazy way of generating some income.
One day the sherdogger has to face the real world and get a job.
IIRC Pete only bet on his team to win. A de-facto argument was made that the games he did not gamble on were equivalent to him betting on his team to lose.But then you might have a Pete Rose situation. Bet on the other guy and lose on purpose.
UFC fighters can bet on themselves but not against themselves.
And betting is not a source of income. If every fighter did that that, the fighters as a group would lose money to the bookies.
To be a reliably winning gambler, you have to 1) be good at predicting fights, 2) be able to detect odds to take advantage of and 3) bet sensible amounts on a large number of fights.
Betting only on yourself is not a viable gambling strategy because 1) you have no guarantee you will be given a good odd each fight and 2) you are the worst person to have an unbiaised assessment of your chances and 3) the number of fights to bet on is too small to protect you from variance.
Yeah, good points.Overall a good analysis, and I agree. I actually did a college paper on mma betting strategy (no joke, and got 100 on it). You did leave out a contrary variable, though: inside information. If you are more privy to your camp, lingering injuries, your improvement than anyone, you know when it's a good fight to bet and when not to.
Of course a fighter's own bias can influence this (so overconfident hot heads need not apply), but that's where common sense comes in. Don't bet on yourself every fight, only when the circumstances are right. Much like Im biased about certain fighters and yet still turn in a profit because I don't bet on my favorites every time.
No it doesn't.Hypothetical.
What if I bet on myself in the last 5 fights and then I dont bet on my next one.
Then I don’t win ( I had an injury)
So Does that mean I bet against myself?
Yes, Anthony Rocco Martin has bet on himself multiple timesIf I was a UFC fighter and I'm allowed to bet on myself, wouldn't that be a good way of 'earning' extra income?
I mean take Demetrious Johnson's run for example... he complained about the money he was making even though he was on a ridiculous winning streak.
Had he bet on himself winning every fight, he would've made so much more money.
Especially with the way he fights (lots of decisions) he can just win on points and always bet a decision win giving him pretty decent odds overall.
If they are allowed to bet on themselves, do we have any examples of fighters betting on themselves?
It's safer to bet on or against teammates (and obviously keeping your mouth shut).
You shouldn't be allowed to bet on the manner in which you win, for example by decision, or by 4th round KO, because then you're giving yourself an incentive to not get the job done earlyIf I was a UFC fighter and I'm allowed to bet on myself, wouldn't that be a good way of 'earning' extra income?
I mean take Demetrious Johnson's run for example... he complained about the money he was making even though he was on a ridiculous winning streak.
Had he bet on himself winning every fight, he would've made so much more money.
Especially with the way he fights (lots of decisions) he can just win on points and always bet a decision win giving him pretty decent odds overall.
If they are allowed to bet on themselves, do we have any examples of fighters betting on themselves?
Baseball is the worst sport to have a coach/manager betting on his team to win because they have to decide what pitchers to use and they might put a reliever in a game they shouldn't just to try and increase their chance of winning the bet instead of saving their star reliever for a game where they are more valuable because their team has a good chance to win.IIRC Pete only bet on his team to win. A de-facto argument was made that the games he did not gamble on were equivalent to him betting on his team to lose.
The de-facto argument I spoke of. The Gullickson starts in 1987 that Rose did not bet on are the closest thing to proof that he actually ever bet against the Reds. The post I was responding to framed it as if Rose was was intentionally losing games to cash wagers he had placed on his team losing, Zero proof of that has surfaced in 35 years. He was on a slippery slope no doubt, and I have no problem with him not being in the HOF. But I honestly don't think he ever did anything other than give his best effort to win todays game, and he was willing to put his money where his heart was, on WINNING!Baseball is the worst sport to have a coach/manager betting on his team to win because they have to decide what pitchers to use and they might put a reliever in a game they shouldn't just to try and increase their chance of winning the bet instead of saving their star reliever for a game where they are more valuable because their team has a good chance to win.
Exactly. Is Connor even married to Dee? Couldn’t stop your girlfriend from betting on you to win. Any relation what so ever betting on you to lose could be problematic and would probably end your career if found out.Even if you aren’t technically allowed....not hard to get someone to bet your money for you