I think Marquardt is a complete lock

[JamesKim]

So I see a lot of people betting on Saffiedine as if he has value. I think Marquardt will absolutely annihilate Saffiedine, but let's see some arguments otherwise. I already bet and Marquardt is my single biggest bet ever, surpassing my previous largest bet on Okami by quite a margin.

Marquardt is the bigger fighter of the two, and has shown no cardio issues from the weight cut in the woodley fight which probably had a higher pace than the Tarec fight will be. Marquardt is the better wrestler and a better grappler, infact Tarec is still only a blue belt in BJJ while Marquardt is a 15 year veteran black belt. Although Tarec has good striking, he doesn't have the power to hurt Marquardt and Marquardt is the better striker. Marquardt can KTFO Tarec at any moment in the fight, and will not be taken down by Tarec. Marquardt can take Tarec down with skill and size whenever he feels like it. Marquardt will dominate Tarec in the clinch and he will outmuscle him everywhere. He also hasn't shown any signs of fading and seems to have no personal troubles. Saffiedine admitted that nerves got to him during the Woodley fight, how is he gonna stop the nerves from getting to him in the biggest match of his career against the most intimidating opponent he has ever faced?

How does Tarec "the can beater" possibly beat Nate "the great"? In the last 10 years, Marquardt's losses were to Yushin, Chael and Anderson. He also lost to Thales, but it was a split decision loss after LOSING 2 POINTS to penalties. He whooped dat ass. Nate is going to absolutely crush Saffiedine. I cap him as a 95%+ favorite, he ain't losing.

[MD]

I'll never forget the utter shame I felt for him when he lost to Okami. It always stays in my mind. I do believe that he's one of the most underrated fighters in MMA today, however. The guy is very good. Has more of a chance to make waves than Melendez, I'm tempted to say. At 185, he was an absolute force; at 170, I'm looking forward to seeing how far he can go.

[JamesKim]

I'll never forget the utter shame I felt for him when he lost to Okami. It always stays in my mind. I do believe that he's one of the most underrated fighters in MMA today, however. The guy is very good. Has more of a chance to make waves than Melendez, I'm tempted to say. At 185, he was an absolute force; at 170, I'm looking forward to seeing how far he can go.

I don't think there's any shame in losing to Okami, I was in disbelief when I saw the Okami vs Belcher odds being close to even. Some fighters are so underrated its criminal, it's an insult to Marquardt that he's only -300 against someone who might or might not cut as a gatekeeper in the UFC.

[Grabaka]

So I see a lot of people betting on Saffiedine as if he has value. I think Marquardt will absolutely annihilate Saffiedine, but let's see some arguments otherwise. I already bet and Marquardt is my single biggest bet ever, surpassing my previous largest bet on Okami by quite a margin.

Marquardt is the bigger fighter of the two, and has shown no cardio issues from the weight cut in the woodley fight which probably had a higher pace than the Tarec fight will be. Marquardt is the better wrestler and a better grappler, infact Tarec is still only a blue belt in BJJ while Marquardt is a 15 year veteran black belt. Although Tarec has good striking, he doesn't have the power to hurt Marquardt and Marquardt is the better striker. Marquardt can KTFO Tarec at any moment in the fight, and will not be taken down by Tarec. Marquardt can take Tarec down with skill and size whenever he feels like it. Marquardt will dominate Tarec in the clinch and he will outmuscle him everywhere. He also hasn't shown any signs of fading and seems to have no personal troubles. Saffiedine admitted that nerves got to him during the Woodley fight, how is he gonna stop the nerves from getting to him in the biggest match of his career against the most intimidating opponent he has ever faced?

How does Tarec "the can beater" possibly beat Nate "the great"? In the last 10 years, Marquardt's losses were to Yushin, Chael and Anderson. He also lost to Thales, but it was a split decision loss after LOSING 2 POINTS to penalties. He whooped dat ass. Nate is going to absolutely crush Saffiedine. I cap him as a 95%+ favorite, he ain't losing.

I bet on Saff and it might be a bad bet but you, sir, are crazy.

[JamesKim]

I bet on Saff and it might be a bad bet but you, sir, are crazy.

Sometimes I feel that fights involving two fighters of somewhat close competitive skills can have a much bigger favorite than a fight with fighters with skill levels that are much further apart. Provided that the underdog in the fight with the bigger skill gap has an open path to victory. Tarec is not a bad fighter, but the fact of the matter is he has no known path of victory in this fight. There is nothing he can do that Marquardt can't outdo him in, AND he has no x-factors like an amazing finishing ability either or a skillset that can turn the fight around instantly.

I think the best way I can explain it is like JDS vs Nelson and a potential matchup with JDS vs Werdum 2. Werdum is by far the better fighter compared to Nelson, it's a fact. His overall skills are much better, but I'd still cap him as a much bigger underdog against JDS than Nelson. Werdum has absolutely no path of victory against JDS, while Nelson has a small, but very possible path of victory. Werdum doesn't have the skills to take JDS down, and doesn't have the striking abilities to last against JDS. He also lacks the one punch KO power needed to starch someone with a good chin like JDS. His one X-factor of a submission victory is useless if he can't get JDS to grapple. Nelson has the ability to survive on the feet and his ability to KO if he connects makes him much less of an underdog. I'd give Werdum close to 0 chance of a victory against JDS, while I'd give Nelson a small chance, even though Werdum is so much better than Nelson.

Tarec has no way to win this fight. He can't keep this fight standing even if he somehow finds success in striking, and he won't oustrike Marquardt from what we've seen out of those two so far. He has a disadvantage in every single physical aspect, including cardio in my opinion. The only close to even thing that I can see is speed. He won't outgrapple Marquardt, too inexperienced and too small compared to Marquardt. He won't be able to clinch with Marquardt either. He lacks the kind of power needed to put Marquardt away and the chances of him submitting Marquardt is pretty much nil.

So even if Tarec is a descent fighter, I can't possibly see a way for him to win. I see no path of victory, so for me this play is a complete lock. The only reason why Okami wasn't a lock for me against Belcher was the fact that Belcher has shown some power and ability to finish, while Okami has shown a shaky chin at times. I still didn't think it was significant enough of a factor to matter and I bet huge. Marquardt however, is an absolute lockdown for me.

[Grabaka]

Sometimes I feel that fights involving two fighters of somewhat close competitive skills can have a much bigger favorite than a fight with fighters with skill levels that are much further apart. Provided that the underdog in the fight with the bigger skill gap has an open path to victory. Tarec is not a bad fighter, but the fact of the matter is he has no known path of victory in this fight. There is nothing he can do that Marquardt can't outdo him in, AND he has no x-factors like an amazing finishing ability either or a skillset that can turn the fight around instantly.

I think the best way I can explain it is like JDS vs Nelson and a potential matchup with JDS vs Werdum 2. Werdum is by far the better fighter compared to Nelson, it's a fact. His overall skills are much better, but I'd still cap him as a much bigger underdog against JDS than Nelson. Werdum has absolutely no path of victory against JDS, while Nelson has a small, but very possible path of victory. Werdum doesn't have the skills to take JDS down, and doesn't have the striking abilities to last against JDS. He also lacks the one punch KO power needed to starch someone with a good chin like JDS. His one X-factor of a submission victory is useless if he can't get JDS to grapple. Nelson has the ability to survive on the feet and his ability to KO if he connects makes him much less of an underdog. I'd give Werdum close to 0 chance of a victory against JDS, while I'd give Nelson a small chance, even though Werdum is so much better than Nelson.

Tarec has no way to win this fight. He can't keep this fight standing even if he somehow finds success in striking, and he won't oustrike Marquardt from what we've seen out of those two so far. He has a disadvantage in every single physical aspect, including cardio in my opinion. The only close to even thing that I can see is speed. He won't outgrapple Marquardt, too inexperienced and too small compared to Marquardt. He won't be able to clinch with Marquardt either. He lacks the kind of power needed to put Marquardt away and the chances of him submitting Marquardt is pretty much nil.

So even if Tarec is a descent fighter, I can't possibly see a way for him to win. I see no path of victory, so for me this play is a complete lock. The only reason why Okami wasn't a lock for me against Belcher was the fact that Belcher has shown some power and ability to finish, while Okami has shown a shaky chin at times. I still didn't think it was significant enough of a factor to matter and I bet huge. Marquardt however, is an absolute lockdown for me.

You know what? i do agree with most of that shit you just wrote but i do believe in the end you might get caught often with this kind of thinking. IMO its not good to sell to yourself that fighter A "cant" KO fighter B. You got to give it his proper % of it actually happening.
I do believe in the end its more plausible that one guy go broke with that mentality than throwing half a unit to the drain once in a while. Because look at you, you are ready to lay the biggest bet ever in your life.

[Grabaka]

But good luck if you do that much money on it. Respek

[JamesKim]

But good luck if you do that much money on it. Respek

Thanks brah. I plan on stopping my wreckless style of betting once I can grow enough of a bankroll. I know this is a really stupid and dangerous way of doing things, but the progress from slow value betting feels like it would take at least a year before I can start seeing real profits that I could somewhat justify the hours I spend studying tapes and betting. A lot of people might say I should still use the steady approach, but penetrate it, I'm gonna swim or die. I'm also tired of my job, and I would like to find a new one, but it's gonna be hard to find comparable income. I want betting to supplement my income so I can find a job that I actually enjoy and the lesser pay won't hurt. It's kind of a pipe dream, but you won't find out until you try.

[Vaughany]

what's the difference between a "lock" brah and a "complete lock"? Is a lock 100% and a complete lock 200%?

[JamesKim]

what's the difference between a "lock" brah and a "complete lock"? Is a lock 100% and a complete lock 200%?

Whats the difference between a troll and a complete troll?

edit: there is no difference, were you trying to make a point? The "complete" is there to exaggerate the point, if you'd like me to point more things out, please feel free to ask.

[Boxscout]

Well, I don't like some of the things you've said, like the 95%+ bit, but I like you're overall reasoning. As a fellow bankroll feeb, I've placed a pittance on your boy.

[Vaughany]

Whats the difference between a troll and a complete troll?

edit: there is no difference, were you trying to make a point? The "complete" is there to exaggerate the point, if you'd like me to point more things out, please feel free to ask.

Well my boiii Gaberz used to have semi-lockz, uber-lockz, mega-lockz, etc... so I wondered if you had a similar system, that is all

[Boxscout]

Haha.

In the interest of diplomacy I'll try to bridge the gap. 1)The bulk of your write up was good. I'm not an MMA expert, nor even really a boxing expert, but like I said, it was well reasoned and I believe you when you say you watch tons of videos and made the pick carefully. 2)You undermine yourself by using hyperbole. Usually, people with bad picks have to sell them with hype so it is a huge red flag. Just take out the "locks" and the 95%+ and stick with explaining why X has no dependable path to victory over Y.

[MD]

I don't think there's anything fundamentally wrong with saying that an MMA fighter is 95%+ to win, I just think such odds are usually greatly exaggerated. The only fights I can recall off the top of my head from the last year that I thought had a 95%+ favourite were Weidman against Munoz and Bendo against Diaz.

[Oblivian]

I'm on Saffiedine. I really think this fight will be competitive. When Okami beat Nate, he was outstriking Nate standing with straight punches down the middle. Saffiedine's standup is pretty solid. With the exception of Nate's win over Kampmann (who we know has poor striking defense) and Gouveia, Nate's really excelled the most against grapplers. I think it will be interesting to see Nate fight someone in a striking match since it's been a long time.

Don't get me wrong, I cap Nate as the favorite still, but I'll bite at +250 on Saff. 95% chance for Nate is insanity.

[Thor4140]

http://forum.sbrforum.com/boxing-mma-ufc-betting/2103194-strikeforce-marquardt-vs-saffiedine.html

[Thor4140]

Well my boiii Gaberz used to have semi-lockz, uber-lockz, mega-lockz, etc... so I wondered if you had a similar system, that is all

hehe

[Vaughany]

I'm on Saffiedine. I really think this fight will be competitive. When Okami beat Nate, he was outstriking Nate standing with straight punches down the middle. Saffiedine's standup is pretty solid. With the exception of Nate's win over Kampmann (who we know has poor striking defense) and Gouveia, Nate's really excelled the most against grapplers. I think it will be interesting to see Nate fight someone in a striking match since it's been a long time.

Don't get me wrong, I cap Nate as the favorite still, but I'll bite at +250 on Saff. 95% chance for Nate is insanity.

seem to remember Dan MIller even having some success in the stand-up, landed some counters and a couple uppercuts

[NunyaBidness]

Thanks brah. I plan on stopping my wreckless style of betting once I can grow enough of a bankroll. I know this is a really stupid and dangerous way of doing things, but the progress from slow value betting feels like it would take at least a year before I can start seeing real profits that I could somewhat justify the hours I spend studying tapes and betting. A lot of people might say I should still use the steady approach, but penetrate it, I'm gonna swim or die. I'm also tired of my job, and I would like to find a new one, but it's gonna be hard to find comparable income. I want betting to supplement my income so I can find a job that I actually enjoy and the lesser pay won't hurt. It's kind of a pipe dream, but you won't find out until you try.

What could go wrong?

[JamesKim]

I'm on Saffiedine. I really think this fight will be competitive. When Okami beat Nate, he was outstriking Nate standing with straight punches down the middle. Saffiedine's standup is pretty solid. With the exception of Nate's win over Kampmann (who we know has poor striking defense) and Gouveia, Nate's really excelled the most against grapplers. I think it will be interesting to see Nate fight someone in a striking match since it's been a long time.

Don't get me wrong, I cap Nate as the favorite still, but I'll bite at +250 on Saff. 95% chance for Nate is insanity.

I agree the fight may be somewhat competitive on the feet, but there's really no way for Tarec to win the fight. Even if he somewhat finds success in striking, he can't stop Marquardt from dominating him in the clinch or taking him down anytime he wants. Even if we give him benefit of the doubt and he can somehow outstrike Marquardt (I have a hard time seeing this), he can't keep it standing nor can finish Marquardt on the short time that he may or may not find success. I don't think it matters if the fight looks competitive on the feet or not, I just think there's nothing he can do to Marquardt that can't be outclassed by Marquardt or completely neutralized.

I think the old saying "styles make fight" is a really good way to look at this, whether or not Tarec can keep it somewhat competitive, he really doesn't have a way to win.

[Oblivian]

Call me crazy, but if I give someone a 95% chance of winning, I don't want the fight to really be competitive anywhere. Just so we are clear, what chances are you giving Cormier and Barnett? I'm guessing it's in the same ballpark, so do you think their opponents will be competitive anywhere? 95% is a bold claim.

[Vaughany]

Problem with this attitude may not be with this play exactly, as Marquardt may well go and completely dominate Saff and win in devastating fashion. Problem is the after-effect of that outcome, you may then go and be over-confident in subsequent plays off the back of this. The amount of times I've seen guys do a thread like this and it wins and they come back and say "told ya so...never in doubt...eazy dollarz $$$ glad I maxed it on 20 different books" then a couple weeks later create a similar thread saying similar things and that play goes and flops! Jesuseatsnubz is a great example of this!

[Sacrelicious]

Problem with this attitude may not be with this play exactly, as Marquardt may well go and completely dominate Saff and win in devastating fashion. Problem is the after-effect of that outcome, you may then go and be over-confident in subsequent plays off the back of this. The amount of times I've seen guys do a thread like this and it wins and they come back and say "told ya so...never in doubt...eazy dollarz $$$ glad I maxed it on 20 different books" then a couple weeks later create a similar thread saying similar things and that play goes and flops! Jesuseatsnubz is a great example of this!

[NunyaBidness]

Problem with this attitude may not be with this play exactly, as Marquardt may well go and completely dominate Saff and win in devastating fashion. Problem is the after-effect of that outcome, you may then go and be over-confident in subsequent plays off the back of this. The amount of times I've seen guys do a thread like this and it wins and they come back and say "told ya so...never in doubt...eazy dollarz $$$ glad I maxed it on 20 different books" then a couple weeks later create a similar thread saying similar things and that play goes and flops! Jesuseatsnubz is a great example of this!

Exactly. People think that a win is somehow justification for whatever they capped the fight at.

Pretty sure Gabers was still arguing he had the right side in the Silva/Prater fight.

[Oblivian]

Prater had a dominating win in Round 1. He didn't even have to throw a punch.

[JamesKim]

Call me crazy, but if I give someone a 95% chance of winning, I don't want the fight to really be competitive anywhere. Just so we are clear, what chances are you giving Cormier and Barnett? I'm guessing it's in the same ballpark, so do you think their opponents will be competitive anywhere? 95% is a bold claim.

I haven't seen any of their fights unfortunately, except I've seen a few of Dion fighting. I don't know them enough to cap the fight.

Problem with this attitude may not be with this play exactly, as Marquardt may well go and completely dominate Saff and win in devastating fashion. Problem is the after-effect of that outcome, you may then go and be over-confident in subsequent plays off the back of this. The amount of times I've seen guys do a thread like this and it wins and they come back and say "told ya so...never in doubt...eazy dollarz $$$ glad I maxed it on 20 different books" then a couple weeks later create a similar thread saying similar things and that play goes and flops! Jesuseatsnubz is a great example of this!

I'll actually keep this in mind, it's not a bad advice.

I still feel really strongly about Marquardt though.

[JamesKim]

I don't think there's anything fundamentally wrong with saying that an MMA fighter is 95%+ to win, I just think such odds are usually greatly exaggerated. The only fights I can recall off the top of my head from the last year that I thought had a 95%+ favourite were Weidman against Munoz and Bendo against Diaz.

I actually learned quite a bit from losing on the Nate fight. As good of a fighter as Nate is, he just didn't have a way to win against Benson. I put way too much emphasis on what Diaz was able to do to other opponents, over what he could possibly due to Benson. There was no way he was going to accumulate punches on someone with the kind of cardio and movement that Benson has, who can also take the fight down to the ground whenever he feels thereatened on the feet. He also lacked the one shot power to put someone with a chin like Benson away and his BJJ was neutralized by the fact that Benson has one of the best submission defense in MMA. It doesn't matter how well Nate did against other great fighters like Cerrone or Miller, the fact of the matter is that he had no clear way of victory against Benson. I learned that the hard way. I see this fight as the same, as impressively as Tarec has looked in some of his outings, he has no path of victory against Marquardt.

[Beelzebubzy]

Where is the bet slip? Late action will be on Nate I think

[Sato]

I dont think that the dogs on the main card will make it. They wont make it homies!

[Oblivian]

I actually learned quite a bit from losing on the Nate fight. As good of a fighter as Nate is, he just didn't have a way to win against Benson. I put way too much emphasis on what Diaz was able to do to other opponents, over what he could possibly due to Benson. There was no way he was going to accumulate punches on someone with the kind of cardio and movement that Benson has, who can also take the fight down to the ground whenever he feels thereatened on the feet. He also lacked the one shot power to put someone with a chin like Benson away and his BJJ was neutralized by the fact that Benson has one of the best submission defense in MMA. It doesn't matter how well Nate did against other great fighters like Cerrone or Miller, the fact of the matter is that he had no clear way of victory against Benson. I learned that the hard way. I see this fight as the same, as impressively as Tarec has looked in some of his outings, he has no path of victory against Marquardt.

The most valuable thing you could have learned from Nate/Bendo is that you can cap a fight wrong. Everyone will cap fights wrong at one point or another. Thus, it's not a great idea to place a bet that would crush you if you lose if you accept that. This is coming from a guy who thought Nam Phan was going to expose Hettes!

[JamesKim]

The most valuable thing you could have learned from Nate/Bendo is that you can cap a fight wrong. Everyone will cap fights wrong at one point or another. Thus, it's not a great idea to place a bet that would crush you if you lose if you accept that. This is coming from a guy who thought Nam Phan was going to expose Hettes!

I'm aware of what both you and Vaughny are saying, and I don't disagree with it. Problem is that I don't think I mind if I lose big, as long as I win big a lot more often than I lose big. As long as my +EV is good and my bankroll keeps increasing, I'll keep on doing this until my bankroll is sufficient enough that I can use it as steady income (complete pipe dream, but I'll work on it).

[MD]

I'm aware of what both you and Vaughny are saying, and I don't disagree with it. Problem is that I don't think I mind if I lose big, as long as I win big a lot more often than I lose big. As long as my +EV is good and my bankroll keeps increasing, I'll keep on doing this until my bankroll is sufficient enough that I can use it as steady income (complete pipe dream, but I'll work on it).

I did this, for a while. If I could do it all over again, I wouldn't, but I did it, and I got to the point where my bankroll was so large that I turned into a massive bankroll nit and stopped what I was doing. I would personally advise you, from experience, not to do this, but it's your decision; I was fortunate, maybe you will be, too, but variance is the enemy of all gamblers, and I was lucky enough to beat the variance, at least in the short term. That doesn't mean I would, again, however. The one piece of advice I'll give you is that being +EV is not relevant with this sort of strategy, as you can make as many +EV plays as you wish, but you have to understand the long-term implications of expected value. You can cap three +100 fighters as 65% to win and be correct, but if you lose on all three of them (which is well within the realm of possibility), your bankroll is destroyed, and unfortunately, the Sklanksy-to-dollar exchange rates aren't looking too favourable these days.

[Vaughany]

I'm aware of what both you and Vaughny are saying, and I don't disagree with it. Problem is that I don't think I mind if I lose big, as long as I win big a lot more often than I lose big. As long as my +EV is good and my bankroll keeps increasing, I'll keep on doing this until my bankroll is sufficient enough that I can use it as steady income (complete pipe dream, but I'll work on it).

[Beelzebubzy]

Asian gabe dropping the knowledge

[JamesKim]

Asian gabe dropping the knowledge

If that's supposed to be an insult, would you like to provide some counters?