Lasker's MMA Picks

[lasker]

Since the main event is still giving me headaches, I'll go with this parlay instead:

2 Team Parlay @+109, 2u to win 2.18u:
9/25/10 10:30pm UFC Fighting 1302 Evan Dunham -220* vs Sean Sherk
9/25/10 9:30pm UFC Fighting 1537 Doerksen/Dollaway starts round 2 -230* vs Fight won't start round 2

Plus odds but I would be somewhat surprised if this parlay doesn't cash.
---

My favorite bet of the night is still Jeremy Stephens. He should not be the underdog! There will most likely be a wild flurry at some point and Stephens will be the one left standing. When Guillard gets tagged he crumbles mentally. Stephens hits harder and has the better chin. He also has better submission defense, and could even win by submission as I indicated earlier (something like a RNC after rocking Guillard on the feet). Somehow I see Guillard getting the better of it early but Stephens coming back to win.

[Shagdogy]

I would LOVE to see Stephens knock Guillard down or make him quit on the feet and then end it with a sloppy RNC or Guillotine. +1083 baby!

[Ranx777]

How on earth are you guys picking Cro Cop? No offense to your opinions, but hear me out. Remember that kickboxing battle Kongo had with Cro Cop? Those guys are very similar, Mir hit Kongo harder than anyone that has ever hit him. I would not be shocked to see a Mir first round TKO, if CC gets rocked, Mir will jump on him and choke him in seconds.

People question Mir's toughness? Losses to Brock and Shane Carwin. Those guys are on a different level. Cro Cop got dominated standing in the first round by Barry, got dominated standing by Dos Santos. CC is the most overrated striker in all MMA. Cro Cop has 0 quality wins in the UFC and he will not be getting one tonight, no chance.

[Vaughany]

How on earth are you guys picking Cro Cop? No offense to your opinions, but hear me out. Remember that kickboxing battle Kongo had with Cro Cop? Those guys are very similar, Mir hit Kongo harder than anyone that has ever hit him. I would not be shocked to see a Mir first round TKO, if CC gets rocked, Mir will jump on him and choke him in seconds.

People question Mir's toughness? Losses to Brock and Shane Carwin. Those guys are on a different level. Cro Cop got dominated standing in the first round by Barry, got dominated standing by Dos Santos. CC is the most overrated striker in all MMA. Cro Cop has 0 quality wins in the UFC and he will not be getting one tonight, no chance.

I wouldnt say he's necessarily an over-rated striker but I agree with you on the whole! I especially think it's wrong that people claim Mir has no heart based on losses to Carwin and Lesnar who are two absolute beasts who I dont think anybody else in the division will be able to hang with.

[lasker]

How on earth are you guys picking Cro Cop? No offense to your opinions, but hear me out. Remember that kickboxing battle Kongo had with Cro Cop? Those guys are very similar, Mir hit Kongo harder than anyone that has ever hit him. I would not be shocked to see a Mir first round TKO, if CC gets rocked, Mir will jump on him and choke him in seconds. People question Mir's toughness? Losses to Brock and Shane Carwin. Those guys are on a different level. Cro Cop got dominated standing in the first round by Barry, got dominated standing by Dos Santos. CC is the most overrated striker in all MMA. Cro Cop has 0 quality wins in the UFC and he will not be getting one tonight, no chance.

I don't disagree anymore. As you can see I hedged my original Cro-Cop bet because I changed my mind. Mir should win this fight, but after hedging I'm not going to bet on it anymore because I just have this nagging feeling that Cro-Cop is going to knock him out. I know that's an irrational reason, but even though Mir is rightly favored in this matchup if he gets hit by Cro-Cop he could wilt. So I don't agree that Cro-Cop has no chance, but I really don't know how much of a chance to give him in his current condition with his injuries and insufficient preparation time. He has looked older and slower since his loss to Gonzaga, and what worried me most is that he's talking like a man who just doesn't have it in him anymore. Had it been a prime Cro-Cop against a prime Mir, I'd have no hesitation in choosing Cro-Cop. But those days are over.

Cro-Cop is not the striker he once was, but I think it's a bit harsh to call him overrated based on his fights with Barry and Hardonk. Barry is one of the very best standup fighters in all of MMA, just look how he dismantled Hardonk who is himself an elite striker. And I can't think of a heavyweight in MMA with better boxing technique than Dos Santos. To have worse standup than them does not mean that his standup is overrated or that it is worse than Mir's. If Mir would keep it standing against either Barry or Dos Santos, I think he would look worse than Cro-Cop.

[lasker]

My favorite bet of the night is still Jeremy Stephens. He should not be the underdog!

Evens Stephens now (-110)

[lasker]

Dunham is down to -185. I like him at that price. I rarely advocate straddles but you can straddle that with Sherk by 3 round decision (+325), since Sherk isn't winning any other way. Some don't think Dunham can finish Sherk either, but I disagree, I think there is enough of a chance to bet him straight up rather than by decision.

[lasker]

As usual I've bet a ton of parlays, including a few real longshots. But for this thread I'll just list what I consider the strongest plays:

Dunham -185: 3u to win 1.62u

Serra wins by submission +1210: 1u to win 12.1u (posted earlier)

J.Stephens wins by submission +1067: 0.5u to win 5.34u (posted earlier)

Matt Serra +120: 2u to win 2.2u

Stephens +120: 3u to win 3.6u

2 team parlay: Evan Dunham -185 / Dolloway and Doerksen start round 2 -212: 2u to win 2.53u

[Marv001]

I bet CC because I am following my friends gut. All of Mirs losses have come against good strikers. CC has knockout power in both legs and his right hand. I like Mir but +200 is too juicy to lay off with a small bet.

[Marv001]

Hope you guys enjoy the card tonight. I can't wait.

[lasker]

I bet CC because I am following my friends gut. All of Mirs losses have come against good strikers. CC has knockout power in both legs and his right hand. I like Mir but +200 is too juicy to lay off with a small bet.

Good luck I have the same gut feeling as your friend, even though my head tells me Mir should win. I took Cro-Cop at +230 but have since hedged, so now I'll get to enjoy the fight without too much stress. Right-kick hospital left-kick cemetary!

[lasker]

Bullshit decision. Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit decision. One judge had it 30-27 Guillard?

BULLSHIT DECISION.

BULLSHIT.

Q#$TYQ$^!@#$^!TYQ#$TY!@Q#$@%^&$^@$@!*%$# @&%^*&^$@!%!!!

[Vaughany]

Bullshit decision. Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit decision. One judge had it 30-27 Guillard?

BULLSHIT DECISION.

BULLSHIT.

Q#$TYQ$^!@#$^!TYQ#$TY!@Q#$@%^&$^@$@!*%$# @&%^*&^$@!%!!!

MASSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIVEEEEEEE BULLSHIT DECISION! 30-27 is scandolous...that judge is defintely one of Trevor Whittman's wierdo buddies! Stephens knocked Guillard down in first few seconds of first round, Guillard probly only scraped the second round, and Stephens definitely won the third round, landing more kicks, the body shot and overall octagon control.

[Vaughany]

Got a feeling that this fight might end up being another bullshit decision win. IMO Dunham has won both rounds.

[lasker]

They need to get some judges who know how to score a fight. When I heard 30-27 for the third judge's score, I was certain Stephens had won a split decision. Sherdog scored it for Stephens, MMAjunkie scored it for Stephens... That "loss" hurt my bankroll.

[lasker]

Um, what? Sean Sherk? Sean Sherk? Sean Sherk by split decision? WTF are these judges smoking?

How do you give rounds 2 or 3 to Sherk? What the hell is this? How on earth does anyone with eyes score that fight for Sherk?

Sherdog scores it 29-28 Dunham. MMAjunkie scores it 29-28 Dunham. That was one of the easiest fights to score that I've ever seen. These judges are a nightmare.

[Vaughany]

Serra/Lytle going to decision has saved me from having a terrible night. Bad luck for u bro but ud be in positive units I think if not for the Dunham and Stephens robberies (as would I).

[lasker]

Well, that sucked. Had Dunham not been robbed, and had Stephens been awarded the decision he deserved, I would have cashed a few parlays... but what can ya do? Hope the rest of you had a better night than I did.

[Shagdogy]

I usually agree with you all here, and I was definitely rooting for Stephens, but I thought he came up just a little short in the exchanges. It was a razor thin fight, and I agree you could give Stephens round 1, but my cumulative feeling by the end of the whole thing was that Guillard had done enough to win it. When a fight is that close, the only thing I have to go on is the entirety of the bout, and Guillard was just slightly more crisp throughout the whole fight.

As for the Dunham fight.... Absolutely BS. They need to change the criteria and stress to the judges that this is a FIGHT! If you got jumped on the street and all the guy did was lay on you for 2.5 minutes, you'd be pretty pleased with that. If he did to you what Dunham did at the end of Rd. 2 and all of round 3, you'd be hurting. Period. I'd love to see the 10 round first, 5 round 2nd from pride. Score the winner based on the whole. Make damage inflicted one of the top priorities. Dunham wasn't helped by that incredible gash. Although that was one solid strike, the judges saw that cut for 2.5 straight rounds.

Hope you made it out of the night with a little something. There's always the next one.

[lasker]

I usually agree with you all here, and I was definitely rooting for Stephens, but I thought he came up just a little short in the exchanges. It was a razor thin fight, and I agree you could give Stephens round 1, but my cumulative feeling by the end of the whole thing was that Guillard had done enough to win it. When a fight is that close, the only thing I have to go on is the entirety of the bout, and Guillard was just slightly more crisp throughout the whole fight.

I can see how some felt Guillard won, it was definitely close. I'll want to watch it again. Granted, I really wanted Stephens to win so maybe I was watching through biased lenses, but here are my thoughts (which I posted on the Guillard-Stephens thread already):

It was not a highway robbery like the Sherk-Dunham fight, and calling it a bullshit decision was harsh, but I do believe Stephens won that fight. The third round was clearly his (the 30-27 score for Guillard was bullshit), and the first two rounds were very close. In the first round Stephens dropped Guillard right away, landing the most significant punch of the round, but I can see that close round going to Guillard as he got the better of the minimal action that followed. In the second Stephens was stalking Guillard and pushing forward almost the entire round, and he also did more damage with his leg kicks than Guillard did with any of his jabs (not to mention landing a nice uppercut of his own). Stephens landed the more damaging strikes and exhibited more aggression/octagon control in the second round.

The 30-27 score for Bader was also baffling, although I do believe Bader won rounds 1 and 2. The split decision win for Sherk... easily one of the worst decisions I've ever seen.

Hope you made it out of the night with a little something. There's always the next one.

Thanks. Unfortunately I lost a lot. I tend to have either really great nights or really horrible ones, as I bet a lot of parlays. Not very smart, but that's just my "all or nothing" mentality I guess. Had the Stephens and Dunham decisions gone the other way, I would have had a winning night overall. Stings a bit, but I'll bounce back.

[Shagdogy]

I think the Stephens/Guillard fight had a little of the Penn/Edgar #1 thing going on. While Guillard didn't do much with any significance, he probably got a lot of credit for his dancing and movement. Guillard LOOKED to be the fresher fighter by the end. While Stephens may have connected a few more times in the exchanges, he appeared to slow more than Guillard did. Neither fighter was gassed, but Guillard's movement in round 3 was equal to that of round 1. Unfortunately, judges like that stuff and credit it a lot. As we can tell by the Dunham decision, damage isn't always first and foremost.

I'd like to see them adopt the 10 minute first round, 5 minute 2nd round Pride style fight. Judges only score who they think won, damage being the biggest factor. And how about this for title fights... UNLIMITED 5 minute rounds. No judges. Fight continues until one fighter finishes the other, or a towel is thrown in. Referee is present in the same capacity as always, there will just be NO decisions. I'd love it.

[lasker]

I think the Stephens/Guillard fight had a little of the Penn/Edgar #1 thing going on. While Guillard didn't do much with any significance, he probably got a lot of credit for his dancing and movement. Guillard LOOKED to be the fresher fighter by the end. While Stephens may have connected a few more times in the exchanges, he appeared to slow more than Guillard did. Neither fighter was gassed, but Guillard's movement in round 3 was equal to that of round 1. Unfortunately, judges like that stuff and credit it a lot. As we can tell by the Dunham decision, damage isn't always first and foremost. I'd like to see them adopt the 10 minute first round, 5 minute 2nd round Pride style fight. Judges only score who they think won, damage being the biggest factor. And how about this for title fights... UNLIMITED 5 minute rounds. No judges. Fight continues until one fighter finishes the other, or a towel is thrown in. Referee is present in the same capacity as always, there will just be NO decisions. I'd love it.

Totally agree. I strongly prefer the system of judging a fight in its entirety rather than round by round. Let's say Sherk, by some miracle, won that second round. He didn't, but just pretend that he did. It shouldn't matter, because Dunham easily did more damage in the last round than Sherk did in the first two.

It doesn't even have to be weighted towards the end of the fight, either. For example, pretend Bisping won rounds 2 and 3 of his fight vs Hamill. It wouldn't matter, because Hamill clearly won round 1 by a larger margin than Bisping won rounds 2 and 3 combined. In the end, judging a fight on the basis of a fight as a whole is a much better approach than the ten point must-system.

Stephens would have also won, because he won round 3 more decisively than Guillard (supposedly) in rounds 1 and 2 combined.

Or take Machida-Rua, first fight. Let's suppose Machida won rounds 1-3. It doesn't matter, because those were all very close rounds whereas rounds 4 and 5 were clearly dominated by Rua, so judged as a whole there is no question who won. I truly believe this rule alteration could prevent many judging travesties each year.

As for unlimited rounds in title fights, I fear it would greatly increase the chances of the first death in the UFC. Safer to keep it to 25 minutes, IMO, but change the damn 10 point must system.

[jin2daj]

Totally agree. I strongly prefer the system of judging a fight in its entirety rather than round by round. Let's say Sherk, by some miracle, won that second round. He didn't, but just pretend that he did. It shouldn't matter, because Dunham easily did more damage in the last round than Sherk did in the first two.

It doesn't even have to be weighted towards the end of the fight, either. For example, pretend Bisping won rounds 2 and 3 of his fight vs Hamill. It wouldn't matter, because Hamill clearly won round 1 by a larger margin than Bisping won rounds 2 and 3 combined. In the end, judging a fight on the basis of a fight as a whole is a much better approach than the ten point must-system.

Stephens would have also won, because he won round 3 more decisively than Guillard (supposedly) in rounds 1 and 2 combined.

Or take Machida-Rua, first fight. Let's suppose Machida won rounds 1-3. It doesn't matter, because those were all very close rounds whereas rounds 4 and 5 were clearly dominated by Rua, so judged as a whole there is no question who won. I truly believe this rule alteration could prevent many judging travesties each year.

As for unlimited rounds in title fights, I fear it would greatly increase the chances of the first death in the UFC. Safer to keep it to 25 minutes, IMO, but change the damn 10 point must system.

good post. but i think ppl just need to use more 10-8 rounds.

[GoldenYAK]

I like both ideas. Sometimes there is just more action in certain rounds. That round should have more weight in the final score.

[Shagdogy]

I know these suggestions most likely aren't gonna happen... so I'll have to agree with jin2daj and say I do wish the judges would score more 10-8 rounds. I also wish they would score more rounds a draw. I think if they utilized the must system with a little more flexibility it would help a lot.

The title fight suggestion for so many reasons can't happen. For my own personal guilty pleasure I'd like it. But yeah... that whole safety thing comes in to play. The last thing MMA needs is another reason for detractors to compare it to dog fighting.

[lasker]

Not super confident for tonight, so not many plays. I saw a few guys got Hominick at a great price, but now the value has been bought out of the line IMO so I'm staying away. I agree that he should put on a striking clinic against the sloppy Garcia.

The big stars Aldo, Brown, and Torres should all roll, but of course they're chalky. I do have the three parlayed, as I really can't see any of them losing here and I've liked what I've been reading about the latter two after their losses. Torres is now training with Firaz Zahabi, and Brown is very humble and refocused for this one; unlike his last fight, he seems to be in a good place mentally this time. As for Aldo, Aldo is truly one of the best p4p fighters on the planet and I fully expect him to dispatch of Gamburyan without ever getting in any trouble.

Varner/Cerrone is too close to call, IMO. It seems like Varner is the consensus play here, but I have some doubts (about Varner's mental state going into this one, actually). I wanted to bet Cerrone by submission if the odds looked good, but it's not available at 5dimes. Varner's the rightful favorite, so I can't quite bring myself to bet on Cerrone even though I have a gut feeling he'll win. It's hard to see Varner winning inside the distance, so him by decision caught my attention... but in the end I can't pick a side on this one. I'm just including Cerrone wins in the 3rd round +1450 in some longshot parlays. In all likelihood it should go the distance, and I think there's still some value in betting that @-145 as I think it would happen at least 60% (a conservative estimate IMO).


I also initially liked Mighty Mouse, who I thought looked really good despite his loss in his fight with Pickett, but he was undersized there and he's undersized here, and that's a concern. I expected his wrestling to prove too explosive for Pace, but Pace has decent wrestling and explosiveness himself, plus he's the bigger, stronger guy. Should be a good pace to this fight (pun intended), but I can't decide so it's another no-play for me. If I had to pick I would still go with Mighty Mouse.

[Shagdogy]

Not sure what you know about Varner's mental state, but if all things are equal coming in to this fight, I see Varner winning a solid decision. Cerrone's strengths are his kicks and his chin against Varner. His kicks lead to him being taken down repeatedly, and his chin just keeps him around. I like Varner by dec. here.

[lasker]

You're probably right. My concern is that Varner hates this role of the villain that he has been cast into, he hated it in his fight against Henderson and he's out with something to prove and I wonder if it might affect him. I do think Cerrone is the mentally tougher fighter. Cerrone's jiu-jitsu can give Varner problems, IMO, and I wouldn't be surprised for him to mix in some takedown attempts with his striking. Regardless, I think it's unlikely we'll see a repeat of the first fight when Cerrone (whose motivation is skyrocketing) has been training for this rematch at Jackson's for a long time. Good luck

[Eccocide]

I love Cerrone and hate Varner, but for me the fact remains that Cerrone isnt a good wrestler and he cant stop takedowns from good wrestlers. Greg Jackson is good at developing fighters with an already strong base in wrestling. I dont think he has much to show for turning guys into great wrestlers (ie. Jardine, Villasenor, McSweeney, etc). Cerrone definitely has a shot at a sub, hes good off of his back. But Varner has the cardio to plant Cerrone on the mat for 3 rounds straight if need be. After saying all of this, Ill still be cheering for Cerrone in the back of my mind even though I bet on Varner by decision lol.

[lasker]

After saying all of this, Ill still be cheering for Cerrone in the back of my mind even though I bet on Varner by decision lol.

The sign of a disciplined bettor! Not a fun situation to be in. Everything you guys say does make sense; as I said, I do agree that Varner should be favored here. I didn't put anything on Cerrone except for him to win in the third round, so I'll be cheering for the Cowboy without any reservations!

[Shagdogy]

Hasn't Cerrone been training at Jackson's for a long time now? If he had switched camps in has last fight or two I'd be afraid of seeing some big improvement, but I feel like we have a good idea of who Cerrone is at this point. My biggest deciding factor here is like Ecco said, Cerrone cannot stop the takedown, and the fact that he's comfortable on his back only hurts him if he doesn't get the sub, because you can't win over any judges from there.

[lasker]

Hasn't Cerrone been training at Jackson's for a long time now? If he had switched camps in has last fight or two I'd be afraid of seeing some big improvement, but I feel like we have a good idea of who Cerrone is at this point. My biggest deciding factor here is like Ecco said, Cerrone cannot stop the takedown, and the fact that he's comfortable on his back only hurts him if he doesn't get the sub, because you can't win over any judges from there.

He's been there for a long time, but it's a lot easier to make a gameplan adjustment after the two already fought for nearly five rounds. If anybody will be studying tape closely and attempting to make it a different kind of fight, it will be Cerrone and his camp. Especially after a stinging loss like that one was for him.

[lasker]

what credentials does one need to become an MMA judge, anyway? Whoever scored that fight for Garcia should never be allowed to judge again.

[Vaughany]

what credentials does one need to become an MMA judge, anyway? Whoever scored that fight for Garcia should never be allowed to judge again.

Maybe the same one who gave Guillard a 30-27!

[lasker]

It's Cowboy time !!!