Ladle's MMA Betting

[sideloaded]

Im not here to hate you had some good picks the arb/hedge thing is a little much I would just bet the soft side.

[Vaughany]

Wiman held onto Siver's leg for most of rounds one and three and got Siver a little closer to the ground than GSot but hardly enough to win those rounds. Round two Wiman won but definitely not a 10-8. You were clearly influenced by the bloodied face and cut of Siver and not the actual punches and offense that actually landed. Judges got this one right.

Yes but u cant say tht either fighter won 1 or 3 clearly can you? But one thing for sure is tht Wiman completely dominated Rnd 2, its ridiculous that Siver can get a 10-9 in first round just because he stopped a couple of takedowns and Wiman also only gets a 10-9 in Rnd 2 even tho he took Siver down and cut him open and dominated him for 80% of the round. The difference in damage is pretty clear, something needs to be changed in the scoring. Same thing with the Maynard/Egar fight, how can Edgar get 10-9's in rounds just because he outlanded and got a takedown and Maynard only get a 10-9 when he knocked Edgar down 3 times in first round.

[FindTheLock]

it's all good. This was just one of those nights. I actually came out ahead a very small amount playing U2.5 rounds +250 in the bader fight, but I definitely didn't see tito being victorious. That is why I would never go large on a -500. No guarantees in gambling. I still look forward to hearing what you have in store for the future events. This card was just one of those nights and nothing more. I hope you ended up ok with all of those arbs you had out there. We'll get em next time.

[gym rat]

[quote=Ladle;10663561]What did Siver do offensively? Almost absolutely nothing. Wiman did more.



Don't tell people what they were influenced by. You don't have a clue.



No they didn't. A guy who did essentially nothing but defend got rewarded.[/quot

Siver won the stand up in rounds one and three and winning the rounds in my opinion. Don't get me wrong they were close rounds but he did enough to win. I do have a clue and I believe if you rewatch the fight tomorrow morning with less stress and anger you may see that it was close fight and not a complete robbery.

I had Cruz by decision so I'm happy he won however the judges scoring in that fight was absurd. I believe it was much much closer than the judges cards and really could have gone either way. I believe the constant movement and strikes even though they were extremely powerless swayed the judges. I mean Cruz was knocked down in three rounds I believe??

[gym rat]

Yes but u cant say tht either fighter won 1 or 3 clearly can you? But one thing for sure is tht Wiman completely dominated Rnd 2, its ridiculous that Siver can get a 10-9 in first round just because he stopped a couple of takedowns and Wiman also only gets a 10-9 in Rnd 2 even tho he took Siver down and cut him open and dominated him for 80% of the round. The difference in damage is pretty clear, something needs to be changed in the scoring. Same thing with the Maynard/Egar fight, how can Edgar get 10-9's in rounds just because he outlanded and got a takedown and Maynard only get a 10-9 when he knocked Edgar down 3 times in first round.

I understand your argument however I'm saying the decision was fair with todays scoring criteria with the winner gets 10 points in the round. Am I the only one on the forum tonight that thinks this was a fair decision??

[Ladle]

[QUOTE=gym rat;10663659]

Siver won the stand up in rounds one and three and winning the rounds in my opinion. Don't get me wrong they were close rounds but he did enough to win.

Not really. I think Wiman's overhand rights were the most significant strikes, and he had Siver pushed up against the cage for prolonged periods in both rounds 1 and 3.

I do have a clue and I believe if you rewatch the fight tomorrow morning with less stress and anger you may see that it was close fight and not a complete robbery.

I can still be objective, thank you very much.

I had Cruz by decision so I'm happy he won however the judges scoring in that fight was absurd. I believe it was much much closer than the judges cards and really could have gone either way. I believe the constant movement and strikes even though they were extremely powerless swayed the judges. I mean Cruz was knocked down in three rounds I believe??

Hardly legitimate knock downs. He sprung back up instantly and showed no signs of being hurt.

Im not here to hate you had some good picks the arb/hedge thing is a little much I would just bet the soft side.

Most pleasant surprise of the night.

Was too confident in The Master Bader.

[FindTheLock]

Fixed

Hey euro f@g... you suck at betting. Perhaps you should just make predictions strictly for fun, till you understand the finer points?

Fukk who tailed you to Losers Lane, you owe .5u to everyone who had to read through your horrible writing/ass bets.

In before you say I admitted on a forum that I was depressed, in before you call me a ''pleb'' like the euro f@g you are

I don't know why you spend your time trying to verbally lash out at someone trying to help us make money? We all have bad nights, and if you can't afford to have one then stop gambling and find another hobby. No one puts my money on my bets but me. When I lose it is not anyone's responsibility but my own. Did you catch ladle's earnings from the event prior to this one? He took in 30 units or something crazy like that. Why don't you post some of your own picks instead of making yourself look like an ass hole kicking a guy for having a bad night.

[gym rat]

[quote=Ladle;10663723]

Not really. I think Wiman's overhand rights were the most significant strikes, and he had Siver pushed up against the cage for prolonged periods in both rounds 1 and 3.



I can still be objective, thank you very much.



Hardly legitimate knock downs. He sprung back up instantly and showed no signs of being hurt.



Most pleasant surprise of the night.

Was too confident in The Master Bader.

Well I understand they were not knockdowns that had Cruz close to going out or anything however Faber threw a punch and Cruz went down for a split second. When a fighter throws a punch and the other fighter goes down there has to be some more weight than a punch Cruz throws that is piddy pat. It was a close fight but for Faber not to win any of the rounds where he scored knockdowns is a bit unfair in my opinion. You must feel somewhat similar or at least Vaughny as he posted he was worried about decision before announced. I was a bit worried about decision myself although I'm happy with result.

I think Cruz really needs to focus on generating a bit more power in his shots and I'm sure he will work on it in time.

[Vaughany]

I understand your argument however I'm saying the decision was fair with todays scoring criteria with the winner gets 10 points in the round. Am I the only one on the forum tonight that thinks this was a fair decision??

Yeah ur right based on the inept scoring criteria that exists it was arguably fair, Im looking at it more in terms of how it should be though.

[cheeese]

To be honest, I only see the fights the way I think the judges are seeing it. I don't even know how I personally feel about decisions anymore. I thought Siver won but my mind could just be infected by the judge's consistant stupidity.

[Ladle]

Fukk who tailed you to Losers Lane, you owe .5u to everyone who had to read through your horrible writing/ass bets.

Someone's a bit upset because I brought up the death of a dead dog. Not my fault you didn't want to carry on living because a dog which you didn't even own died.

In before you say I admitted on a forum that I was depressed, in before you call me a ''pleb'' like the euro f@g you are

You wanted to kill yourself because a dog you didn't even own died. You're the most pathetic excuse for a human being I've ever encountered.

Hey euro f@g... you suck at betting. Perhaps you should just make predictions strictly for fun, till you understand the finer points?

Where were you when I won over 30 units last event?

[cheeese]

Dog funeral?

[gym rat]

Yeah ur right based on the inept scoring criteria that exists it was arguably fair, Im looking at it more in terms of how it should be though.

I'm actually a fan of the current 10 point must system. I believe you need to be consistent from round to round throughout the fight. In the Siver fight for example he was consistent in defending takedowns and won the standup in my opinion in rounds 1 and 3 whereas if Wiman could have done what he did in round two in one other round he would have been the consistent fighter and should have got the nod. I do believe in 10-8 rounds but I don't think Wiman deserved one. Even if you give Wiman a 10-8 the fight would be scored a draw. I'm not a big fan of 10-10 rounds either. With 10-10 rounds we would be seeing so many draws it would get annoying. The fact of the matter is if it goes to a decision anything can happen and I don't think any scoring system will be perfect as every judge or person for that matter will see a fight differently.

[Eccocide]

Im not gunna get into arguments for the Wiman/siver fight. I scored it 29-28 Siver and I had no money on teh fight...but whoever suggested that round 2 was a 10-8....hahahahah thats laughable. Especially the way MMA 10-8s are scored. That wasnt even close....

[Vaughany]

Im not gunna get into arguments for the Wiman/siver fight. I scored it 29-28 Siver and I had no money on teh fight...but whoever suggested that round 2 was a 10-8....hahahahah thats laughable. Especially the way MMA 10-8s are scored. That wasnt even close....

Yeah well tht was my point, clearly with current rules it was only a 10-9 but I just think tht the difference is damage and dominance was a lot greater than the difference in Rnds 1 or 3 yet tht difference doesnt get take in to account with the current scoring sytstem. Is what it is tho

[Ladle]

Just re-watched Wiman/Siver. Wiman definitely won the third with the cage pressure, the brief takedown and the two submission attempts. No idea how anyone could score it for Siver; he constantly defended and only landed baby punches.

[Wrecked]

Just re-watched Wiman/Siver. Wiman definitely won the third with the cage pressure, the brief takedown and the two submission attempts. No idea how anyone could score it for Siver; he constantly defended and only landed baby punches.

I think it's pretty apparent judges don't give fighters credit for submission attempts anymore, and I think that's complete and utter bullshit.
I'm sorry about your loss Ladle, you got screwed on this one

[Ladle]

I think it's pretty apparent judges don't give fighters credit for submission attempts anymore, and I think that's complete and utter bullshit.
I'm sorry about your loss Ladle, you got screwed on this one

Yeah man, it's dumb. They don't seem to understand that submission attempts fall directly into the category of EFFECTIVE GRAPPLING (and also effective aggression). Athletic commissions need a far more stringent selection process when it comes to judges, because so many of the current ones are total invalids. More than anything else, I feel bad for Matt Wiman here. Dude is a seriously underrated fighter and has been robbed twice now in the UFC. Just a total injustice.

[Kaladarus]

Wiman should have won easily. It's kind of stupid to bring up things like "the way MMA is scored" as a defense to the Siver decision. The way MMA is scored takedowns/clinch against the cage win fights. If you were able to plug in all past decisions into a computer and the computer could figure out a decision for this fight based on decisions that have happened in the past, Wiman wins every time. Even a program as useless as fightmetric that overvalues the useless punches Siver gave was still able to score the fight for Wiman.

[gym rat]

Wiman should have won easily. It's kind of stupid to bring up things like "the way MMA is scored" as a defense to the Siver decision. The way MMA is scored takedowns/clinch against the cage win fights. If you were able to plug in all past decisions into a computer and the computer could figure out a decision for this fight based on decisions that have happened in the past, Wiman wins every time. Even a program as useless as fightmetric that overvalues the useless punches Siver gave was still able to score the fight for Wiman.

More has to be done for a fighter to win in the clinch up against the cage. Simply holding on to a leg or being sprawled on while eating rabbit punches is clearly not enough to win up against the cage.

[Ladle]

More has to be done for a fighter to win in the clinch up against the cage. Simply holding on to a leg or being sprawled on while eating rabbit punches is clearly not enough to win up against the cage.

Oh yeah, because the mini-punches of Siver were clearly more significant than Wiman's guillotine and omoplata attempts, as well as his consistent octagon control. I could totally appreciate the argument for Siver winning round three if he was punishing Wiman's takedowns, and landing, clean hard counter shots (a la Kampmann/Sanchez), but he wasn't. He was tapping him in the face.

Also, Kaladarus brings up the excellent point that Wiman also deserved to win even in the context of the way that MMA is typically judged (in the sense that forcing your opponent up against the cage for prolonged periods is usually held in high regard). Judges don't understand what they're watching, and are only consistent in their inconsistency.

[gym rat]

The octagon control and submission attempts argument is absurd. The fact of the matter is they were failed takedowns. Siver needs to be given credit for defending the takedown. Wiman should not be given credit (octagon control) for his failed takedowns. He was on the bottom for the most part and just for hanging on and not allowing Siver to get back to the center of ring does not mean he should win the round on OctagonControl. The submissions were not even close and furthermore what about Siver's "awesome" guillotines then.

It was a close fight but in my opinion I would have a hard time saying Wiman did enough to win the first and third rounds.

[Ladle]

The octagon control and submission attempts argument is absurd. The fact of the matter is they were failed takedowns. Siver needs to be given credit for defending the takedown. Wiman should not be given credit (octagon control) for his failed takedowns. He was on the bottom for the most part and just for hanging on and not allowing Siver to get back to the center of ring does not mean he should win the round on OctagonControl. The submissions were not even close and furthermore what about Siver's "awesome" guillotines then.

Your entire argument is absurd. You're justifying Siver winning the third round on the basis that he defended the whole time and only landed baby punches. You're saying that's more significant than two submission attempts and LITERAL octagon control. That's preposterous.

Siver needs to be given credit for defending the takedown. Wiman should not be given credit (octagon control) for his failed takedowns.

What the ****? Now holding your opponent up against the cage isn't octagon control, even though it LITERALLY is? Okay buddy, you keep establishing your arbitrary rules. LOL.

Siver needs to be given credit for defending the takedown.

If your opponent is continually putting you in a position where you have to defend (and you're not inflicting damage as you defend), you're losing the fight.

The submissions were not even close and furthermore what about Siver's "awesome" guillotines then.

Those submission attempts constitute the most significant offense in the round. Also, Siver's guillotine attempt was in the first round, not the third. We're discussing the third. You knew that, right? At least be aware of what we're actually debating here.

[gym rat]

Your entire argument is absurd. You're justifying Siver winning the third round on the basis that he defended the whole time and only landed baby punches. You're saying that's more significant than two submission attempts and LITERAL octagon control. That's preposterous.

No I'm saying that he won the standup in the third round which I stated in earlier post and that Wiman takedown attempts were not enough for him to win the third round.

I think you are forgetting that there was some standup as well in the third round. It was not all Wiman holding on to a leg and getting sprawled on.

To say this is a robbery is amateurish of you and you clearly cannot be objective because you obviously had wagers on Wiman. It was a close fight but I feel the right decision was rendered.

[Ladle]

No I'm saying that he won the standup in the third round which I stated in earlier post and that Wiman takedown attempts were not enough for him to win the third round.

I think you are forgetting that there was some standup as well in the third round. It was not all Wiman holding on to a leg and getting sprawled on.

Won the stand-up? Please, tell me which significant shots Siver landed in the third round.

Matt Wiman's octagon control and submission attempts were more significant than anything Siver landed in the stand-up in the third.

To say this is a robbery is amateurish of you

You haven't justified a damn thing. You just said "Siver won the stand-up" with zero evidence. Until you can start substantiating what you're saying, I'm going to keep saying that Wiman got ripped off.

and you clearly cannot be objective because you obviously had wagers on Wiman.

Uh, don't tell me what I can and can't be. I will always remain objective. I was very vocal about Marcos Galvão beating Joe Warren, even though I bet on Warren. I was also very vocal about Riki Fukuda beating Nick Ring, even though I had money on Ring. I can remain impartial, and judging by your argument here, apparently I'm a lot more objective than you are.

[gym rat]

Won the stand-up? Please, tell me which significant shots Siver landed in the third round.

Matt Wiman's octagon control and submission attempts were more significant than anything Siver landed in the stand-up in the third.



You haven't justified a damn thing. You just said "Siver won the stand-up" with zero evidence. Until you can start substantiating what you're saying, I'm going to keep saying that Wiman got ripped off.



Uh, don't tell me what I can and can't be. I will always remain objective. I was very vocal about Marcos Galvão beating Joe Warren, even though I bet on Warren. I was also very vocal about Riki Fukuda beating Nick Ring, even though I had money on Ring. I can remain impartial, and judging by your argument here, apparently I'm a lot more objective than you are.

Okay Ladle, I think we are beating a dead horse at this point. Obviously we can see how easy it is for two people to view the same fight differently.

[Wrecked]

More has to be done for a fighter to win in the clinch up against the cage. Simply holding on to a leg or being sprawled on while eating rabbit punches is clearly not enough to win up against the cage.

[gym rat]

Couture usually gets a takedown though. He usually doesn't spend that much time getting sprawled on and eating rabbit punches throughout the round.

[Ladle]

Okay Ladle, I think we are beating a dead horse at this point. Obviously we can see how easy it is for two people to view the same fight differently.

I accept that, but if someone can't justify their claims, then I don't think their claims have any credibility.

Anyway, as long as you're not accusing me of being influenced by the likes of Mike Goldberg, I'm sure we'll get along just fine.

[Ladle]

UFC 132 Review

Amount Staked: 99.97

Amount Returned: 84.87

Profit: -15.1 units

Worst/most unlucky night of MMA betting I've had so far, but the surprises made for an extremely enjoyable night of fights, so it's not all bad. Watching Ortiz sink in that guillotine on Bader was the perfect antithesis of Kongo's incredble comeback last month. Pretty crazy how we can get a parrallel like that across two consecutive events.

Ironically, this was one of the events which I felt most confident about coming in. Like pretty much everyone else in the world, I considered the odds of Ortiz finishing Bader to be extremely remote. 15 of my units said it wasn't going to happen, but it did. Such is the nature of gambling. Happens to us all, I guess.

Hopefully 133 is more kind to me.

6.2 units on Dominick Cruz by decision at +170 to win 10.4 units

0.4 units on Urijah Faber wins Submission of the Night at +820 to win 3.28 units

5 units on Matt Wiman at +130 to win 6.5 units

2.5 units on Andre Winner at +130 to win 3.25 units

6.2 units on Dong Hyun Kim by decision at +150 to win 9.3 units

1.5 units on Sotiropoulos by decision at +150 to win 2.25 units

6 units on Wanderlei Silva at -120 to win 5 units
2 units on Chris Leben by KO at +400 to win 8 units
0.5 on Chris Leben by KO at +800 to win 4 units

2.5 units profit if Silva wins.
6 units profit if Leben wins by KO.

12.55 units on Bader/Tito goes the distance at -130 to win 9.65 units
13.5 units on Bader/Tito goes the distance at -135 to win 9.99 units
13.5 units on Bader/Tito goes the distance at -148 to win 9.12 units

13.3 units on Bader/Tito doesn't go the distance at +280 to win 37.23 units
0.92 on Bader/Tito doesn't go the distance at +250 to win 2.32 units

6.2 units on Ryan Bader by T/KO at +366 to win 22.96 units

Hedged with...

9.7 units on Bader/Tito goes the distance at -157 to win 6.2 units

Progress so far...

UFC Fight Night: Seattle: +40.00 units (11/14 successful plays)
Bellator 38: +1.9 units (1/1 succesful plays)
Strikeforce: Diaz vs. Daley: +5.47 units (2/5 successful plays)
Bellator 40: +1.7 units (1/1 successful plays)
Bellator 41: +3.15 units (1/1 successful plays)
UFC 129: -1.69 units (5/7 successful plays)
UFC 130: +14.59 units (7/13 successful plays)
TUF 13 Finale: -13.2 units (2/7 successful plays)
UFC 131: N/A
Strikeforce: Dallas: +7.65 units (5/9 successful plays; deserved to be 6/9)
UFC Live: Kongo vs. Barry: +33.12 units (5/7 successful plays)
UFC 132: -15.1 units (3/8 successful plays)

Progress since March 26, 2011: +77.59 units

Was aiming to exceed +100 units profit with this event. Would have been nice for just three months work, but wasn't to be. Hoping to reach that milestone within the next few events.

[lasker]

UFC 132 Review

Amount Staked: 99.97

Amount Returned: 84.87

Profit: -15.1 units

Worst/most unlucky night of MMA betting I've had so far, but the surprises made for an extremely enjoyable night of fights, so it's not all bad. Watching Ortiz sink in that guillotine on Bader was the perfect antithesis of Kongo's incredble comeback last month. Pretty crazy how we can get a parrallel like that across two consecutive events.

Ironically, this was one of the events which I felt most confident about coming in. Like pretty much everyone else in the world, I considered the odds of Ortiz finishing Bader to be extremely remote. 15 of my units said it wasn't going to happen, but it did. Such is the nature of gambling. Happens to us all, I guess.

Hopefully 133 is more kind to me.



Progress so far...

UFC Fight Night: Seattle: +40.00 units (11/14 successful plays)
Bellator 38: +1.9 units (1/1 succesful plays)
Strikeforce: Diaz vs. Daley: +5.47 units (2/5 successful plays)
Bellator 40: +1.7 units (1/1 successful plays)
Bellator 41: +3.15 units (1/1 successful plays)
UFC 129: -1.69 units (5/7 successful plays)
UFC 130: +14.59 units (7/13 successful plays)
TUF 13 Finale: -13.2 units (2/7 successful plays)
UFC 131: N/A
Strikeforce: Dallas: +7.65 units (5/9 successful plays; deserved to be 6/9)
UFC Live: Kongo vs. Barry: +33.12 units (5/7 successful plays)
UFC 132: -15.1 units (3/8 successful plays)

Progress since March 26, 2011: +77.59 units

Was aiming to exceed +100 units profit with this event. Would have been nice for just three months work, but wasn't to be. Hoping to reach that milestone within the next few events.

you'll get there soon enough. incredible results, truly

[illmatick]

Just a minor setback man, only thing that really sucks is having to wait so long for another big MMa event. i don't think I've ever been more upset about turning a profit than I was last night. Just a lot of small things I could have done that would have really boosted my results.

back to the film room man, always a sanctuary for me.

[Eccocide]

Yeah well tht was my point, clearly with current rules it was only a 10-9 but I just think tht the difference is damage and dominance was a lot greater than the difference in Rnds 1 or 3 yet tht difference doesnt get take in to account with the current scoring sytstem. Is what it is tho

I see what your saying. Thats kind why i always liked the idea of the half-point system. I would have gave Siver rounds 1 and 3 as 10-9.5's and Wimans round 2 as a 10-9 or 10-8.5. The major problem with the half point system is that there would prolly be a lot more draws (as in this case possibly) which isnt something anybody would want to see.

[Educ8d Degener8]

UFC 132 Review


Progress since March 26, 2011: +77.59 units

Just a reminder of the grand scheme of things... keep your chin up f*cker.

[Chairib]

Couture usually gets a takedown though. He usually doesn't spend that much time getting sprawled on and eating rabbit punches throughout the round.

He didn't get sprawled on because his takedown attempts were mostly Greco-Roman techniques. Toney's the only guy he used a double leg on and he shot from way outside.