Any gambler of any experience or anyone who knows markets has to cringe when ESPN's journalism rejects and ex-jocks tries to talk about the gambling world like they're "hip" and "informed", and even worse when they act like they know what they're talking about.
ESPN is proclaiming Rousey closed at -1400 and Holm at +800 by quoting the ultra square Vegas shop, The Westgate, and using that to call it the biggest upset in UFC history. When are these clowns going to learn that Vegas is corporate owned, high-vig rec. books that only caters to squares, and high-roller tourists, especially for markets like the UFC. Vegas shops will not let any consistent winning UFC bettors,or active pro's even play there, or they limit them quickly. Pinnacle closed with Rousey only at -810 and Holm was bet down to +610, and I'm sure they were taking a lot more action than the Westgate (I welcome any correction if I'm wrong on that point). You mean to tell me there isn't one person at ESPN that can look up Pinnacle 5 minutes before the fight goes off? Anyway, since Holm was really bet down to around 6-1, I'm almost positive T.J. Dillashaw closed at 8-1 or 9-1 when he challenged Barao in a UFC fight, hence, Holm is not the biggest winning underdog in UFC history, and perhaps someone can come up with an even bigger underdog than what Dillashaw was in the first Barao fight.
When "journalists" at ESPN get facts this wrong and you know it, just think how much other journalists get things wrong on things we don't know about.
ESPN is proclaiming Rousey closed at -1400 and Holm at +800 by quoting the ultra square Vegas shop, The Westgate, and using that to call it the biggest upset in UFC history. When are these clowns going to learn that Vegas is corporate owned, high-vig rec. books that only caters to squares, and high-roller tourists, especially for markets like the UFC. Vegas shops will not let any consistent winning UFC bettors,or active pro's even play there, or they limit them quickly. Pinnacle closed with Rousey only at -810 and Holm was bet down to +610, and I'm sure they were taking a lot more action than the Westgate (I welcome any correction if I'm wrong on that point). You mean to tell me there isn't one person at ESPN that can look up Pinnacle 5 minutes before the fight goes off? Anyway, since Holm was really bet down to around 6-1, I'm almost positive T.J. Dillashaw closed at 8-1 or 9-1 when he challenged Barao in a UFC fight, hence, Holm is not the biggest winning underdog in UFC history, and perhaps someone can come up with an even bigger underdog than what Dillashaw was in the first Barao fight.
When "journalists" at ESPN get facts this wrong and you know it, just think how much other journalists get things wrong on things we don't know about.
