UFC 121 Lesnar vs Velasquez

[MMA_scientist]

Yeah, but unless you set your own line on Cain at like -400, that is a lot more risk than 30u on something that is 90% to win.

I mean, I like Cain too, but I have to give Brock at least a 40% chance to win. There is value to Cain, but betting 1/5 of your bankroll seems sort of maniacal to me.

[sbjj]

Yeah, but unless you set your own line on Cain at like -400, that is a lot more risk than 30u on something that is 90% to win.

I mean, I like Cain too, but I have to give Brock at least a 40% chance to win. There is value to Cain, but betting 1/5 of your bankroll seems sort of maniacal to me.

Not even close to 1/5 of my bankroll. But I just disagree with your whole philosophy. You seem to assume that big favorites have a 90% chance to win, I do not. I look at it simply as risking alot of money to win a little. that kind of thinking IMO is flawed.

Assuming you have a 100 unit bankroll. For some reason you have the mindset that betting 30% of your bankroll for a 5% return makes more sense than betting 20% of your bankroll for a 30% return. I think you just feel better because the LINE is telling you that you are making a safer bet. I bet over 50 units on GSP in his second fight with Hughes. I had the same conversation with others about that fight that I am having with you.

People could just not believe I was betting that much on the dog. they would tell me to just bet it on a heavy fave. for a sure thing. So most people thought I should drop 10K down on some fave. to win 2K, instead of 10K on a slight dog to win 12K. i just do not look at it that way.


BTW, i think Brock would be lucky, very lucky, to have a 40% chance to win.

[MMA_scientist]

sbjj... I don't think betting 20% on any fight is a good idea. I don't think there is a difference between doing it on a fave or dog though. The issue is not THE LINE, the issue is YOUR LINE. If your line is -400 and the actual line is -250, I would bet the shit out of that. Same thing with this one. If you think Cain should be more than -150 (60%) and he is currently at +135 (40%), that needs to bet and bet big. Similarly, if a fighter is at -300 (75%) and you think he should be -900 (90%) then you also need to bet the shit out of that...

So it is not that I think a favorite is automatically 90% to win. The issue is when the favorite is more likely to win that the line indicates. There is no difference between betting 30 to win 5 and 20 to win 30 if the value is there, because the risk of loss (in your specific assessment) is the same.

In any event, if you are not using a 100u bankroll, then this is all moot. I was just questioning the wisdom of betting 1/5 of your bankroll on one fight, which you are not doing.

[sbjj]

sbjj... I don't think betting 20% on any fight is a good idea. I don't think there is a difference between doing it on a fave or dog though. The issue is not THE LINE, the issue is YOUR LINE. If your line is -400 and the actual line is -250, I would bet the shit out of that. Same thing with this one. If you think Cain should be more than -150 (60%) and he is currently at +135 (40%), that needs to bet and bet big. Similarly, if a fighter is at -300 (75%) and you think he should be -900 (90%) then you also need to bet the shit out of that...

So it is not that I think a favorite is automatically 90% to win. The issue is when the favorite is more likely to win that the line indicates. There is no difference between betting 30 to win 5 and 20 to win 30 if the value is there, because the risk of loss (in your specific assessment) is the same.

In any event, if you are not using a 100u bankroll, then this is all moot. I was just questioning the wisdom of betting 1/5 of your bankroll on one fight, which you are not doing.

Our difference in thining is this Scientists. You spend alot of time in your head trying to figure out value. I take a simpler approach with fundamental rules. I WILL NOT bet a -500 fighter even if I think he has great value because I am still risking to much for what my possible return will be. This is something i think every good capper should do...set simple rules and abide by them. They are not set rules if you EVER have an exception for them.

Do me a favor, come on here the next time you see a -300 guy that you believe should be -900. I think I might have to wait awhile on that one. Yet we have 2 fights coming up which IMO have GREAT value...Cain and BJ.

Bottom line, we have two different mindsets. You will bet ANY fight as long as you see value. While I have more set rules that I must try to abide by. I firmly believe that my rules have kept me from losing alot of money.

Also, when you say bet a fight hard or bet the shit out of it. Do you bet the -300 or higher fighter the same as the +150 fighter? if you see the same value structure in a -300 fighter and a+150 fighter...do you bet the same units. I would guess you bet more on the -300 fighter because he is more expensive. Which can lead to bigger overall losses. When i all actuality, if you are willing to drop 6 units on a -300 guy, you should be willing to do the same with the +150 guy.

[SPX]

Our difference in thining is this Scientists. You spend alot of time in your head trying to figure out value. I take a simpler approach with fundamental rules. I WILL NOT bet a -500 fighter even if I think he has great value because I am still risking to much for what my possible return will be. This is something i think every good capper should do...set simple rules and abide by them. They are not set rules if you EVER have an exception for them.

That's fine. That's YOUR rule. Others abide by the simple rule of betting fights that have a ton of value.

Do me a favor, come on here the next time you see a -300 guy that you believe should be -900.

That would be hard to do. But I think there are a lot of -500 fights that should be -900. GSP/Hardy probably falls into that range. I wouldn't be surprised if Hardy only lands that necessary KO shot once in 20 fights, much less 10.

You will bet ANY fight as long as you see value.

That's not how he bets at all. I've seen him pass up plenty of bets that he felt had value, but was unsure about.

I firmly believe that my rules have kept me from losing alot of money.

Or perhaps they've kept you from winning a lot of money. That is, if you're actually a good capper.

[sbjj]

sbjj... I don't think betting 20% on any fight is a good idea. I don't think there is a difference between doing it on a fave or dog though. The issue is not THE LINE, the issue is YOUR LINE. If your line is -400 and the actual line is -250, I would bet the shit out of that. Same thing with this one. If you think Cain should be more than -150 (60%) and he is currently at +135 (40%), that needs to bet and bet big. Similarly, if a fighter is at -300 (75%) and you think he should be -900 (90%) then you also need to bet the shit out of that...

So it is not that I think a favorite is automatically 90% to win. The issue is when the favorite is more likely to win that the line indicates. There is no difference between betting 30 to win 5 and 20 to win 30 if the value is there, because the risk of loss (in your specific assessment) is the same.

In any event, if you are not using a 100u bankroll, then this is all moot. I was just questioning the wisdom of betting 1/5 of your bankroll on one fight, which you are not doing.

I disagree with this. As good as any capper believes he is, he should never begin to think he is God. You are going to be wrong all the time. There is a big difference in it because when you hit a rough patch and lose 3 out of 4 faves, you are destroyed real quick. If you lose 3 out of 4 even lines, you are in a much better position.

it is interesting Scientist, you continually try to figure out the magic of it all. But if you really believe in yourself that much...why have any rules at all. Just bet every fight no matter the odds and as much as you want. I do not believe in myself that much, so i have rules, rules that I believe keep me out of trouble. And with the rules I follow, if I can hit 55%, i will still make a nice profit. the last couple of months, I am hitting like 30% and I have still made a very small profit. Without my rules, I would be down pretty big.

Of course this could all go up in smoke if I lose my Cain and BJ bets. But I am confident enough that if I bet(hard) the 4 to 6 fights under my rules each year I will end up ahead.

[sbjj]

SPX, I actually have a hard time even responding to you, because you come off as a child with a big ego.

Scientist himself said he bets fights where he sees value.

As for it being MY rule. Yes, it is, and I said nowhere that everyone had to follow it.

As for me being a good or bad capper. i could care less what you think. You might actually be a better capper than I am, but I am 99% sure that I have and always will make more of a profit than you because of my simple rules.

[Luke]

i cant believe anyone is making a big play on this fight

[MMA_scientist]

I have rules. I just don't follow them. One rule that I do stick to pretty well though is never going over -400. If I see a guy that I feel is 80% to win, I will do a max bet on him regardless of whether his line is -200 or +200. I would be inclined to bet more on the +200 guy because there would be more value.

That said, I rarely see a dog that I feel is an overwhelming favorite. Dos Anjos to Etim comes to mind. Koscheck to Rumble as well. I bet pretty bog on Kos as a dog. I think I went smaller on Dos Anjos.

I see the as many or more fights at -300 that I think should be steeper. Looking at my past bets in that range (it has been a while because I lowered my cap to -250), Kongo/Buentello was a 6u bet for me @ -340. I felt Kongo would win 9/10 fights with Buentello. I put 5u on Reis @ -315, again, I felt Reis would win at least 80% of the time.
The best example was Pitbull Friere/Romero- I really felt that Pitbull was going to sub him and it was a STEAL @ -280. He should have been -1500. I called the exact round and sub for that fight (round 1 heelhook), I put 6u there, but would have been comfortable with more.

[SPX]

SPX, I actually have a hard time even responding to you, because you come off as a child with a big ego.

Bitch, you don't know me.

Maybe you just got on my bad side when you called me a liar.

Scientist himself said he bets fights where he sees value.

You said he will bet "ANY" fight as long as there's value. That's not true. You don't have any idea how he bets.

As for me being a good or bad capper. i could care less what you think. You might actually be a better capper than I am, but I am 99% sure that I have and always will make more of a profit than you because of my simple rules.

I didn't make any judgement. I was just pointing out that if you can't pick winners, then the line doesn't matter. You'll go broke, whether slowly or quickly. If you're good at capping though then choosing enough -500 winners to turn a profit in the long run shouldn't be a big problem.

Also, as for your comment about "betting 3 or 4 big favorites and losing" leading to some insurmountable loss, if you have a 100u bankroll and bet 5u on each of those fights then you'll be down 15% or 20% of your total roll. That's hardly career threatening.

[sbjj]

i cant believe anyone is making a big play on this fight

I can respect that.

but this is the type of fight I always make a big play on. A slight dog to slight fave. that I think has good value.

i look at Cain having advantages and Brock really having none.

Striking...clear Cain...cain also mixes his strikes up very well with leg kicks.

grappling(BJJ)...pretty unknown, but my head tells me cain.

wrestling...wash...Cain has speed and technique, while Brock has size and strength.

Cardio...I'd give it to cain because he keeps a very fast pace, and Brock seems to like a slow grinding fight.

Chin and Heart...Both seem to have them in spades. But I worry a bit in the way Brock has reacted when he has been hit.

I just see no reason why Cain is the dog here.

[sbjj]

SPX, I actually have a hard time even responding to you, because you come off as a child with a big ego.

Bitch, you don't know me.

Maybe you just got on my bad side when you called me a liar.

Scientist himself said he bets fights where he sees value.

You said he will bet "ANY" fight as long as there's value. That's not true. You don't have any idea how he bets.

As for me being a good or bad capper. i could care less what you think. You might actually be a better capper than I am, but I am 99% sure that I have and always will make more of a profit than you because of my simple rules.

I didn't make any judgement. I was just pointing out that if you can't pick winners, then the line doesn't matter. You'll go broke, whether slowly or quickly. If you're good at capping though then choosing enough -500 winners to turn a profit in the long run shouldn't be a big problem.

Also, as for your comment about "betting 3 or 4 big favorites and losing" leading to some insurmountable loss, if you have a 100u bankroll and bet 5u on each of those fights then you'll be down 15% or 20% of your total roll. That's hardly career threatening.

Jesus dude, you just do not get it. Yea, and if you hit every single one, you will be up a whopping 3 or 4 units. Man, you just do not seem to see it.

must have missed where I called you a liar. or maybe you just read to much into something.

[sbjj]

SPX, I actually have a hard time even responding to you, because you come off as a child with a big ego.

Bitch, you don't know me.

Maybe you just got on my bad side when you called me a liar.

Scientist himself said he bets fights where he sees value.

You said he will bet "ANY" fight as long as there's value. That's not true. You don't have any idea how he bets.

As for me being a good or bad capper. i could care less what you think. You might actually be a better capper than I am, but I am 99% sure that I have and always will make more of a profit than you because of my simple rules.

I didn't make any judgement. I was just pointing out that if you can't pick winners, then the line doesn't matter. You'll go broke, whether slowly or quickly. If you're good at capping though then choosing enough -500 winners to turn a profit in the long run shouldn't be a big problem.

Also, as for your comment about "betting 3 or 4 big favorites and losing" leading to some insurmountable loss, if you have a 100u bankroll and bet 5u on each of those fights then you'll be down 15% or 20% of your total roll. That's hardly career threatening.

LOL, looks like I had the child part right.

[MMA_scientist]

it is interesting Scientist, you continually try to figure out the magic of it all. But if you really believe in yourself that much...why have any rules at all. Just bet every fight no matter the odds and as much as you want. I do not believe in myself that much, so i have rules, rules that I believe keep me out of trouble. And with the rules I follow, if I can hit 55%, i will still make a nice profit. the last couple of months, I am hitting like 30% and I have still made a very small profit. Without my rules, I would be down pretty big.

Of course this could all go up in smoke if I lose my Cain and BJ bets. But I am confident enough that if I bet(hard) the 4 to 6 fights under my rules each year I will end up ahead.

I have rules. I am just saying "theoretically" and mathmatically it is no different. As a practical matter, the volatility will be too much and you will lose all your money. Just like, a martingale is "theoretically" perfect. It would always win if you had an unlimited bankroll and no house limits. But as it were, favorites lose, I am wrong on my assessments all the time, so I set caps on my bets (-400 and 5u, 6u in special cases). I do break the rules though, which is my main problem.

I am not trying to figure out the magic... there is no magic. I am trying to figure out how to optimally manage my bankroll for limited volatilty and risk of ruin while still allowing enough risk to see decent returns. There are plenty of mechanical systems out there (like the Kelly systems)...

I think you are confusing what I do, with what I am saying is possible.

[SPX]

Jesus dude, you just do not get it. Yea, and if you hit every single one, you will be up a whopping 3 or 4 units. Man, you just do not seem to see it.

No, I get it perfectly.

Let me ask you this: I'm 5'6", 140 lbs., with minimal martial arts training. If I personally fought Mike Tyson in his prime and you were offered a line of -1000, would you bet it, or would you worry that I'd throw a haymaker that would KO him?

I assume you would bet it.

So there you go.

[SPX]

LOL, looks like I had the child part right.

This is not the way to make friends around here.

[MMA_scientist]

Jesus dude, you just do not get it. Yea, and if you hit every single one, you will be up a whopping 3 or 4 units. Man, you just do not seem to see it.

must have missed where I called you a liar. or maybe you just read to much into something.

As long as you hit more than you are supposed to, you win. I don't know what else to tell you about that. I will never believe that betting where there is value is wrong. You would be better off telling me that big favorites never have value because of the inherent variables in MMA (which I sort of buy to a certain extent).

yeah, if you make huge bets, you are making a mistake in managing your funds...


as for your feud, cmon guys. We are all on the same side here. I don't want to see southbay-I mean sbjj- get banned because X is pissed. This kind of discourse is going to make us all better and at least consider if the bets we are making are good or not... (even if sbjj is wrong on this particular issue)

I actually think we all kind of agree here. Making bets too big for your bankroll is bad and will lead to your demise. We just disagree in that getting a lot of little wins and a big loss has that much effect as opposed winning 1.5 and then losing 1... it all washes out after a while.

[Svino]

Not even close to 1/5 of my bankroll.

How many units is your bankroll? Sorry if you've told us before, but I just don't have any context for a bet given in "units" without knowing that.

I think where we are disagreeing is on the question of what types of value it is possible to predict. Personally, I think it is easier to predict that GSP has at least a 90% chance of beating Hardy than it is to say that Cain has more than a 60% chance of beating Lesnar.

However, I agree that the slight dog -> to favorite bets can be some of the most profitable, and often justify pretty big bets. I'll do that as well if I'm feeling particularly sure of myself. I had 10 U on Shogun to beat Machida, and I definitely wish I had bet earlier and harder on Carwin to beat Mir.

[Ludo]

Jesus dude, you just do not get it. Yea, and if you hit every single one, you will be up a whopping 3 or 4 units. Man, you just do not seem to see it.

No, I get it perfectly.

Let me ask you this: I'm 5'6", 140 lbs., with minimal martial arts training. If I personally fought Mike Tyson in his prime and you were offered a line of -1000, would you bet it, or would you worry that I'd throw a haymaker that would KO him?

I assume you would bet it.

So there you go.

Yeah but Tyson wasn't fighting Matt Serra size midgets, so there you go

[SPX]

Yeah but Tyson wasn't fighting Matt Serra size midgets, so there you go

You see southbay, we already have enough assholes around here. We don't need anymore.