Posted:
#26
Quote Originally Posted by sharpstick:
Bellator 139 & UFC UFN 70 Plays
Posted:
#29
Quote Originally Posted by MR219:
This is not a weight class issue. This is purely a mental thing with Larkin. He freezes and becomes completely flustered when he is pressured and does not know how to change up his gameplan mid-fight when this occurs. As a result, he just sort of back pedals and does not throw any offence. Until he shows that he can handle this from a mental stand point, he is not someone I would trust laying 2 to 1 juice with.
im not laying 2-1 either as larkins cardio is untested at the weight.
lorenzs problem at 185 was that he did not have the power or strength to keep guys off of him and i dont think hell have that problem at 170
santiago is really nothing more than a poor mans version of chris leben and if larkin can keep this on the feet he should win. im hoping that ponzinibbio gets an early take down so i can live bet lornez at even money.
Posted:
#32
Quote Originally Posted by RLeith35:
What do u think about playing the UN 2.5 in Larkin fight?
What do u think about playing the UN 2.5 in Larkin fight?
This over under is more of a vote on who you are winning. Ponzi has only had decisions in 4 of 22 fights. Larkin has gone to decision in 9 of his 19 fights. So the over is a vote for larkin and under is for ponzi. If you're on the under, it would make more sense to take ponzi because he as +175. Further, ponzi inside distance is +400 and that's a steal since it's almost guaranteed that if he wins, it comes by finish.
, 
Posted:
#35
Quote Originally Posted by Qncyk1:
im not laying 2-1 either as larkins cardio is untested at the weight.
lorenzs problem at 185 was that he did not have the power or strength to keep guys off of him and i dont think hell have that problem at 170
santiago is really nothing more than a poor mans version of chris leben and if larkin can keep this on the feet he should win. im hoping that ponzinibbio gets an early take down so i can live bet lornez at even money.
Well, Carmont & Brunson laid and prayed him. Queen Mo, Costa & Tavares pressured him and he acted as I described above.
Santiago is much more of a complete fighter than Leben. Not a great comparison IMO.
Like I said, Ponzinibbio will not be going in for takedowns. It is not his style of fighting. The only way I see you getting even money on Larkin in fight is if he clearly drops round 1.
Posted:
#36
Quote Originally Posted by RLeith35:
What do u think about playing the UN 2.5 in Larkin fight?
What do u think about playing the UN 2.5 in Larkin fight?
Both guys typically have good chins and neither have shown the ability to get consistent stoppage victories at the high test level of MMA so I would lean over. Personally, I am passing on the total for this fight. BOL with whatever you decide. 
Posted:
#37
Quote Originally Posted by whitebelt:
This over under is more of a vote on who you are winning. Ponzi has only had decisions in 4 of 22 fights. Larkin has gone to decision in 9 of his 19 fights. So the over is a vote for larkin and under is for ponzi. If you're on the under, it would make more sense to take ponzi because he as +175. Further, ponzi inside distance is +400 and that's a steal since it's almost guaranteed that if he wins, it comes by finish.
This over under is more of a vote on who you are winning. Ponzi has only had decisions in 4 of 22 fights. Larkin has gone to decision in 9 of his 19 fights. So the over is a vote for larkin and under is for ponzi. If you're on the under, it would make more sense to take ponzi because he as +175. Further, ponzi inside distance is +400 and that's a steal since it's almost guaranteed that if he wins, it comes by finish.
Like I said to you before, I think you give way too much credit to people's finishing ability before they have reached the UFC. The level of competition some of these guys have faced is flat out pathetic.
For example, look at someone like Joe Merritt. He has 6 stoppage victories but he has fought in some gawd awful promotions where they literally pick a person's opponent from the crowd. A fighter padding his record by knocking out people with records of 4-3, 0-4, 5-10, 0-2, 0-2 is not impressive. You need to evaluate this information more closely while you are capping so that you don't make silly conclusions like thinking that Merritt is going to KO someone with the experience of Cowboy Oliviera because they have a 100% finishing rate.
Posted:
#38
Quote Originally Posted by MR219:
Well, Carmont & Brunson laid and prayed him. Queen Mo, Costa & Tavares pressured him and he acted as I described above.
Santiago is much more of a complete fighter than Leben. Not a great comparison IMO.
Like I said, Ponzinibbio will not be going in for takedowns. It is not his style of fighting. The only way I see you getting even money on Larkin in fight is if he clearly drops round 1.
im hoping that ponzi goes for the td and gets it in the first round. i think larken clearly has the better striking and if he doesnt gas is eventually going to catch him. santaigo tends to wing and telegraph his punches and lorenz are straight set up with a good jab. as for the leben comparason i was referring to their lunging when they strike. no set up, no lateral movement, just come forward walking and swinging with wild wide punches. they are not even hooks.
a good counterpuncher is going to time him, catch him and ko him.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gl5J51_1REM
Posted:
#39
Quote Originally Posted by MR219:
Quote Originally Posted by whitebelt:
This over under is more of a vote on who you are winning. Ponzi has only had decisions in 4 of 22 fights. Larkin has gone to decision in 9 of his 19 fights. So the over is a vote for larkin and under is for ponzi. If you're on the under, it would make more sense to take ponzi because he as +175. Further, ponzi inside distance is +400 and that's a steal since it's almost guaranteed that if he wins, it comes by finish.
Like I said to you before, I think you give way too much credit to people's finishing ability before they have reached the UFC. The level of competition some of these guys have faced is flat out pathetic. For example, look at someone like Joe Merritt. He has 6 stoppage victories but he has fought in some gawd awful promotions where they literally pick a person's opponent from the crowd. A fighter padding his record by knocking out people with records of 4-3, 0-4, 5-10, 0-2, 0-2 is not impressive. You need to evaluate this information more closely while you are capping so that you don't make silly conclusions like thinking that Merritt is going to KO someone with the experience of Cowboy Oliviera because they have a 100% finishing rate.This over under is more of a vote on who you are winning. Ponzi has only had decisions in 4 of 22 fights. Larkin has gone to decision in 9 of his 19 fights. So the over is a vote for larkin and under is for ponzi. If you're on the under, it would make more sense to take ponzi because he as +175. Further, ponzi inside distance is +400 and that's a steal since it's almost guaranteed that if he wins, it comes by finish.
I didn't say I'm taking him because he finished 6 guys. I'm taking him because I watched his fights and his striking looks good. I agree that winning at a regional level is not the same. But he looked good in his RFA fight in his last outing. You act like he's stepping up against some UFC veteran. He isn't. He's fighting Oliveira, whose 1-1 in a short career, and didn't look spectacular against Noons. This is also his first trip outside of Brazil. He's also been fighting so actively, his durability could be a factor. At +375 he's got value. And you discount finishing rates so much. You know how often judges get the winners wrong... There's always added value in a guy who keeps it out of their hands. It's also valuable information if you like prop bets.
Posted:
#41
Quote Originally Posted by Qncyk1:
im hoping that ponzi goes for the td and gets it in the first round. i think larken clearly has the better striking and if he doesnt gas is eventually going to catch him. santaigo tends to wing and telegraph his punches and lorenz are straight set up with a good jab. as for the leben comparason i was referring to their lunging when they strike. no set up, no lateral movement, just come forward walking and swinging with wild wide punches. they are not even hooks.
a good counterpuncher is going to time him, catch him and ko him.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gl5J51_1REM
Fair enough
BOL tonight!
Posted:
#42
Quote Originally Posted by whitebelt:
Like I said to you before, I think you give way too much credit to people's finishing ability before they have reached the UFC. The level of competition some of these guys have faced is flat out pathetic. For example, look at someone like Joe Merritt. He has 6 stoppage victories but he has fought in some gawd awful promotions where they literally pick a person's opponent from the crowd. A fighter padding his record by knocking out people with records of 4-3, 0-4, 5-10, 0-2, 0-2 is not impressive. You need to evaluate this information more closely while you are capping so that you don't make silly conclusions like thinking that Merritt is going to KO someone with the experience of Cowboy Oliviera because they have a 100% finishing rate.
I didn't say I'm taking him because he finished 6 guys. I'm taking him because I watched his fights and his striking looks good. I agree that winning at a regional level is not the same. But he looked good in his RFA fight in his last outing. You act like he's stepping up against some UFC veteran. He isn't. He's fighting Oliveira, whose 1-1 in a short career, and didn't look spectacular against Noons. This is also his first trip outside of Brazil. He's also been fighting so actively, his durability could be a factor. At +375 he's got value. And you discount finishing rates so much. You know how often judges get the winners wrong... There's always added value in a guy who keeps it out of their hands. It's also valuable information if you like prop bets.
Like I said to you before, I think you give way too much credit to people's finishing ability before they have reached the UFC. The level of competition some of these guys have faced is flat out pathetic. For example, look at someone like Joe Merritt. He has 6 stoppage victories but he has fought in some gawd awful promotions where they literally pick a person's opponent from the crowd. A fighter padding his record by knocking out people with records of 4-3, 0-4, 5-10, 0-2, 0-2 is not impressive. You need to evaluate this information more closely while you are capping so that you don't make silly conclusions like thinking that Merritt is going to KO someone with the experience of Cowboy Oliviera because they have a 100% finishing rate.
I didn't say I'm taking him because he finished 6 guys. I'm taking him because I watched his fights and his striking looks good. I agree that winning at a regional level is not the same. But he looked good in his RFA fight in his last outing. You act like he's stepping up against some UFC veteran. He isn't. He's fighting Oliveira, whose 1-1 in a short career, and didn't look spectacular against Noons. This is also his first trip outside of Brazil. He's also been fighting so actively, his durability could be a factor. At +375 he's got value. And you discount finishing rates so much. You know how often judges get the winners wrong... There's always added value in a guy who keeps it out of their hands. It's also valuable information if you like prop bets.
I get what you are saying, but Merritt looking good has as much to do with who he was fighting. He will not be able to pull off those type of techniques this quickly in his career against proven competitors. Cowboy's strength of competition is far superior.
Yes, Noons landed some good shots in the first 30 seconds while Cowboy was getting into the flow of the fight, but the second he found his opening, he exploded and finished.
Posted:
#43
Quote Originally Posted by whitebelt:
Or over unders... Which was the question I was answering. If you think finish rates should be ignored when evaluating over unders, I can't help you.
pOr over unders... Which was the question I was answering. If you think finish rates should be ignored when evaluating over unders, I can't help you.
Of course finishing rates are something to consider, but giving equal weight to someone like Joe Merritt's finishes compared to some like Shane Carwin who consistently finished in the UFC is just not the same. You need to take all the information and simply evaluate it for what it is and then make an informed decision.
Posted:
#45
Quote Originally Posted by whitebelt:
This over under is more of a vote on who you are winning. Ponzi has only had decisions in 4 of 22 fights. Larkin has gone to decision in 9 of his 19 fights. So the over is a vote for larkin and under is for ponzi. If you're on the under, it would make more sense to take ponzi because he as +175. Further, ponzi inside distance is +400 and that's a steal since it's almost guaranteed that if he wins, it comes by finish.
This over under is more of a vote on who you are winning. Ponzi has only had decisions in 4 of 22 fights. Larkin has gone to decision in 9 of his 19 fights. So the over is a vote for larkin and under is for ponzi. If you're on the under, it would make more sense to take ponzi because he as +175. Further, ponzi inside distance is +400 and that's a steal since it's almost guaranteed that if he wins, it comes by finish.
i wouldnt take into consideration most of his previous 18 stoppages when they come against guys like diego viera, lucas nascimento, felipe santos, lucas funas or diego lopez
like mr219 says, some if not most of the wins and fight metrics on the small and obscure fight leagues are virtually worthless for capping ufc and even bellator fights
Posted:
#47
Quote Originally Posted by whitebelt:
This over under is more of a vote on who you are winning. Ponzi has only had decisions in 4 of 22 fights. Larkin has gone to decision in 9 of his 19 fights. So the over is a vote for larkin and under is for ponzi. If you're on the under, it would make more sense to take ponzi because he as +175. Further, ponzi inside distance is +400 and that's a steal since it's almost guaranteed that if he wins, it comes by finish.
This over under is more of a vote on who you are winning. Ponzi has only had decisions in 4 of 22 fights. Larkin has gone to decision in 9 of his 19 fights. So the over is a vote for larkin and under is for ponzi. If you're on the under, it would make more sense to take ponzi because he as +175. Further, ponzi inside distance is +400 and that's a steal since it's almost guaranteed that if he wins, it comes by finish.
That's terrible logic that MR219 already picked apart. Who cares what they've done against bums in different promotions six years ago?
And with your terrible logic, how does 9 decisions in 19 fights lean to the over for Larkin? Elementary math says he goes to a decision LESS than he finishes fights....
I guess that is why you're struggling to hit the 80% you touted in your opening thread......
Posted:
#50
So you believe careers are irrelevant outside of UFC history, but you're more than happy to look at fights outside of the UFC for the purposes of flaming. Stop being cunty and write something substantive than people want to read, though it may not give you the same fuzzy feelings of hate.
Hot Forum Topics
