Profile | Entries | Thread Author | Posts | Activity |
---|---|---|---|---|
Quote Originally Posted by rzagza: Welcome to what has happened to literally everyone at 5dimes in the last 5 months. Do yourself a favor and check your credit report and make sure no cards have been opened in your name. Because that's next. Get a fraud alert put on your credit report while you're at it. Trust me. can you check your pm request?
|
Jerseyboy89 | 13 |
|
|
i dont have the time to dig up the new ufc judging criteria but tds are now being valued less especially if no damage was done with that being said, only a rookie with little if any mma capping experience would claim "robbery" when miller landed signfigantly more punches and at a higher connect percentage rate in two of the three rounds https://www.fightmetric.com/fight-details/e15b393a27c07043 for future reference, these are what robberies looks like https://www.fightmetric.com/fight-details/f079cb2db8dbbf04 https://www.fightmetric.com/fight-details/e60e53bdc614a0af
|
MoneyBags402 | 3 |
|
|
i live bet serrano at +300
fight couldve gone either way even though fightmetrics tells a different story
|
Eddy_Winslow | 3 |
|
|
Quote Originally Posted by sawman: I would never question your picks. You know your stuff. I find it hard not to get swayed sometimes though Your Have to credit cowboy. He's had a couple quick loses to formidable opponents. But he keeps knocking down whatever is in his way. At the same time fighting twice as much as the average fighter. Maybe 4 times more than a veteran like him. i thought that this was a fight cowboy could get old overnight. six fights in a year and a half span, getting ktfo standing after coming off what most would believe to be a loss to benson and his wild lifestyle. i lost two units on the play and never questioned it and still dont. you shouldnt be gambling if youre doubting your plays after they lose. cote was somewhat competitive with thompson who would just wreck cerrone
|
JimGunn | 15 |
|
|
Quote Originally Posted by sawman: But I am choked I didn't scared off Cerrone from you and Q! i see some people on other sites looking back on their cote pick as being bad capping but not me. cerrone was pretty much coming off a tko loss, standing, and jumping to a higher weight class( donald claimed to weigh 176 on fight night) against a prior 185 with an iron chin and ko power. donald has also not done well against pressure fighters(barboza was beating him until he was kd and submitted by a jab) and fighting in canada was probably going to lose a close fight if it went to decision with cote being at plus money. sometimes fight history and metrics dont correlate with results
|
JimGunn | 15 |
|
|
i bought him at +157. have action plays on the ko prop 1,2 and 3 also
|
rzagza | 6 |
|
|
well done, jim
take a look at john jackson next weekend. hes a very live dog at +790. i was on the dallas jr play as well and luckily hedged with the draw at +2800
|
JimGunn | 8 |
|
|
the only way to end eye pokes and fence grabbing is to give an immediate one point deduction and on a second occurance a dq.
the eye poke in the mitrione fight shouldve resulted in a dq |
sawman | 9 |
|
|
Quote Originally Posted by NickCapone: Lol set my self up for that one. But in my def Mendes was a short replacement barley had a camp and time to prepare. He did dominate the 1st round with his wrestling tho. a month before the fight mendes was in one of those iron man type competitons i believe in lake tahoe. i thought he took a big adrenaline dump right before round one and thats why he had nothing left. im on hendricks tonight and might live bet thompson after johhny takes him down. these ufc judges are just garbage right now and i could see hendricks getting robbed if it does go to the cards |
rzagza | 14 |
|
|
Quote Originally Posted by NickCapone: Thats enough to win fights. All Conor has is striking too. In same cases yes.. But not when your matched up against an NCAA All American division 1 wrestler https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chad_Mendes
|
rzagza | 14 |
|
|
agreed.
taken down five times by matt brown who does not possess the on punch power that hendricks has nor the wrestling pedigree
|
rzagza | 14 |
|
|
i had larkin and no problem with that decision. was even able to hedge out some
the lawler decision was just horrible. lawler himself admitted in the postfight interview that his corner said that he needed to win the last two rounds and there is no way robbie won the fourth round visibly hurt from a condit left hook followed by a carlos right hand behind lawlers left ear which threw off his equilibrium https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APw2P5qK7rA fourth round saw robbie land 6 of 18 to condits 47 of 98 https://www.fightmetric.com/fight-details/f079cb2db8dbbf04 |
WalshyMMA | 21 |
|
|
Quote Originally Posted by StackMyLoot: LOL UFC don't judge the fights the Nevada State Athletic Commission does don't you think if the judges was on UFC payroll their would be alot of corruption going on if you had to worry about Dana White being your boss? LOL what does the NSAC have to do with the fact that lawler statistically did not win the third round...the whole premise for those that are trying to justify that robbie won the fight? lawler opened as a +400 to start the fifth round what do you not understand about that? or i guess you want to make some stupid presumption that you know more about probablilties in live betting than the traders at williamhill and bet365 |
WalshyMMA | 21 |
|
|
Quote Originally Posted by sawman: All the judges were all thinking the same thing. The only round they disagreed on was Rd 3. 1 Carlos 2 Robbie 4 Carlos 5 Robbie the people that think lawler won are grabbing at anything to justify the bad decision unless there is a knockdown/td or a fighter is visibly hurt, said fighter should not lose the round(third) when he throws three times as many punches(octogon control) and lands twice as many signifigant strikes before the fifth round started, robbie lawler was offered as a +400(bet365 traders being the smartest guys in the room) and got bet up to +600. with one round remaining, these type of odds suggest a minimum of a two point round or a lawler finish in order for robbie to win or push the fight, both of which did not happen it was another bad ufc decision |
WalshyMMA | 21 |
|
|
https://www.fightmetric.com/fight-details/f079cb2db8dbbf04
condit outhrowing and outlanding lawler by a 2-1 margin in rounds 1,3 and 4 with no td or kds by robbie in either round lawler has no case for winning any of those three rounds and his only argument in that the rounds he won were 10-8 rounds which is also ridiculous |
Ferrari29 | 21 |
|
|
Quote Originally Posted by Ferrari29: Terrible outsrikes a guy 4-1 and losses!!!! not 4/1 but definately outthrew and outlanded at a significant number i had it condit 1,3 and 4 |
Ferrari29 | 21 |
|
|
well done, jim
|
JimGunn | 8 |
|
|
nice hit
rockhold got as high as +400 in live betting in the first round
|
sharpstick | 36 |
|
|
i am going to wait until after weedman takes rockhold down in the opening three minutes before live betting on luke
|
sharpstick | 36 |
|
|
Quote Originally Posted by Ferrari29: esparza is a very small 115 and valerie is big at the weight. took 135 davis the distance. if she can get joanna down, like claudia was able to, she has a chance.and with live betting. there might be a hedge possibilitiy when getting +1350 I like Valerie BUT she fought Davis 8 years ago, isn't close to Claudia's TD game, and Penned who is a ground girl couldn't sniff it against Joanna. Tell me how a striker by trade is suddenly gonna change??? I think Holm has a better chance!!! i think holm has far less a chance as rousey standup is as good or better. its completely unknown how much joannas ground game has improved and if she can even beat the bigger letormuea on the ground if the fight should get there laying -2000 on a fighter with an unproven gorund game is nuts
|
Chewy5394 | 19 |
|
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so. It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly. Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality. Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it. As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.