Brad Tavares -185...Pound Bitches

**brokenbrain** · 05-13-12, 07:46 PM

Agreed 100%. All my parlays will have Tavares in them. Excellent assessment, Vitooch.

**bjpenn85** · 05-13-12, 07:51 PM

people who bet on a consistent basis, will probably say, what a stupid thing to do. Do not take this the wrong way, but hasnt it crossed your mind that you can be wrong with tavares? if so, all your bets go straight to hell.

**Luca Fury** · 05-13-12, 07:52 PM

His chin is a concern, though. Baroni hurt him when they fought in 2011... Phil Baroni... in 2011...

Also got KO'd on TUF by the illegal kick and then almost KO'd by McGee before being choked out.

Still, Yang's passiveness and willingness to sit back and wait to land one big shot will likely cost him again. Tavares should either win rounds on the feet simply by being more active, or maybe can get a sub later in the fight.

But that chin of Tavares...

Yang has a solid puncher's chance, but is definitely the likely loser. I'm staying away, since there are better bets on the card. I briefly thought about betting Brad, though.

**Vitooch** · 05-13-12, 07:54 PM

Yea...gabe put Thompson in all his parlays for UFC 145 and got buried.

As confident as I am in Tavares, there's no way I would risk that much on him.

**Luca Fury** · 05-13-12, 07:57 PM

Originally posted by Vitooch

Yea...gabe put Thompson in all his parlays for UFC 145 and got buried.

As confident as I am in Tavares, there's no way I would risk that much on him.

Wha??????? You're kidding, right? Please say yes!

**Vitooch** · 05-13-12, 07:57 PM

Originally posted by Luca Fury

His chin is a concern, though. Baroni hurt him when they fought in 2011... Phil Baroni... in 2011...

Also got KO'd on TUF by the illegal kick and then almost KO'd by McGee before being choked out.

Still, Yang's passiveness and willingness to sit back and wait to land one big shot will likely cost him again. Tavares should either win rounds on the feet simply by being more active, or maybe can get a sub later in the fight.

But that chin of Tavares...

Yang has a solid puncher's chance, but is definitely the likely loser. I'm staying away, since there are better bets on the card. I briefly thought about betting Brad, though.

Baroni is a monster in the first few minutes of every fight!

**Vitooch** · 05-13-12, 07:57 PM

Originally posted by Luca Fury

Wha??????? You're kidding, right? Please say yes!

About gabe?

**bjpenn85** · 05-13-12, 08:01 PM

true, even jon jones would be hesitant to trade with that maniac the first minute. in round three i would probably locked up my grandmother without feeling any concern.

**Luca Fury** · 05-13-12, 08:04 PM

Originally posted by Vitooch

About gabe?

Yeah. One-dimensional, completely unproven Stephen Thompson in EVERY parlay???

I don't want to make fun of someone, but I really hope he didn't do that. That's bad.

**Vitooch** · 05-13-12, 08:07 PM

Thx!

Here are my quick picks for 145:

Jon Jones -440
Miguel Torres -120
Che Mills +485
Brendan Schaub -280
John Alessio +285
Stephen Thompson -250
Anthony Njokuani -190

I'll also be betting Griggs, Brimage, and Danzig.

Thompson-Njokuani-Schaub-Jones

Thompson-Njokuani-Mills-Jones

Thompson-Njokuani-Alessio-Jones

Thompson-Njokuani-Alessio-Mills

John Alessio, Che Mills, and Marcus Brimage could all be sweet upsets. Especially John and Che.

**Vitooch** · 05-13-12, 08:08 PM

**brokenbrain** · 05-13-12, 08:12 PM

It definitely has crossed my mind. However, a) I'm not a pro gambler/bettor and have no desire to start second guessing myself. b) I'm not big on this event and won't be wagering much/often (unlike UFC 146). c) I think the Tavares bet is the best bet of the night and fully agree with Vitoochs' assessment. d) My Astrologer said this fight is during a bad Lunar cycle for 'the Ox' - haha, joking.
I can appreciate your point, bjp85, and you're math is correct = if I'm wrong, I'm very wrong. But I've done my homework and don't see how Tavares loses this fight. It's like JDS v Mir...Mir could possibly win, but he probably won't. The Ox could possibly win, but he probably won't. I can bet that.
As for stupid betting - I've done far worse.
Cheers mate

**gabe** · 05-13-12, 09:27 PM

Yeah, I thought for sure Thompson was talented enough to beat Matt Brown. I saw him as an up and coming talent, a la Rory MacDonald, but boy was I dead wrong. That was more of a Matt Brown fade than anything else.

That was nothing, though, 'cos I didn't have a great night, regardless of that fight... a couple months ago Paul Daley losing on the Strikeforce card is what REALLY buried me! I was set to cash in HUGE had he won.

**Vitooch** · 05-13-12, 09:49 PM

Originally posted by gabe

Yeah, I thought for sure Thompson was talented enough to beat Matt Brown. I saw him as an up and coming talent, a la Rory MacDonald, but boy was I dead wrong. That was more of a Matt Brown fade than anything else.

That was nothing, though, 'cos I didn't have a great night, regardless of that fight... a couple months ago Paul Daley losing on the Strikeforce card is what REALLY buried me! I was set to cash in HUGE had he won.

I actually thought Thompson was going to win also. I thought the disparity in standup abilities alone would be the difference. I just wasn't nearly as confident as you.

Daley's performance was horrible. He just seemed to quit after a unexpected first round.

**gabe** · 05-13-12, 09:55 PM

Originally posted by Vitooch

I actually thought Thompson was going to win also. I thought the disparity in standup abilities alone would be the difference. I just wasn't nearly as confident as you.

Daley's performance was horrible. He just seemed to quit after a unexpected first round.

I thought Thompson was an easy pick... Who would have thought that a 22/23 year old "superstar" athlete would gas out after 1 round? If he wasn't gassed, he would have EASILY knocked Matt Brown outw within 2 minutes of the 2nd round. Matt Brown was DONE. I really did not expect Thompson to suck nearly as much as he did. Wow, just WOW!!

**Vitooch** · 05-15-12, 06:56 PM

**sirchadwick1** · 05-15-12, 06:57 PM

Haha, I was sweating the decision... even though I thought it was a clear 29-28 for Tavares. Good call, but close fight.

**Vitooch** · 05-15-12, 06:59 PM

Yea second round was killing me!

**Luca Fury** · 05-16-12, 07:44 PM

Damn, I got robbed here. I bet Yang at +160. I had him winning 29-28, as did most of the MMA websites. Sucks...

**Vitooch** · 05-16-12, 07:46 PM

Not robbed...gave round 2 to yang and 3 to tavares. Round 1 was very close.

**brokenbrain** · 05-16-12, 08:13 PM

Originally posted by sirchadwick1

Haha, I was sweating the decision... even though I thought it was a clear 29-28 for Tavares. Good call, but close fight.

Yeah...that was tense, I thought it was going the other way and my night was over.

**Mercersux** · 05-16-12, 11:48 PM

Listen, Tavares won rnd 1 by a close margin, Yang won rnd 2 by pressing the action and getting in the better strikes, and rnd 3 went to Tavares by takedowns and better striking since Yang was just cooked the last rnd. I defintely could see how people could be on either side for the first round but i don't think you'll see anyone outraged by this decision. Only the ones who bet on Yang. Thank god i wasn't one of em.

**Oblivian** · 05-17-12, 10:33 AM

I had Tavares with 1 and 3. It was funny because I looked at MMA website play by plays right after the bell in the 3rd to see where they stood on Round 1. I was pretty shocked to see most had Yang. The beginning of that round was all Tavares.

**NunyaBidness** · 05-17-12, 10:43 AM

It was a close one, but obviously Yang was the right side.

**gabe** · 05-17-12, 02:48 PM

Obviously Tavares was the right side. I think he was -135 at one point.

Only time you can say a loser was the right side is if they were a big underdog that came close to winning. Yang was barely a dog. It was a close betting play and he lost. Betting on him was a bad play, no value in his line.

**Vitooch** · 05-17-12, 02:54 PM

Yea I thought -185 was a steal!

The fact that it got to -135 disappoints me.

**Vitooch** · 05-17-12, 02:59 PM

If Tavares didn't have trouble seeing in the 2nd round, he probably would have won that round too. As expected, Tavares was the more technical striker and landed more strikes (whether they be body kicks or jabs). I would love to see the FightMetric for this fight.

**NunyaBidness** · 05-17-12, 03:22 PM

Originally posted by gabe

Obviously Tavares was the right side. I think he was -135 at one point.

Only time you can say a loser was the right side is if they were a big underdog that came close to winning. Yang was barely a dog. It was a close betting play and he lost. Betting on him was a bad play, no value in his line.

So, Erick Silva wasn't the right side against Prater? Okami vs Boetch? A million other examples.

You could fill books with all the shit you're wrong about.

**gabe** · 05-17-12, 03:54 PM

Originally posted by NunyaBidness

So, Erick Silva wasn't the right side against Prater? Okami vs Boetch? A million other examples.

You could fill books with all the shit you're wrong about.

Huh? This fight was a close decision. Those fights are completely different. What an irrelevant example by an idiot with aspergers, I swear...

Boetsch was the right side. He was a big underdog and he won. How could he not have been the ride side, you imbecile?

Same with Prater. He was a big underdog who cashed, clearly the right side! Anybody who bet -700 on Erick Silva was in no doubt on the WRONG side.

Can't believe how dumb this guy is. Do everybody a favor and don't talk about anything that is unrelated to mathematics.

**NunyaBidness** · 05-17-12, 03:58 PM

Originally posted by gabe

Only time you can say a loser was the right side is if they were a big underdog that came close to winning.
Only time you can say a loser was the right side is if they were a big underdog that came close to winning.
Only time you can say a loser was the right side is if they were a big underdog that came close to winning.
Only time you can say a loser was the right side is if they were a big underdog that came close to winning.
Only time you can say a loser was the right side is if they were a big underdog that came close to winning.
Only time you can say a loser was the right side is if they were a big underdog that came close to winning.
Only time you can say a loser was the right side is if they were a big underdog that came close to winning.
Only time you can say a loser was the right side is if they were a big underdog that came close to winning.
Only time you can say a loser was the right side is if they were a big underdog that came close to winning.
Only time you can say a loser was the right side is if they were a big underdog that came close to winning.
Only time you can say a loser was the right side is if they were a big underdog that came close to winning.
Only time you can say a loser was the right side is if they were a big underdog that came close to winning.
Only time you can say a loser was the right side is if they were a big underdog that came close to winning.
Only time you can say a loser was the right side is if they were a big underdog that came close to winning.
Only time you can say a loser was the right side is if they were a big underdog that came close to winning.
Only time you can say a loser was the right side is if they were a big underdog that came close to winning.
Only time you can say a loser was the right side is if they were a big underdog that came close to winning.
Only time you can say a loser was the right side is if they were a big underdog that came close to winning.
Only time you can say a loser was the right side is if they were a big underdog that came close to winning.
Only time you can say a loser was the right side is if they were a big underdog that came close to winning.
Only time you can say a loser was the right side is if they were a big underdog that came close to winning.
Only time you can say a loser was the right side is if they were a big underdog that came close to winning.
Only time you can say a loser was the right side is if they were a big underdog that came close to winning.
Only time you can say a loser was the right side is if they were a big underdog that came close to winning.
Only time you can say a loser was the right side is if they were a big underdog that came close to winning.
Only time you can say a loser was the right side is if they were a big underdog that came close to winning.
Only time you can say a loser was the right side is if they were a big underdog that came close to winning.
Only time you can say a loser was the right side is if they were a big underdog that came close to winning.

you said what?

**Vitooch** · 05-17-12, 04:00 PM

Originally posted by gabe

Huh? This fight was a close decision. Those fights are completely different. What an irrelevant example by an idiot with aspergers, I swear...

Boetsch was the right side. He was a big underdog and he won. How could he not have been the ride side, you imbecile?

Same with Prater. He was a big underdog who cashed, clearly the right side! Anybody who bet -700 on Erick Silva was in no doubt on the WRONG side.

Can't believe how dumb this guy is. Do everybody a favor and don't talk about anything that is unrelated to mathematics.

I completely disagree with Prater being a good play. Silva wins that fight 99% of the time. Prater got outclassed, and even more so, lucky.

**Pew Pew** · 05-17-12, 04:04 PM

gabe i think you hit a nerve.

NunyaBitterness

**Beelzebubzy** · 05-17-12, 04:04 PM

Originally posted by gabe

Huh? This fight was a close decision. Those fights are completely different. What an irrelevant example by an idiot with aspergers, I swear...

Boetsch was the right side. He was a big underdog and he won. How could he not have been the ride side, you imbecile?

Same with Prater. He was a big underdog who cashed, clearly the right side! Anybody who bet -700 on Erick Silva was in no doubt on the WRONG side.

Can't believe how dumb this guy is. Do everybody a favor and don't talk about anything that is unrelated to mathematics.

Boetsch got picked apart for 2 rounds and landed a shot on a guy who has not been KOed in his UFC career. (Anderson was a TKO stoppage)
Prater was dumbfound luck. Your example of Prater could be the same if Cote vs Anderson, Anderson breaks his leg instead.

**gabe** · 05-17-12, 04:06 PM

Originally posted by NunyaBidness

you said what?

I said what you quoted me saying 100x

Was Prater a loser that came close to winning? No.
Did Boetsch lose a close decision? No.