UFC 127

[Svino]

Anyone else notice that Tuschereerererer opened at +215 on 5dimes? Is it me or is that fucking nutty? I don't know who wins the fight but god damn he shouldn't be that big a dog to a guy who has lost like 6 fights in a row.

Are you sure that was real and not a typo at bestfightodds.com? I thought he started at -215.

[edman5555]

I bet that for 3u. Bit of a gamble but I think it is worth it at +200.

[edman5555]

Also BTW Tiequan Zhang vs Jason Reinhardt completes 1 full round is +200 on bodog.

[edman5555]

Anyone else notice that Tuschereerererer opened at +215 on 5dimes? Is it me or is that fucking nutty? I don't know who wins the fight but god damn he shouldn't be that big a dog to a guy who has lost like 6 fights in a row.

[edman5555]

Bodog is offering props for this. Some of the undercards have props posted too. No lines for them yet though.

[MMA_scientist]

With a little calculation you get that you have to be right almost 37 times in a row to get your 10 units.

If I made this exact same parlay, I would need it to hit 9 times in a row to clear 10u. 27 separate events. Considering the line on River and Siver getting the sub is -4800 each, I don't think it will be that difficult to hit 27- but I am not going to need to, because the odds are steeper than I usually play for these.

But I generally get better odds than this on these plays. I usually try to get it under -400, but that often requires me to force a bet at the end. But I can generally get it down to -600 pretty easily (at -600, it would only have to hit 4.5 in a row). Anyway, I totally understand the skepticism. Really though, the issue is the larger percentage of my bankroll I am risking, more so than the odds.

[trotterz]

I don't think any of those things would happen 1 in 50 times, much less 1 in 13. I understand that it is a lot of of risk for little reward... but it will add up. I am trying to not think about individual events. So the parlay will just keep going next time, where I will bet 10.83u, maybe next time I clear 2u, then 3 and then 4 and I start over after I double it (10u). The key is to not get wild and try to make it happen too fast, that is what I did last time. I am only betting things that I feel have actual value and are very very unlikely to lose. I am still going to lose sometimes (like I probably would have bet "not Forrest to sub Shogun" for example), but I think I can find the value and chip away if I narrow down the variables.

We'll see what happens. It won't be the first time I have been wrong. But I am doing it.

Exactly, I see why you are doing it. But forrest sub on shogun is a good example, cro cop sub of barry is another good one, guida sub of dos anjos by jaw breaking is another good example of place where you would have maybe loose.
I think the concept is not bad, but the reward is defenetely not big anought to be worth it. You have it the 3 of them only to get less than 1 unit out of 10. With a little calculation you get that you have to be right almost 37 times in a row to get your 10 units. In 37 fights, there is a lot of situation like forrest/shogun so IMO it's not worth the risk

[MMA_scientist]

I can see not doing parlay events at all like Trotterz says but I think I can make them work. I did it well with Cerrone last time. I think I may follow that format from now on if I feel anyone is a solid solid bet. Incase you forget I did a straight bet on Cerrone for a lot of money, then I parlayed him with my other picks for the night. I also threw in some straight bets. This time around, I might bet a good chunk on Bisping and throw him into a parlay or two as well. I consider it all "My bet on Bisping"

There is nothing inherently good or bad about parlays. They are not magic nor are the "sucker bets". You are just raising your bets. Some people try to tell you they are bad and will make you lose, it simply is not true. There is no difference between a parlay and straight bet, the only difference is that it does increase the bet size, making your bankroll more volitile. Your swings will be bigger, you will win more when you win, and lose more when you lose. I used to be against them because of the volatility, but I have embraced parlays recently as I try to get something going. But, mainly, I just want to speed up my returns or lose quickly. I don't want to die a slow death, I would rather just be out of the game. But that is not going to happen, because I am going to be wildly successful

[MMA_scientist]

Not a fan of that kind or parlays either. The problem with ''not fighter X by submission'' is that anybody could win by submission. Even if a fighter A is knocking out a fighter B, and the fighter B fall on his knees, then the first fighter jump on the back and lock a rear naked choke and the end result will be submission. I have seen that SO OFTEN. Another thing that could happend is crap like dos santos vs cro cop. cro cop could see anymore because of punches to the eye: end result (submission (punches). shit like that could scrap up your parlay

of course anything could happen. I expect to lose some, which is why I am not betting my entire bankroll on it. But I think I can win more often. We shall see. It is not limited to props though, I will bet anything I feel is a lock.

[edman5555]

I can see not doing parlay events at all like Trotterz says but I think I can make them work. I did it well with Cerrone last time. I think I may follow that format from now on if I feel anyone is a solid solid bet. Incase you forget I did a straight bet on Cerrone for a lot of money, then I parlayed him with my other picks for the night. I also threw in some straight bets. This time around, I might bet a good chunk on Bisping and throw him into a parlay or two as well. I consider it all "My bet on Bisping"

[MMA_scientist]

I don't think any of those things would happen 1 in 50 times, much less 1 in 13. I understand that it is a lot of of risk for little reward... but it will add up. I am trying to not think about individual events. So the parlay will just keep going next time, where I will bet 10.83u, maybe next time I clear 2u, then 3 and then 4 and I start over after I double it (10u). The key is to not get wild and try to make it happen too fast, that is what I did last time. I am only betting things that I feel have actual value and are very very unlikely to lose. I am still going to lose sometimes (like I probably would have bet "not Forrest to sub Shogun" for example), but I think I can find the value and chip away if I narrow down the variables.

We'll see what happens. It won't be the first time I have been wrong. But I am doing it.

[trotterz]

I am basically going to a 5u system for the year. I am going to double my bankroll up in 2011 or go down in flames. Basically, I am going to lay down 10u on each play, and parlay i until I clear 10u. Then take it down, re-divide and go. I am still going to make straight plays too, but they will be small. That's how I roll in 2011.

I was reading an investing book in B&N last night, and basically when the probability of success is higher, I need to be risking more.

10u to win a measly .83u on "not siver by submission/not rivera by submission/not fitch by submission". Prepare to witness the power of compounding.

Basically, only playing absolute locks in this thing, just like the failed never ending locks parlay (which really never failed, it lost because I used the bankroll on a non-lock in a moment of heated desperation).

Not a fan of that kind or parlays either. The problem with ''not fighter X by submission'' is that anybody could win by submission. Even if a fighter A is knocking out a fighter B, and the fighter B fall on his knees, then the first fighter jump on the back and lock a rear naked choke and the end result will be submission. I have seen that SO OFTEN. Another thing that could happend is crap like dos santos vs cro cop. cro cop could see anymore because of punches to the eye: end result (submission (punches). shit like that could scrap up your parlay

[edman5555]

Like for instance. 10u on bisping + all those parlays you made. Then you would have 13.5u or so going into your parlays instead of 10u. Pretty fancy.

[edman5555]

I don't know about those parlays Scientist. 10u to win .83u? I just calculated that out, you have to win 12 times to win 10u. If you lose 1 in 13 your total profit is .83u. Thats a lot to risk on so many different things not happening. I feel like that will fall through at some point. Maybe you could try juicing up your normal picks with those parlays. That will increase your payout for those by a lot more.

[MMA_scientist]

I am basically going to a 5u system for the year. I am going to double my bankroll up in 2011 or go down in flames. Basically, I am going to lay down 10u on each play, and parlay i until I clear 10u. Then take it down, re-divide and go. I am still going to make straight plays too, but they will be small. That's how I roll in 2011.

I was reading an investing book in B&N last night, and basically when the probability of success is higher, I need to be risking more.

10u to win a measly .83u on "not siver by submission/not rivera by submission/not fitch by submission". Prepare to witness the power of compounding.

Basically, only playing absolute locks in this thing, just like the failed never ending locks parlay (which really never failed, it lost because I used the bankroll on a non-lock in a moment of heated desperation).