[gabe]

I challenge ANYBODY who understood what this guy was saying to come forth and explain.

[Grabaka]

Ill try:

Gabe, lets not use a coin and use a 10-sides-dice. When they place a -400 odd its an implied probability of 80% of that event winning (according to the bookies thoughts). Like they are giving you 8 numbers to choose from (from the 10 total)....Lets say you pick 1-8. Theres a possibility that 9 or 10 hit and you lose your bet. Agood bet would be if they offer you -350 for this 8 numbers....a bad bet would be if they offer -430 for the 8 numbers.

A good bet is ALWAYS linked to the price. If you cap Ebersole at -120 a good bet is ONLY when you get him at a better price that -120 (thats of course if your a great capper). We all commit the crime of liking a guy too much and make a bad bet on a guy like Ebersole @ -250 playing in a parlay. That way you have action on the fight which makes it exciting and you might win a little more on the night. But Ebersole @ -250 was a bad bet for sure even if he end up winning....because once you are regular and make this mistake 100 times you win less than you lose. The name of this game is not only get the winners but the good bets.

A parlay is just a straight bet linked to take the initial money and profits of a win and bet it in the next fight and so on. A good parlay has the same rules as a straight bet which is get a better price than what you capped it.

[Grabaka]

Lets go back to the coin-flip. A fight like Holloway - Lawrence was perceived as a coin-flip by the bookmaker. Since you liked Holloway to win and gave him lets say a 58% chance of winning and they were offering him evens or +110. You loved that bet and hopped on it. That was correct way to go. If they fight a 100 times and Holloway did had a advantage you will end up winning money for sure.

If someone offers you a side of a coin-flip for +150 you Always take it since you know the probability of your bet winning is 50% hence the price should be +100 instead of +150. You make this bet 100 times and even if you get unlucky you still gonna win some money.

[GunShard]

Fights that were like coin flips: Henderson vs Edgar, Condit vs Diaz, Shogun vs Henderson.

[DublinMeUp]

I challenge ANYBODY who understood what this guy was saying to come forth and explain.

Ok I'll bite, I wanted to leave it but for some reason can't. You are under the impression that sticking any fancied fighters that are priced badly ("over juiced" as you may say) in parlays seems to somehow negate those bad prices. What i did using coin flips as a "simple" example was to show that your assumption was incorrect. The coin flips have nothing to do with the actual picks as I've already stated but they are used to demonstrate a concept, i can perform the same calculation on any parlay if you like but originally assumed you could make the not to difficult comparison between the two.

I'm sure a lot of people Understood this perfectly but realised that trying to explain it was a fruitless exercise in that you would probably just switch to arguing with them and still not grasping what they had explained.

If that is not any clearer then there's not much else i can say.

Lastly, in order to get a strike rate of 95% on parlays of 3 or more teams you would need avg odds per team of -6500~ or lower. Or in English each Pick would need a 98.5%+ chance of winning.

[sideloaded]

Jesus didnt it say in the bible that gambling was a vice?

[gabe]

Ok I'll bite, I wanted to leave it but for some reason can't. You are under the impression that sticking any fancied fighters that are priced badly ("over juiced" as you may say) in parlays seems to somehow negate those bad prices. What i did using coin flips as a "simple" example was to show that your assumption was incorrect. The coin flips have nothing to do with the actual picks as I've already stated but they are used to demonstrate a concept, i can perform the same calculation on any parlay if you like but originally assumed you could make the not to difficult comparison between the two.

I'm sure a lot of people Understood this perfectly but realised that trying to explain it was a fruitless exercise in that you would probably just switch to arguing with them and still not grasping what they had explained.

If that is not any clearer then there's not much else i can say.

Lastly, in order to get a strike rate of 95% on parlays of 3 or more teams you would need avg odds per team of -6500~ or lower. Or in English each Pick would need a 98.5%+ chance of winning.

Um, no I'm not. It doesn't negate the bad prices, it just means I think the fighter is going to win, but I'm not confident enough to make a straight play on him.

[DublinMeUp]

If that is not any clearer then there's not much else i can say.

.....

[Vitooch]

Um, no I'm not. It doesn't negate the bad prices, it just means I think the fighter is going to win, but I'm not confident enough to make a straight play on him.

You still don't understand?

[Jesus Christ]

Jesus didnt it say in the bible that gambling was a vice?

Yea prolly...but I'm Jesus...those rules don't apply to me.

[sideloaded]

so will you forgive my sins if i gamble?

[NunyaBidness]

Gabers, these guys don't get it... them and their coin flips, wtf?! When was the last time two shiny quarters got inside the octagon and fought each other?

Post of the year, right here.

[NunyaBidness]

I can't believe you guys are using coin flip and 10 sided die examples to get gabe to understand. Don't you know I've used both of those examples several times. It's not going to happen just give up.

Parlays ARE magic.

Sometimes you shouldn't bet on a guy at -300 because he's overvalued, even though he's going to win 95% of the time. 95 PER CENT. So you put him in a parlay with 5 other guys that also win 95 PER CENT of the time.

Do you know how often that parlay wins?

95 PER CENT OF THE TIME, EVERY TIME.

[Grabaka]

He just switched threads now he dont talk in here. So true bro but we couldnt help ourselves.

[Dillonious Monk]

Hopefully that Stipe/Struve line keeps going down. Struve is going to get owned. Stipe has better stand up, better wrestling, a better chin, and he actually fights smart. Struve sucks at using his range. Struve has been put out with the right hand a few times, and Stipe's is mean.

Ugh I Just wish they would release all the UFC 151 odds already lol

You might wanna keep an eye out when they do. Hieron/Ellenberger have already fought years ago and Hieron won a decision. Well, they may open the odds a bit low for Ellenberger due to that, but I expect Jake to smash him.

Its looking like somewhat of an easy main card to predict, honestly, in comparison to some. Tavares should beat Hallman, Siver should beat Yagan, Jones, Ellenberger, will have to look into Urushanti vs Liniker.

Strikeforce should be a profitable night though. I'm thinking Rousey ITD, Saffedine-Souza parlay and maybe a play on sayers depending on the odds...

Wonder what Christ would think?

Hmmm...

[Educ8d Degener8]

I'd like to parlay this chick... Might as well throw in her pasty white Twilight looking friend in the halter top too.

[Educ8d Degener8]

Ok, smart guys... you guys think you're so smart with your quarters... how do you cap this one...???

Quarter is fighting Nickel in a catch-weight bout.
Quarter is coming off ACL surgery so ring rust may be a factor.
In addition, Nickel-kun has been training with Master Steven Seagal, learning his deadly stuff.

That's what I thought b*tches.

[Vaughany]

loooooooooooooooooool

[Grabaka]

LOL Easy
Seagal's side always +EV.

[Educ8d Degener8]

LOL Easy
Seagal's side always +EV.

How 'bout now??? Quarter has a new corner man...

[Vaughany]

Quarter is now the +EV play here

[gabe]

Yeah, I still don't see why it's bad to put high juiced favs in parlays when you think they're gonna win but aren't worth betting straight up... Can anybody explain why it's a bad idea without it being a lesson in algebra? if it was such a bad idea, I wouldn't end up cashing them most of the time.

[NunyaBidness]

Fair line is Quarter -500 obviously.

But Gabe's got him in a parlay with Half Dollar over Canadian Looney, and its a

[NunyaBidness]

Yeah, I still don't see why it's bad to put high juiced favs in parlays when you think they're gonna win but aren't worth betting straight up... Can anybody explain why it's a bad idea without it being a lesson in algebra? if it was such a bad idea, I wouldn't end up cashing them most of the time.

No, sorry. No one can explain a mathematical concept without using some form of math.

None of it matters when you think you see 95% favorites, but somehow the rest of the handicapping world with more money and more tools at their disposal let the lines sit at +250.

[gabe]

No, sorry. No one can explain a mathematical concept without using some form of math.

None of it matters when you think you see 95% favorites, but somehow the rest of the handicapping world with more money and more tools at their disposal let the lines sit at +250.

I see 95% favorites? Huh? Talking about huge favorites and you're mentioning +250... yeah, I'm really lost.

[DublinMeUp]

Yeah, I still don't see why it's bad to put high juiced favs in parlays when you think they're gonna win but aren't worth betting straight up... Can anybody explain why it's a bad idea without it being a lesson in algebra? if it was such a bad idea, I wouldn't end up cashing them most of the time.

Last try, @Nunya i promise.

Without math: If the payout for the win is not greater than the fighters actual winning chance (odds) this is a bad bet. If you combine three of these bad bets into a parlay it is a bad parlay.

Simple right????

[Beelzebubzy]

Guys. You are all saints in my books. Hope to share a beer with all of you in hell one day.

But to quote some random dude

You can lead a horse to water but you cant force him to drink it

[Vaughany]

You callin my boy Gabe a horse muthafuckkker?!

[Beelzebubzy]

You callin my boy Gabe a horse muthafuckkker?!

No you can teach a horse Math.

V you are an arb raper. Go home butter tooth.
Love
Math Riddle

[Vaughany]

arb-raper/ass-slammer like Dustin Poirier

[Beelzebubzy]

At the end of the nineteenth century, a performing horse in Germany known as Clever (or Kluge) Hans was able to tap out the answers to mathematical problems written on a chalk board. Hans would use his right forefoot to indicate the single digits (0-9) and his left forefoot for the tens place (10, 20, 30, etc.). His amazing performances continued for a number of years until the psychologist Oskar Pfungst (1874-1932) was able to show that Hans was simply counting until his questioner indicated (subconsciously) that Hans had reached the correct sum. Even though the horse was not actually performing calculations, his ability to observe and respond to subtle changes in human behavior is still quite noteworthy.

[Vaughany]

Quite astounding

[DublinMeUp]

Even though the horse was not actually performing calculations, his ability to observe and respond to subtle changes in human behavior is still quite noteworthy.

I'm more impressed that he could even count, never mind observing human behaviour

[Vitooch]

But to quote some random dude

You can lead a horse to water but you cant force him to drink it

I though it was you can lead a horse to water but you cant force him to drink his own ***

[NunyaBidness]

Last try, @Nunya i promise.

Without math: If the payout for the win is not greater than the fighters actual winning chance (odds) this is a bad bet. If you combine three of these bad bets into a parlay it is a bad parlay.

Simple right????

Taking out the numbers doesn't mean its not math.