Slump buster

[MMA_scientist]

Re: Slump buster

^^ I am like the Frank Mir of mma betting. Anytime something goes wrong, I look for a way to change my regimen to make me unbeatable.


i don't see anything on the near horizon that is parlay worthy anyway, so it will be moot for a while.

But you guys might have set me straight here. I might flip it around, 40u for regular play, and 10u for project play (since I wiped out my entire parlay project bankroll on the night of doom).

[Svino]

Re: Slump buster

Also, if you didn't catch it, his bankroll was 500u at the time. So 25u is only 5%. You've never risked 5% of your bankroll on a fight?

Yeah, I also tend to fall into the catch of assuming 1U = 1%. Honestly, a bet of only 5% on a heavy favorite is pretty low-risk.

Let me just go back to something sbjj and luke said that I agree with though: if you are betting on heavy favorites in MMA constantly then there's probably something wrong. I don't do more than a few a year. It's simply because really steep lines are rare to begin with, so steep lines with discernible value are doubly rare, and steep lines where the value is on the favorite are probably twice as rare as that.

On the other hand, if these pros really got together and put the word out that "serious bettors don't bet heavy favorites", maybe they could get enough people to follow them and pull down the lines. Then we could find value on all the favs and win big money. sbjj is doing his part, so I approve.

[Svino]

Re: Slump buster

^^ I am like the Frank Mir of mma betting.

LOL

[sbjj]

Re: Slump buster

That guy that SPX posted is probably bust right now.

No

He lost 25 units on GSP, so he loaded up double on the rematch to win back 10 units...Priceless.

Where does it say this? Oh, wait, it doesn't. . .

Also, if you didn't catch it, his bankroll was 500u at the time. So 25u is only 5%. You've never risked 5% of your bankroll on a fight?

LOL, it is in his post dude. Read it again. He says he lost 25 units on GSP, and is betting 49 units on the rematch. I am assuming the line he got in at was around -400 on the rematch.

[sbjj]

Re: Slump buster

^^^ I think he may have come to Performify's aid, basically saying that we all go through slumps, but I don't think he knows him personally.

I would have not doubt that he stuck up for Performity. Performity would make decent picks and then fuck it all up with one stupid ass bet on a heavy favorite. Good God, all you have to do is look at him to see how betting heavy faves can screw up a dudes bankroll.

[sbjj]

Re: Slump buster

He actually states he has 40 units on GSP @ -490 afetr losing 25 units on him in the first fight. So he is essentually risking 10% of his bankroll after already losing 5% of it to try to win back less than 2% of his bankroll. HHHHMMMMM! Sounds brilliant. I guess he just found it too hard to find a -150 or lower fight out there to bet on.

[sbjj]

Re: Slump buster

That guy that SPX posted is probably bust right now.

No

He lost 25 units on GSP, so he loaded up double on the rematch to win back 10 units...Priceless.

Where does it say this? Oh, wait, it doesn't. . .

Also, if you didn't catch it, his bankroll was 500u at the time. So 25u is only 5%. You've never risked 5% of your bankroll on a fight?

Not to increase my bankroll by a mere half of one percent. Risk vs. Reward.

[SPX]

Re: Slump buster

He actually states he has 40 units on GSP @ -490 after losing 25 units on him in the first fight.

I actually got that PM from him on 1/15/2010. So the fight he'd be referring to is the GSP/Hardy fight, long after GSP/Serra I and II. These events are not connected. He simply believed that GSP was going to easily beat Hardy and that even at -490 there was a ton of value, and he capitalized on it.

And we all know how that fight turned out.

[sbjj]

Re: Slump buster

He actually states he has 40 units on GSP @ -490 after losing 25 units on him in the first fight.

I actually got that PM from him on 1/15/2010. So the fight he'd be referring to is the GSP/Hardy fight, long after GSP/Serra I and II. These events are not connected. He simply believed that GSP was going to easily beat Hardy and that even at -490 there was a ton of value, and he capitalized on it.

And we all know how that fight turned out.

Hell yea he did. He risked 10% of his bankroll to add less than 2% to his bankroll. I mean, you could just bet GSP every fight @ -400 or higher and more than likely you will win money(the guy is that good)...but at that price, you are gonna win what...3 or 4 units a year on him.

[SPX]

Re: Slump buster

Hell yea he did. He risked 10% of his bankroll to add less than 2% to his bankroll. I mean, you could just bet GSP every fight @ -400 or higher and more than likely you will win money(the guy is that good)...but at that price, you are gonna win what...3 or 4 units a year on him.

I guess I think 2% is a pretty big increase, and is worth a 10% risk if the possiblity of winning is tremendous.

I think the important point is not bet all high lines . . . but to bet -500 (or whatever) fights when they should really be -900.

[edman5555]

Re: Slump buster

I can't see betting huge fav's all the time...The problem is the low return and high risk of "something" happening. I do it every now and then but i generally don't go over -250 or so. I'd rather look for value in dogs, they seem to win almost as much as favorites. Which is the KEY. Dogs win almost as much as favorites..

As for the "something" I am referring to, I'll give you some examples.

A fighter coming in injured and not telling anybody. His performance will be affected.

A fighter not being in shape. This shit happens a lot, we all know it.

A freak accident. There have been guys that have literally slipped on the budweiser logo. I think Jason Macdonald?? was going for a takedown on John Salter and stepped in wrong and broke his leg..remember that?

The fact that one punch can end a fight.

A fighter developing new skills he never had before...Doerksen getting submitted by C.B. Dolloway..who was expecting that?

A guy not following the most logical path to victory..Koscheck trying to stand up with guys and getting KO'd. Serra trying to box with the bigger, Professional boxer Chris Lytle. That was stupid and he lost.

Guys who decide to fight just to be entertaining..

Fedor deciding to leap into Werdums guard?

Serra punching GSP behind the ear.

The problem with betting A LOT of big favorites is that the return is so small you have to be an amazing picker to win in the long run.

Lets say you bet 10 bets at -500. 100 bucks each.

that is 100 to win 20.

You will have to bet 1000 to win 200.

After you lose two bets your in the hole. Check my math, I am pretty sure I am right. So you have to have an 80% pick rate. That is really really hard.

On top of all the reasons I mentioned before for why a fight can go bad there is also the fact that sometimes all of us will straight up be WRONG. We are not mma fighters, hell even they are wrong a lot of the time. Read pros pick before any big fight. THEY ARE NEVER IN AGREEMENT.

Well thats what I think. For the record I am way down right now but I have been chasing and betting like an idiot. Or maybe I just don't know enough about MMA. I'm not sure.

[SPX]

Re: Slump buster

Which is the KEY. Dogs win almost as much as favorites.

I can't remember who it was, but I know this was looked into at one point and it was determined that, on average, dogs win about 30% of the time. So out of 10 fights, dogs should win 3 times and faves should win 7 times.

So you have to have an 80% pick rate. That is really really hard.

I'm not sure it's that hard when we're talking about -500 favorites. I think you just have to be educated. WHY has a line been set to -500?

Let me give you an example of a -500 bet I recently bet: Megumi Fujii vs Carla Esparzaa.

Fujii has been called by some the best pound-for-pound female fighter in the world. In fact, she's been called the best pound-for-pound fighter PERIOD. Not female fighter . . . just fighter. Going into the Esparzaa fight, she had a perfect 20-0 record with a finish rate of something like 88%. She is a black belt in Judo and BJJ and has either won or performed very respectably in judo, sambo, and BJJ competitions. (She is Japan National Sambo and BJJ champ. She also has placed third at ADCC.) She is the Fedor of the 115 lb. women's division (only truly undefeated).

Esparzaa, on the other hand, was 3-0 going into the fight. She also took the fight on short notice. She did have legit wrestling credentials and at least held wins over fighters with winning records, but had very little experience in the sport and had never faced a submission master like Fujii. It was, in essence, like taking a promising young WW fighter and making him fight GSP.

In my opinion, taking -500 on a fight like this is a no-brainer. It would truly take a freak occurrence to lose and I think the odds are a lot less likely than 20%.

Now on the other hand, there have been a lot of high lines that never deserved to be. Like Larson vs Pierce, for instance. I'm sure you can come up with a few more examples of your own.

But I think the key is not betting big favorites "all the time" as you say, but to bet big favorites who deserve to be BIGGER favorites than they already are.

[MMA_scientist]

Re: Slump buster

^^ I totally agree. I think it is easier to win more that 80% of your bets @ -400 than it is to win more than 50% at even odds.

You have -500 lines where it is a legit fighter against a legit fighter (Sonnen/Silva was in that ballpark). #1 should not be -500 to #2. Same thing with GSP/Koscheck IMO. I don't make -400 bets where there are two top guys involved.

But then you have a lot of fights like Phil Davis or Daniel Cormier (who could probably beat at least 4 or 5 top 10 guys right now) at -500 against another guy that does not have a big name. In those cases, I will take the Cormier's of the world @ -400. Then you have the legit fighter vs. scrub matchups like Couture/Toney or Sylvia/Pudz or Mousasi/Goodridge... those fights scream to be bet even at deep odds.

I don't know, the more I think about it... you just can't pick any old deep odds fight, but I think I could go a long time, very long picking -500 fights and never losing, much more than 5:1 tbh. And that is how I used to bet. I would take anything up to -400, and I used to go one 10-1 streajs ALL the time. Since each win ratchets up your unit size, you can bak pretty quickly this way.

In short, I am going back to the favorites. You can't talk me out of it.

[edman5555]

Re: Slump buster

Well I think it is all subjective..You can bet at any line. It just comes down to how confident you are the guy will win Vs. The payout.

[sbjj]

Re: Slump buster

I can't see betting huge fav's all the time...The problem is the low return and high risk of "something" happening. I do it every now and then but i generally don't go over -250 or so. I'd rather look for value in dogs, they seem to win almost as much as favorites. Which is the KEY. Dogs win almost as much as favorites..

As for the "something" I am referring to, I'll give you some examples.

A fighter coming in injured and not telling anybody. His performance will be affected.

A fighter not being in shape. This shit happens a lot, we all know it.

A freak accident. There have been guys that have literally slipped on the budweiser logo. I think Jason Macdonald?? was going for a takedown on John Salter and stepped in wrong and broke his leg..remember that?

The fact that one punch can end a fight.

A fighter developing new skills he never had before...Doerksen getting submitted by C.B. Dolloway..who was expecting that?

A guy not following the most logical path to victory..Koscheck trying to stand up with guys and getting KO'd. Serra trying to box with the bigger, Professional boxer Chris Lytle. That was stupid and he lost.

Guys who decide to fight just to be entertaining..

Fedor deciding to leap into Werdums guard?

Serra punching GSP behind the ear.

The problem with betting A LOT of big favorites is that the return is so small you have to be an amazing picker to win in the long run.

Lets say you bet 10 bets at -500. 100 bucks each.

that is 100 to win 20.

You will have to bet 1000 to win 200.

After you lose two bets your in the hole. Check my math, I am pretty sure I am right. So you have to have an 80% pick rate. That is really really hard.

On top of all the reasons I mentioned before for why a fight can go bad there is also the fact that sometimes all of us will straight up be WRONG. We are not mma fighters, hell even they are wrong a lot of the time. Read pros pick before any big fight. THEY ARE NEVER IN AGREEMENT.

Well thats what I think. For the record I am way down right now but I have been chasing and betting like an idiot. Or maybe I just don't know enough about MMA. I'm not sure.

Very well said. if you bet a -500 or -600 fighter every month(5 or 6 units at a time) and hit 11 of them for the year, you net 5 units for the year...seriously, that is ridiculous. That is like a 5% return for the year(assuming a 100unit bankroll). Jesus, just put your money in a conservative high yield stock with a 6% dividend. If you only hit 10 of the 12 fights, you net nothing. It just really makes no sense IMO.

And I think you would be lucky to win 11 of 12 big favorites...And the return is STILL not worth it.