Velcorr's mma money machine

[BIGDAY]

Right on man 129-81 is sick.

I know you've been betting long before '14 tho.


Good luck to you too. Throw some underdogs (like Wineland great pick) in there every now n then n watch you Will win even more money!

Yeah. Wish I'd have figured out the spreadsheet better before I started tracking as the sport was more profitable in my opinion. Thanks for the advise.

[Rich Benjamins]

And josh samman? Stanciau? Oleynik su, inside distance?

Oh yea, he did lose those. But overall he won and was spot on on some. I can tell by what he posted that he's likely a big winner long term. But maybe not, who knows.

[Ty$]

Where did he go?

[bjpenn85]

Oh yea, he did lose those. But overall he won and was spot on on some. I can tell by what he posted that he's likely a big winner long term. But maybe not, who knows.

Its the way he lost, going for stanciau and samman, i have 0 respect for his breakdowns as hes losses piled up. You shouldnt loose often. People are so careless...well i did profit total over the night? Ohh i did go 5-2. No, this 2thing yoou have behind your 5, is a huge issue. You shouldnt have losses at all.I can go 2-3 month without loosing a single bet. Who cares, his not a pro. Hes an amateur, why care

[sweep]

True. I hold my own though.

To be honest, was much easier to profit earlier on in the sport... I only track my strait wagers. Harder to track my props and parlays. But want to show I can hold profit strait betting.

GL on the upcoming cards.

end of thread

kushmoney=buried alive

[Rich Benjamins]

Its the way he lost, going for stanciau and samman, i have 0 respect for his breakdowns as hes losses piled up. You shouldnt loose often. People are so careless...well i did profit total over the night? Ohh i did go 5-2. No, this 2thing yoou have behind your 5, is a huge issue. You shouldnt have losses at all.I can go 2-3 month without loosing a single bet. Who cares, his not a pro. Hes an amateur, why care

You make a good point, I appreciate it. I think there's a randomness factor to fighting, if a fighter is injured a bit, if his mind is off that day, if his strategy was wrong from the coaches. But overall, you should get the majority of your plays right, or you shouldn't make them.

[jjgold]

guys leave once they lose

[bjpenn85]

You make a good point, I appreciate it. I think there's a randomness factor to fighting, if a fighter is injured a bit, if his mind is off that day, if his strategy was wrong from the coaches. But overall, you should get the majority of your plays right, or you shouldn't make them.

Top level talent pull through anyway. Even with that broken toe, or finger or whatever. I start to realise i have made critical mistakes not understand how important the key word CONSISTANCY is. In betting, stocks, predicting whatever, its everything. I have bet this sammans and stanciaus and what not too long. Go for top level talent or a fighter that is consistent. Usually top level talent are consistent, but you can find top 15 fighters that are consistent as well that will win you money. Darren Elkins will never challenge for the title, but you know he beats most guys with his strategy.

[Rich Benjamins]

Good point. Don't bet on fighters that haven't proved consistency/reliability.

But how would you categorize Rockhold losing to Bisping? Rockhold seemed consistent. But maybe attaining the belt messed with his head like what's been happening lately to new champions. Or Henderson beating Lombard, who could've imagined that? Velasquez losing to Verdum. Rothwell KOing Overeem, Overeem KOing JDS, then JDS beating Rothwell.

I guess the answer is don't bet on fights that could end up being a surprise or a wild card. Or maybe bet on the dog in those possible situations.

[BIGDAY]

Good point. Don't bet on fighters that haven't proved consistency/reliability.

But how would you categorize Rockhold losing to Bisping? Rockhold seemed consistent. But maybe attaining the belt messed with his head like what's been happening lately to new champions. Or Henderson beating Lombard, who could've imagined that? Velasquez losing to Verdum. Rothwell KOing Overeem, Overeem KOing JDS, then JDS beating Rothwell.

I guess the answer is don't bet on fights that could end up being a surprise or a wild card. Or maybe bet on the dog in those possible situations.

Too be honest, heavyweights are hard to lay a wager on. The "if" factor has to be weighed in at a much higher rate. I do much better with stylistic lower weight matchups. Everyone has they're own methods to their madness though.

[bjpenn85]

[QUOTE=Rich Benjamins;26052496]Good point. Don't bet on fighters that haven't proved consistency/reliability.

But how would you categorize Rockhold losing to Bisping? Rockhold seemed consistent. But maybe attaining the belt messed with his head like what's been happening lately to new champions. Or Henderson beating Lombard, who could've imagined that? Velasquez losing to Verdum. Rothwell KOing Overeem, Overeem KOing JDS, then JDS beating Rothwell.

Then you have rules you make after experiencing shit. So an amateur mma bettor will bet on a heavyweight.Francis ngannou was also an exception to the rule as he faced basically a medioce light hevy weight and also is a top level talent. I bet on Alistair overeem to beat andrei arlovsky. He has not shown consistency in the ufc, but suddenly he became an conservative out fighter, a bit because of his KO losses. Then you may bet on a heavy weight fighter, but thats an exception to the rule. The rule is not bet heavy weight fighter so that one is rather easy. Most of your examples where heavy weight fighters.

So to the Rockhold vs Bisping. Difficult, i didnt bet that fight because of the price. Rule is:

1. Is the fighter consistent/matchup/style matchup
2.Price
3.Tope level talent.

So Rockhold bisping was a typical do not like the price, so rule number 3. But, lets say the price was good. Like 1.35 for rochkhold or better. Than you would probably have lost. But, nothing is without a risk. You cant predict the upset of the year? But is that my point? No. My point is that everytime you bet, you look at those three rules. You will win 85% of the time? How much do you really care loosing that one bet on upset of all time, or upset of the year? Let me answer that question for you. 0, nothing, i dont care, no one cares. All bets involve risk, your job is to eliminate risk as much as possible, youre not god. We cant predict everything.

Lombard/Henderson is a clear no bet. It could end both ways, maximum a parlay on lombard for small money. Cant bet against henderson, as henderson opposes the consistency rule, he consistently KO people out, so you cant challenge him.

Valesquez is a heavyweight coming from a long lay off, near 2 year. I have a rule when it comes to ring rust. most fighters will have ring rust over 1.5 year and up. So that will def be a high risk fight, but the rule doesnt say anything about layoff so thats an experience thing, that most podcast or breakdowns will explain. If you oppose all of those alarm bells chiming, then youre an idiot.

All of the new champions, had huge red flags. rousey? -1200, huge risk to lay. Rafael dos anjos -400 against another champ? Huge risk. no surprise if youre sane. Having consistent losses in MMA shouldnt happen. We know so much now. Just elminate fakk ups, go for consistency and accept the times rockhold looses against the bispings.

[bjpenn85]

Too be honest, heavyweights are hard to lay a wager on. The "if" factor has to be weighed in at a much higher rate. I do much better with stylistic lower weight matchups. Everyone has they're own methods to their madness though.

Agreed, but many methods are not the best method/ an effective method. Not all ways lead to rome...

[KushMoney]

end of thread

kushmoney=buried alive

No.

I actually don't care about you so you can continue talking shit lmao.

Bigday is okay, good guy - but we all know pulling off strong line of bets in the -200 range doesn't work/make money long term.

and I already gave up the good info BJPenn85 and Ty$ (ex-fighter Tyler Larson) are the long-term best bettors to agree with. You want to bet what they pick/bet.

the dummies on here naturally will think the losing fighter will win <50% of the time. and usually think Bjpenn85 and ty$'s bets aren't good or just disagree with analysis overall . but >50% they lose and don't make money.


I don't care about you "sweep" but good luck to you and listen to me and you will be happy.

[KushMoney]

[QUOTE=bjpenn85;26053102]

Good point. Don't bet on fighters that haven't proved consistency/reliability.

But how would you categorize Rockhold losing to Bisping? Rockhold seemed consistent. But maybe attaining the belt messed with his head like what's been happening lately to new champions. Or Henderson beating Lombard, who could've imagined that? Velasquez losing to Verdum. Rothwell KOing Overeem, Overeem KOing JDS, then JDS beating Rothwell.

Then you have rules you make after experiencing shit. So an amateur mma bettor will bet on a heavyweight.Francis ngannou was also an exception to the rule as he faced basically a medioce light hevy weight and also is a top level talent. I bet on Alistair overeem to beat andrei arlovsky. He has not shown consistency in the ufc, but suddenly he became an conservative out fighter, a bit because of his KO losses. Then you may bet on a heavy weight fighter, but thats an exception to the rule. The rule is not bet heavy weight fighter so that one is rather easy. Most of your examples where heavy weight fighters.

So to the Rockhold vs Bisping. Difficult, i didnt bet that fight because of the price. Rule is:

1. Is the fighter consistent/matchup/style matchup
2.Price
3.Tope level talent.

So Rockhold bisping was a typical do not like the price, so rule number 3. But, lets say the price was good. Like 1.35 for rochkhold or better. Than you would probably have lost. But, nothing is without a risk. You cant predict the upset of the year? But is that my point? No. My point is that everytime you bet, you look at those three rules. You will win 85% of the time? How much do you really care loosing that one bet on upset of all time, or upset of the year? Let me answer that question for you. 0, nothing, i dont care, no one cares. All bets involve risk, your job is to eliminate risk as much as possible, youre not god. We cant predict everything.

Lombard/Henderson is a clear no bet. It could end both ways, maximum a parlay on lombard for small money. Cant bet against henderson, as henderson opposes the consistency rule, he consistently KO people out, so you cant challenge him.

Valesquez is a heavyweight coming from a long lay off, near 2 year. I have a rule when it comes to ring rust. most fighters will have ring rust over 1.5 year and up. So that will def be a high risk fight, but the rule doesnt say anything about layoff so thats an experience thing, that most podcast or breakdowns will explain. If you oppose all of those alarm bells chiming, then youre an idiot.

All of the new champions, had huge red flags. rousey? -1200, huge risk to lay. Rafael dos anjos -400 against another champ? Huge risk. no surprise if youre sane. Having consistent losses in MMA shouldnt happen. We know so much now. Just elminate fakk ups, go for consistency and accept the times rockhold looses against the bispings.

This is how you MMA Gamblers need to think if you wanna make money.

Rousey - Luke Rockhold - Connor when he fought Nate - RDA vs. Alvarez All. Had. Huge. Red. Flags. If you actually do some research you would know..
With Rousey it was all the personal issues .
With Connor it was the fact that he was fighting 25 pounds above his normal fighting weight... shit like that doesn't work. Unheard of in boxing. Fighter athletes don't just gain 25 pounds of natural weight in weeks/months unless they are taking roids.
With Rockhold it was the complete disrespect of his opponent and random change of preparation/opponent and training camp technique. He fought like a different fighter for no reason. His normal style would have dominated.
With RDA it was the fact that he was coming off an injury and decent layoff... momentum was on Alvarez' side and he looked very, very good at the weigh-ins.

I didn't take Holm or Bisping but was all over Nate and Alvarez straight up and small on ITD props on 5dimes.

[bjpenn85]

[QUOTE=KushMoney;26053416]

This is how you MMA Gamblers need to think if you wanna make money.

Rousey - Luke Rockhold - Connor when he fought Nate - RDA vs. Alvarez All. Had. Huge. Red. Flags. If you actually do some research you would know..
With Rousey it was all the personal issues .
With Connor it was the fact that he was fighting 25 pounds above his normal fighting weight... shit like that doesn't work. Unheard of in boxing. Fighter athletes don't just gain 25 pounds of natural weight in weeks/months unless they are taking roids.
With Rockhold it was the complete disrespect of his opponent and random change of preparation/opponent and training camp technique. He fought like a different fighter for no reason. His normal style would have dominated.
With RDA it was the fact that he was coming off an injury and decent layoff... momentum was on Alvarez' side and he looked very, very good at the weigh-ins.

I didn't take Holm or Bisping but was all over Nate and Alvarez straight up and small on ITD props on 5dimes.

[Ty$]

No.

I actually don't care about you so you can continue talking shit lmao.

Bigday is okay, good guy - but we all know pulling off strong line of bets in the -200 range doesn't work/make money long term.

and I already gave up the good info BJPenn85 and Ty$ (ex-fighter Tyler Larson) are the long-term best bettors to agree with. You want to bet what they pick/bet.

the dummies on here naturally will think the losing fighter will win <50% of the time. and usually think Bjpenn85 and ty$'s bets aren't good or just disagree with analysis overall . but >50% they lose and don't make money.


I don't care about you "sweep" but good luck to you and listen to me and you will be happy.

How do you know who I am home slice? Lol wtf not cool in my eyes just cuz everyone on here has a diff name to go by... Oh well I guess.. So I do have good bets or no? Idfk it's a lot of luck and I like picking against the grain w some facts to boot.

[BIGDAY]

How do you know who I am home slice? Lol wtf not cool in my eyes just cuz everyone on here has a diff name to go by... Oh well I guess.. So I do have good bets or no? Idfk it's a lot of luck and I like picking against the grain w some facts to boot.

TY, by the sound of it I should be following you.

I might chill on my own plays and just keep eye on you.

Let's cash.

[bjpenn85]

Thats funny. Ill guess Kush is a sharp mf.

[Ty$]

Let's form a team BJ bounce ideas back and forth. TMT!!

[bjpenn85]

Let's form a team BJ bounce ideas back and forth. TMT!!

Sure, arent we already?

[KushMoney]

Sorry Ty$ if you want I can edit or erase post. But you said you train and fought Pablo Garza so I knew.

[bjpenn85]

Sorry Ty$ if you want I can edit or erase post. But you said you train and fought Pablo Garza so I knew.

Sherdog is a hell of a tool

[Ty$]

Sorry Ty$ if you want I can edit or erase post. But you said you train and fought Pablo Garza so I knew.

It don't matter

[sweep]

Business as usual.

No one steps on my turf.

Whats the play Saturday Elk??

Bisbing looks like freeeeeeeeee

[BIGDAY]

Whats the play Saturday Elk??

Bisbing looks like freeeeeeeeee

Maybe. Hendo has been tough to bet against. Not loving this weekends card.

Eyeing up a few of the upcoming fight night cards though...