O'malley Yan may have been a robbery...

Langinbang187 said:
Stats always lie in MMA.

Sean landing a single jab, and Yan landing that huge counter that nearly knocked O'Malley unconscious in round 2 are technically both considered one significant strike each on paper.
Click to expand...
WTF. Yan landed nothing in the first round. If i recall he maybe landed a td an held Omalley down. More than likely a OMalley round. Second, Yan won but had to win via take downs.
Third, close but again, Yan has to panic wrestle as he gets outstruck. He does land a few good counter stirkes but loses the round. Holding someone down to avoid strikes does not mean you win.
 
I agree I felt like Yan had booked the W in that one. I think it comes down to the cut O'Malley opened up on Yan.
 
xhaydenx said:
When I gamble, I tend to just look more for the ways the fighter I bet on likely won the round. That's not the best thinking, but whatever. Thinking like that, though I was on Yan I still gave round 1 to Suga. And I mean, I'm not the only one that thought Poodle won the first round. Some dickheads were obviously biased because they're in love with Sugar, but as I said in an earlier post, I needed Yan to win for a multi and for him to finish for a single I had on, so I was definitely not biased towards Suga.

Whether anyone agrees or not, me and the people who seriously gave it to Suga and aren't trolling must have seen something, right? Like, I'm not here saying it to rile you up for an argument's sake.

Also, keep in mind those live odds aren't just the bookies, they're also affected by what live money is coming in.

Oh, and you mention the biggest moment might have been for Yan with a body kick. Man, if watching judges has taught me anything, you really need to fold someone up with a body kick for it to matter anywhere near as much as a simpler, less damaging punch to the head. Head strikes are valued so much more lol.

The scoring criteria isn't interpreted literally either. Again, human element and all that.
Click to expand...

No, you aren't the only one, but you're in the extreme minority, and this is a live bet, this isn't a situation where you're "fading the public" pre-game, it's an entirely different scenario, without much, if any evidence to support the thought process. I'm not necessarily convinced this wasn't a blatant example of an individual the UFC views as a future cash cow getting a favorable scorecard, so that isn't necessarily my thought process. The masses speak, and if you bet, you know the market typically has a very good idea of which way the fight is going to go, as they're collecting data from sharps, as well as squares, but most importantly their algorithm's are adjusting based on the action transpiring inside of the octagon accordingly when speaking about live action.

I'm not biased towards either fighter, but a terrible decision is a terrible decision, and this was as blatant a terrible decision as things can get for me, and many, many others.
 
Langinbang187 said:
Stats always lie in MMA.

Sean landing a single jab, and Yan landing that huge counter that nearly knocked O'Malley unconscious in round 2 are technically both considered one significant strike each on paper.
Click to expand...

O’Malley’s 40 sig strikes in rd3 were mostly junk. People need to stop parroting that hilariously botched stat and rewatch the fight themselves. It was a close round striking-wise and Yan had 2 minutes of ground control. The ‘O’Malley outclassed Yan in rd 3’ narrative is a joke.
 
abject said:
WTF. Yan landed nothing in the first round. If i recall he maybe landed a td an held Omalley down. More than likely a OMalley round. Second, Yan won but had to win via take downs.
Third, close but again, Yan has to panic wrestle as he gets outstruck. He does land a few good counter stirkes but loses the round. Holding someone down to avoid strikes does not mean you win.
Click to expand...

Yan literally landed more strikes in round one than your hero, Sugar Shane :

http://ufcstats.com/fight-details/5c3c4bcc6c746ca0

Are we to do the whole "HEY BUT O'MALLEY LANDED 3 MORE SIGNIFICANT STRIKES, THAT NEGATES OCTATON CONTROL, TAKEDOWNS, STRIKE TOTALS, GROUND CONTROL!" walk next?



Imagine pretending Yan won the second via takedowns, after landing by far the most significant strike of the entire fight on the feet, nearly knocking O'Malley out cold in the process.
 
Langinbang187 said:
No, you aren't the only one, but you're in the extreme minority, and this is a live bet, this isn't a situation where you're "fading the public" pre-game, it's an entirely different scenario, without much, if any evidence to support the thought process. I'm not necessarily convinced this wasn't a blatant example of an individual the UFC views as a future cash cow getting a favorable scorecard, so that isn't necessarily my thought process. The masses speak, and if you bet, you know the market typically has a very good idea of which way the fight is going to go, as they're collecting data from sharps, as well as squares, but most importantly their algorithm's are adjusting based on the action transpiring inside of the octagon accordingly when speaking about live action.

I'm not biased towards either fighter, but a terrible decision is a terrible decision, and this was as blatant a terrible decision as things can get for me, and many, many others.
Click to expand...


The masses do speak, but often they're wrong. The market is mainly made up of casuals who throw a $50 on some fighter on a whim while drinking beers with their mates down at the pub. That's who bookies make their money off.

They base their live odds off both incoming bets and what their viewing teams are seeing (if they use those). Again, that's just another person with an opinion that can be wrong or right.

I've never seen any concrete evidence that the UFC conspired to get someone a favorable scorecard. I can't really imagine it either. The judges aren't assigned by the UFC. Sure, the UFC could go to the athletic commissions and corrupt things that way.

It just seems unlikely to me. The cost of that eventually blowing back into their faces is a lot more than what they'd make off someone like Suga. If it came out they were corrupting judges, that is going to look bad on ESPN, which means it will look bad on Disney, who care more about their image than anything.

I can't see them risking it on a fighter who has lost his first step up and had a shit, controversial showing in his fight before this one.
 
xhaydenx said:
The masses do speak, but often they're wrong. The market is mainly made up of casuals who throw a $50 on some fighter on a whim while drinking beers with their mates down at the pub. That's who bookies make their money off.

They base their live odds off both incoming bets and what their viewing teams are seeing (if they use those). Again, that's just another person with an opinion that can be wrong or right.

I've never seen any concrete evidence that the UFC conspired to get someone a favorable scorecard. I can't really imagine it either. The judges aren't assigned by the UFC. Sure, the UFC could go to the athletic commissions and corrupt things that way.

It just seems unlikely to me. The cost of that eventually blowing back into their faces is a lot more than what they'd make off someone like Suga. If it came out they were corrupting judges, that is going to look bad on ESPN, which means it will look bad on Disney, who care more about their image than anything.

I can't see them risking it on a fighter who has lost his first step up and had a shit, controversial showing in his fight before this one.
Click to expand...

You aren't listening.

Their pre fight odds are most definitely build upon praying on casual bettors, I quite literally just stated as much in the very post you just responded to, what you aren't acknowledging, is their live algorithm, that isn't necessarily reflected, one does not simply go from -250 pre-fight to -1000 at closing time simply based upon casual money, that's absolutely silly and you should know this if you bet even with even a modicum amount of the regularity you've previously stated.

I don't believe the UFC hands over a tremendous amount of cash, I do think fighters with more future appeal are significantly more likely to pull upsets, as opposed to individuals from say, Russia, a Country that is pretty much universally hated across the globe currently. I don't think that's a reach. I think it's a significant reach to act as if favorable judging doesn't exist in combart sports, when it's been transpiring for decades upon decades across other variations of combat.

It absolutely happens, we have clear cut cases in the past of fighters literally being straight up paid money to lose, taking everything at face value from an organization like the UFC? interesting way to look at things, that's for sure.
 
Last edited:
Langinbang187 said:
You aren't listening.

Their pre fight odds are most definitely build upon praying on casual bettors, I quite literally just stated as much in the very post you just responded to, what you aren't acknowledging, is their live algorithm, that isn't necessarily reflected, one does not simply go from -250 pre-fight to -1000 at closing time, simply based upon casual money, that's absolutely silly and you should know this if you bet even with even a modicum amount of the regularity you've previously stated.

I don't believe the UFC hands over a tremendous amount of cash, I do think fighters with more future appeal are significantly more likely to pull upsets, as opposed to individuals from say, Russia, a Country that is pretty much universally hated across the globe currently. I don't think that's a reach. I think it's a significant reach to act as if favorable judging doesn't exist in combart sports, when it's been transpiring for decades upon decades across other variations of combat.

It absolutely happens, we have clear cut cases in the past of fighters literally being straight up paid money to lose, taking everything at face value from an organization like the UFC? interesting way to look at things, that's for sure.
Click to expand...

I am listening to you, mate.

Maybe I'm not understanding what you mean about the gambling. Going from -250 pre to -1000 by the time the market closes is pretty normal. Yan was a big dog by the end because enough people thought he was clearly winning and were betting on him. The bookies weren't doing anything to adjust these odds because they obviously felt the same.

You don't need to see their algorithms to see how they work. If you put enough money on something, you'll change those odds all on your own. I've put 5k on fighters that were somewhat well known and seen decent changes in the line instantly.
 
xhaydenx said:
I am listening to you, mate.

Maybe I'm not understanding what you mean about the gambling. Going from -250 pre to -1000 by the time the market closes is pretty normal. Yan was a big dog by the end because enough people thought he was clearly winning and were betting on him. The bookies weren't doing anything to adjust these odds because they obviously felt the same.

You don't need to see their algorithms to see how they work. If you put enough money on something, you'll change those odds all on your own. I've put 5k on fighters that were somewhat well known and seen decent changes in the line instantly.
Click to expand...

Closing at -1000 live and losing is not normal, in fact, it is quite literally the largest live line I've seen lose a decision in the history of tracking these fights.

The issue is, all bookies had Yan at a minimum of -800 live at the end of the third round, nobody was placing money on O'Malley, the market was rapidly adjusting as they recognized that O'Malley had very likely lost the previous 2 rounds, and despite O'Malley having his best round of the fight, the gap for getting the finish he, the market, the media, 90% of individuals who witnessed the fight felt he needed, was rapidly closing, hence why it shot up.

Markets do not give away free money, they don't lay +500 odds to an individual who opened at +200 or so because a bunch of drunk guys laid 20$, they do so based again, on their algorithm and what is transpiring during the fight lol, I shouldn't need to repeat this.
 
Langinbang187 said:
Closing at -1000 live and losing is not normal, in fact, it is quite literally the largest live line I've seen lose a decision in the history of tracking these fights.

The issue is, all bookies had Yan at a minimum of -800 live at the end of the third round, nobody was placing money on O'Malley, the market was rapidly adjusting as they recognized that O'Malley had very likely lost the previous 2 rounds, and despite O'Malley having his best round of the fight, the gap for getting the finish he, the market, the media, 90% of individuals who witnessed the fight felt he needed, was rapidly closing, hence why it shot up.

Markets do not give away free money, they don't lay +500 odds to an individual who opened at +200 or so because a bunch of drunk guys laid 20$, they do so based again, on their algorithm and what is transpiring during the fight lol, I shouldn't need to repeat this.
Click to expand...

Ah, right, I understand you. I was thinking you meant end with those lines and win, but of course you meant lose, as Yan did.

Definitely not normal but it does happen, despite what the media and fans and whoever else is thinking. A similar fight that springs to mind is Hansen/Mckenna. Everyone and the bookies had Kay up 2 rounds and the odds reflected that live. Kay started a decent fav Mckenna was paying 5.00 in round 3. Turns out Hansen actually needed a finish.

I don't know why you think those small bettors couldn't have made such a big impact along with a bookie's own reads. A lot of people bet and it adds up. It moves those lines hard. So does their own reads if their teams are on it (obviously they're not always). They clearly read it as Suga had no chance. They didn't want people coming in and making anything close to decent cash by betting big on Yan late.

They got it all wrong though.
 
Langinbang187 said:
Yan literally landed more strikes in round one than your hero, Sugar Shane :

http://ufcstats.com/fight-details/5c3c4bcc6c746ca0

Are we to do the whole "HEY BUT O'MALLEY LANDED 3 MORE SIGNIFICANT STRIKES, THAT NEGATES OCTATON CONTROL, TAKEDOWNS, STRIKE TOTALS, GROUND CONTROL!" walk next?



Imagine pretending Yan won the second via takedowns, after landing by far the most significant strike of the entire fight on the feet, nearly knocking O'Malley out cold in the process.
Click to expand...
O'Malley landed more significant strikes overall. So your nut huggery of your idol is sadly mistaken. Yan managed to hold him down. Due to being SIGNIFICANTLY OUTSTRUCK. But he lost the fight. As proven by the judges. Cry harder. I shower in your rage tears.
 
ki11ian said:
Stop with that shit. I don’t hate O’Malley, I root for him but this is beyond silly. You are a complete fucking idiot if you think he won that fight, end of story.
Click to expand...

I think it's time for you to come out of the closet as an O'Malley hater and join the crowd.

Yan2.jpg
Here's a nice picture of Yan to help stir the hate.
 
abject said:
WTF. Yan landed nothing in the first round. If i recall he maybe landed a td an held Omalley down. More than likely a OMalley round. Second, Yan won but had to win via take downs.
Third, close but again, Yan has to panic wrestle as he gets outstruck. He does land a few good counter stirkes but loses the round. Holding someone down to avoid strikes does not mean you win.
Click to expand...
yeah the first was clearly sean’s. cracked yan with a huge shot, and landed multiple nasty teeps to the body as well as jabs. yan landed a lot of good low kicks and got a TD but those aren’t as effective.
 
KAZSoliloquy said:
crazy how all the people who called me a troll yesterday have completely disappeared as more and more people chime in in sean’s favor lol
Click to expand...
Sean could have won going away by point fighting. His instincts were to finish, and that got him in trouble because Yan has a hard head. Sean will see it when he watches the film. Just a bit impatient IMO. Gotta let the finish present itself against a fighter like Yan. Can't force it because he wants to brawl.
 
The old Jon Fitch days of laying and praying your opponent to a victory is over. You have to do damage, which Yan didn't do on the ground.

His takedowns were never offensive, but more reactionary or an escape from taking more damage on the feet.

He only ever shot for takedowns whenever Sean was tagging him. Judges obviously saw that and that's why Yan lost.
 
There is a whole lot of TLDR in this thread.
Summarize your shit.

Also Yan won the fight.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,281,131
Messages
58,342,545
Members
176,008
Latest member
tatamere

Share this page

Back
Top