« ESPN SportsNation on UFC 100 | Home | Dan LeBatard talks about UFC 100 on ESPN »
Betting on UFC 100
By Zach Arnold | July 8, 2009
Steve Cofield & Dave Farra held a gambler’s anonymous meeting on Raw Vegas regarding the top three fights at UFC 100 and what is the ‘best value’ to bet on.
- Dan Henderson vs. Michael Bisping – both men said if you like Bisping, bet now before more people bet on him. He’s considered their ‘best value pick.’
- Georges St. Pierre vs. Thiago Alves – both men said if you can get St. Pierre at around -200 or -225, take it. If not, avoid the fight.
- Brock Lesnar vs. Frank Mir – both men said take Mir if he’s +190 or higher as an underdog. There’s a good chance that casual fans will put more money on Lesnar than Mir at the sportsbooks.
How ESPN is covering UFC 100
Besides MMA Live being live in Las Vegas, ESPN’s coverage of UFC 100 consists of Colin Cowherd on ESPN2 answering questions like this:
More frightening appearance: Brock Lesnar or Lady Gaga?
SportsNation said 53% in favor of Lesnar, BTW.
Topics: Media, MMA, UFC, Zach Arnold | 20 Comments » | Permalink | Trackback |
Pretty funny but I disagree with nearly everything they say. GSP is not worth the risk at -220ish against someone very dangerous and he’s actually -320 anyway which is nuts. Bisping has a chance but not enough of one, Lesnar is probably going to beast Murr.
If you want to bet on someone as a favourite, bet Lesnar but honestly this isn’t a card to be betting on unless you think that Thiago will find GSPs off switch. At +260, that’s the best value on the card. He’ll just have been drilling escapes from the bottom for about 4 months and on the feet, what’s going to happen? I think the fight’s 50:50. GSP needs basically to go to a decision – Alves has at least 5 chances to score a KO.
I’m not a gambler, but there are some good underdog bets on this event.
Bisping is a good bet. I think he’ll out point Henderson.
ESPN or any big media outlets are really not covering UFC 100 at all, and its only a couple of days away.
Only way that I can see Alves winning this is if he comes in 20 pounds overweight.
The idea of value betting is preposterous and how people lose their shirts. On anything you are willing to bet money the key is to analyze, decide what you think will happen and lay your bet. If you think Alvrs is going to win bet 2 or 3 grand on him. But don’t bet big on Alves because the odds are high. If you like underdogs throw a hundred on him.
If you like GSP even at -320. That’s paying 33%. That’s way better than any bank of stock will pay out. Which in case you’re wondering is why gamblin is illegal in most of the US.
The key to this card in my opinion is parlay betting.
I meant to say don’t just bet on alves because the odds are high. But if you were going to bet home even if it were a pick ’em fight now is a good time to lay a lot of money on him.
I’ve had a good run of luck betting conservatively and when I see a line in the wrong place I lay big money down. For example Chuck Rampage 2. I saw Rampage + 225 and said that’s free money.
bullshit judging system is making it harder and harder for us to bet on the fight that has close odds (which usually means the fight is likely to go the distance).
The way they scored Tibau vs Melvin reminded me of Rutten vs Randleman from pre-zuffa era. Now our predictions are required to speculate on promoter’s point of view.
Hendo vs Bisping – I’m pretty sure that they will fight 3 full rounds and decision will reflect “politics” more or less. I won’t bet on this match.
Lock of the night- Fitch over Brazilian. Fitch’s selfishness won’t help the sport see another sokoudju. I would easily say “Bonnar over Coleman” if this fight took place 2 years ago. I just don’t know how serious Psycho’s been about MMA lately and don’t wanna pick a guy with questionable stamina and mental stability against the world class wrestler.
Alls I know is my parlay for this weekend looks like this; Jones, Fitch and Belcher.
I’m confident in it.
Roadblock, if you think a fight is 50:50 and one guy is +260, it’s not proposterous to bet on it at all.
With any sport, there isn’t a right answer. If they fight 100 times, a different thing would happen each time and with that said, the concept of value betting is not completely untransferrable from something like poker to MMA.
I CERTAINLY wouldn’t bet on someone I thought was going to lose just because they were good odds but I CERTAINLY don’t bet on someone just because I think they should win, irrespective of the odds. GSP at -320 is BAD odds. His chin is his weak spot – why bet against someone who can knock him the f out at any point?
I’m not betting on the fight because I am a GSP fan and I want to enjoy the fight without external thoughts about money but betting GSP in this fight is not a great idea.
“His chin is his weak spot – why bet against someone who can knock him the f out at any point?”
This is something I read all the time from ‘hardcores’…that they seem to have the inside scoop on the bone density of a fighter’s chin bone.
How many times has GSP been KOed? ONE TKO in his career equals a weak spot where he’s vulnerable to lose at any point? That’s a huge leap in logic.
ANYONE can (and has) be KOed at any point at this level. Don’t kid yourself.
Aparently I’m not allowed an opinion? I’m not kidding myself. I’m a massive GSP fan – he is my favourite fighter. BUT he has a couple of weaknesses – he doesn’t move his head enough and he has a dodgy chin. The reason he hasn’t been KOd more is because he’s not an idiot – he fights in the most sensible way as to not get caught.
Tycoon I’m agreeing with you that if you think it is 50/50 and there is big odds on one guy take a flier. But I hear a lot of people say value bet when they’re meaning to say take the points regardless of fight analysis. Betting is an all or moving game. It isn’t like a value option in stocks. If you ok k wrong in gambling you get zero.
Dave I like your parlay. That’s how I do ’em too. Look for a prelim mismatch or like when Thiago Silva a d Goran Rejic hit he scene andthe house disk know where to put the line on them. One food underdog in your parlay substantially increases your take.
To be honest, the whole “MMA is too unpredictable!” thing is out of hand. If it was that unpredictable, there wouldn’t be dominant champs in 3 weight classes. Someone would have touched Anderson Silva, Miguel Torres, or Fedor Emelianenko’s chin by now. Heck, they would have done that to Lyoto too.
It creates good value though. No way Anderson should have been below -1200 for a fight with someone like Cote, but he was by a lot.
one good underdog. God damned iPhone. Sorry. Makes me type like a retard.
Also if you’re confident in GSP (and I’m not I think this fight is more like a 65/35 fight in that if they fought 100 times GSP would win 65) -320 is still good money. I used to do good taking the Patriots and Colts to win outright over inferior teams. You get horrible -450’s and things like that but you’re still getting a big return on your money. If you put your money in a CD with a 5% yield it will take you 4-6 years to get that kind of return. Of course you have no chance of losing all your money in a CD.
I loved Roadblock’s first post. Advising against betting, but then saying bust a parlay lol. Honestly, if that was a semi-troll post, that was brilliant.
I never listen to people’s advice online when it comes to betting because I don’t think that most people who talk about it actually bet. I have some small action on this card, but I wouldn’t be surprised if I lost them all. I only bet underdogs, or pick ’ems.
The last decent sized bet I made was Yvel over Rizzo, and the next decent sized one I have coming up is Mousasi over Babalu (got Mousasi @ +140 and the line has since shifted.)
“More frightening appearance: Brock Lesnar or Lady Gaga?”
Lady Gaga, hands down.
Although I would bet Brock could TKO her in R2, even with her flaming nipples.
The sport goes through periods of upsets. Typically every 2 to 3 years as the sport kind of progresses to the next level. With that said, Alan is right. There is a lot more consistency in the sport then people realize.
One of the most common mistakes I see is when people say something to the effect of “Well, I wouldn’t bet on Jones at -500, but I’ll add him to my parlay”. Parlays are a bad idea unless you like the odds on every pick enough that you would be willing to make a straight bet on it, because literally, you’re making a straight bet with all the winnings you would have had without that particular pick. So if you add Jones to make your parlay $600 instead of $500, it’s the same as if you just put down $500 on Jones on a straight bet.
It’s not directed at anyone in particular, so if the shoe fits, whatever.
One of the most common mistakes I see is when people say something to the effect of “Well, I wouldn’t bet on Jones at -500, but I’ll add him to my parlay”.
The attitude a lot of people have is that he doesn’t really represent any value in and of himself. If you put 20 on him at -500, you win $4. Most people want to win more than $4; if they were okay with that, they’d probably play scratch-offs more often. Ironically, parlays are cheap and fun and ultimately not much different than scratchoffs when it comes to payback. You can do a $5 parlay on guys you’d otherwise bet straight on that pays out $50-75. I usually do one or two of those per event, but they’re usually a fraction of what I put down elsewhere.