one of the most fucked up nights of fights in mma history.
Understatement of the fucking century.
Horrible night for me. Can't believe Tito is the only thing that turned it from a severe loss into a simply bad one. The decisions hardly mattered for me (I really thought Chandler would stop this fight).
Chandler was the squarest bet in the history of MMA. We have Saad Awaad to thank for this. Seriously
.
it wasn't just a "bad decision" (though i think it was, or could've been a draw from 10-8 3rd)
brooks +900 was a flat out great bet. if he lost a close decisiont here, would have said the same thing.
brooks is the most talented guy to ever be +900 for a fight. that means he needs to win 10% of the time to break even. 10%. he could land a huge shot, chandler could get injured, chandler could get a cut, brooks could outwrestle him, brooks could outcardio him, or, yes, could be just competitive and get a close (bad) decision... etc, etc..
+900 was a great bet.
Exactly why I thought betting Brooks was a must. I mean, at -1000 + the bookie is essentially guaranteeing a victory for the favorite; Brooks has too much talent to be +900 vs. ANY LW in MMA.
I thought he won r3 10-8 and r4 was 10-9 .. Have to watch again to see how the judges could possibly give him 1,2 or 5 homie
Any talk of saying that a fighter can't lose against another professional fighter is crazy even if one is much better skill wise. There are so many variables in MMA that almost anything can happen.
As far as Tito I made a bundle betting him to win last night because of the generous +440 odds available and his huge size advantage at weigh-ins. A $100 bet earning $440 was too good to pass up. I'm also damn glad that I didn't listen to the people that said that one should only bet Tito's Decision prop because he wasn't going to finish Alex. But I was under no impression that it was a guaranteed win. It was a calculated gamble based on value and real factors like his weight advantage and skill set against a very dangerous opponent that paid off. Anyone that says differently is just indulging in bad gambler talk.
Rack, brah, you gotta relax a bit man. It's your first day in the thread and you're not making any friends so far. A lot of good gamblers in here but if you piss everybody off then they're gonna think you're an asshole and ignore you. Just trying to help you out here b/c this is becoming a clusterfuck.
I was on Tito but he's old, he had been off for a long time, he had one win in what seems like forever, and Schlemenko is small but he could've easily slammed a shin or left hand into Tito's liver and that would've been it. Even if Tito had value at his line, there were definitely ways he could've lost including winning a rd then gassing hard like he's been known to do. Like I said, I was on Tito but it's risky to go big on considering it's......... Tito.
I thought Tito decision was an absolute attrocious bet (if that is all you played) b/c you were already get great odds SU.
I'm not in the "it was rigged" camp. I really think Alex has too much pride to let that happen.
But, I say this, and yet I can't epain TWO judges finding 3 rounds to give to Brooks or THREE judges gving Rampage the las round unamiously.
But, never underestimate the power of human stupidity, OJ Simpson, Casey Anthony, and George Zimmerman had 36 jurors between the three of them, and not a single one held out for a guilty verdict. And we think humans can't fuck up a fight? :icon_neut
Line movement
Opening odds / Current odds
Love Trinaldo @ + odds; think he gets Chiesa outta there early.
Might take a stab at Kikuno as he matches up really well w/ Tony plus Ferg's been out foreer. Also, Dillashaw odds starting to reach playable territory.
I like a Iaquinta + DC + Holdsworth parlay too