Sam Peter vs. Eddie Chambers Chambers -105 (Bodog) 5.25 units
I'm getting on this one early because the odds on Chambers have been steadily increasing, and I expect him to be in the -150 range by fight time. Chambers' fast hands and evasive head movement should be enough to steadily take rounds from the slower Peter, who relies on wide, looping shots. Chambers is quick enough to steer clear of danger while racking up points. Although Chambers' workrate in the last half of his fight against Alexander Povetkin was a concern, Povetkin has more athleticism and skill than Peter, and I definitely don't see Peter outworking Chambers. In fact, Chambers should have learned something from that fight: he has the talent to compete at the world-class level as long as he's in shape to go 12 strong rounds. Moreover, Peter's apparently lost a bit of his desire since being outclassed by Vitali Klitschko, so I doubt that we see a re-energized Peter on Friday night. A decision for Chambers is the logical outcome, but I won't be surprised if Peter quits late in the fight after Chambers continually clowns him around the ring.
0
To remove first post, remove entire topic.
2007: +12.45 units 2008: +25.3 units
2009: +1.58 units
Sam Peter vs. Eddie Chambers Chambers -105 (Bodog) 5.25 units
I'm getting on this one early because the odds on Chambers have been steadily increasing, and I expect him to be in the -150 range by fight time. Chambers' fast hands and evasive head movement should be enough to steadily take rounds from the slower Peter, who relies on wide, looping shots. Chambers is quick enough to steer clear of danger while racking up points. Although Chambers' workrate in the last half of his fight against Alexander Povetkin was a concern, Povetkin has more athleticism and skill than Peter, and I definitely don't see Peter outworking Chambers. In fact, Chambers should have learned something from that fight: he has the talent to compete at the world-class level as long as he's in shape to go 12 strong rounds. Moreover, Peter's apparently lost a bit of his desire since being outclassed by Vitali Klitschko, so I doubt that we see a re-energized Peter on Friday night. A decision for Chambers is the logical outcome, but I won't be surprised if Peter quits late in the fight after Chambers continually clowns him around the ring.
Good write-up as always Let's keep that Khan magic going bro this is a tougher fight to call, but I am going with Chambers as well I don't know what happened in the 2nd half of the Povetkin fight, but Chambers was doing VERY well the first four rounds I think he can learn from that experience
0
Good write-up as always Let's keep that Khan magic going bro this is a tougher fight to call, but I am going with Chambers as well I don't know what happened in the 2nd half of the Povetkin fight, but Chambers was doing VERY well the first four rounds I think he can learn from that experience
Fernando Montiel vs Diego Oscar Silva Under 8.5 rounds (Even) (Sportsbook) 3 units
This line has been moving fast and currently sits at 140 over at The Greek. Stupid 5 DImes is taking forever to post their odds this week, but it wouldn't surprise me to see it open at the same number there. Thankfully, Sportsbook usually move a little slower on their numbers (props to them for posting their lines early this week though) and you can still catch this one at even money there. In boxing, perhaps more so than any other sport, you have to have more than one book and this is a perfect example why. A Montiel KO here seems practically inevitable, as his punching power seems increasing with each bout. I got to see him in action vs Castillo on the Pavlik undercard and made the mistake of stepping out into the lobby for a margarita in the 2nd round. By the time I got back, it was over. Silva seems far less durable than a guy like Castillo, evidenced by 4 knockdowns in his last 11 fights. Although he's never been knocked out, he's never faced a guy as powerful as Montiel. This line reminds me of a Brazilian soccer match I played the other night where a team that was an overwhelming favorite was getting a great price on the over 2.5 goals prop since they had been in a bit of a scoring lul. Well, they covered the over with ease (in fact, they would have covered it in the first 15 minutes had a couple shots not gone off the post) and the soft line turned out to be an easy winner. Since Silva's never been KO'd, the oddsmakers seem to have installed the over / under accordingly, giving him more credit than he's worth. I'll take this soft line give that this has the feel of a 5th or 6th round KO for Mexican favorite.
0
Fernando Montiel vs Diego Oscar Silva Under 8.5 rounds (Even) (Sportsbook) 3 units
This line has been moving fast and currently sits at 140 over at The Greek. Stupid 5 DImes is taking forever to post their odds this week, but it wouldn't surprise me to see it open at the same number there. Thankfully, Sportsbook usually move a little slower on their numbers (props to them for posting their lines early this week though) and you can still catch this one at even money there. In boxing, perhaps more so than any other sport, you have to have more than one book and this is a perfect example why. A Montiel KO here seems practically inevitable, as his punching power seems increasing with each bout. I got to see him in action vs Castillo on the Pavlik undercard and made the mistake of stepping out into the lobby for a margarita in the 2nd round. By the time I got back, it was over. Silva seems far less durable than a guy like Castillo, evidenced by 4 knockdowns in his last 11 fights. Although he's never been knocked out, he's never faced a guy as powerful as Montiel. This line reminds me of a Brazilian soccer match I played the other night where a team that was an overwhelming favorite was getting a great price on the over 2.5 goals prop since they had been in a bit of a scoring lul. Well, they covered the over with ease (in fact, they would have covered it in the first 15 minutes had a couple shots not gone off the post) and the soft line turned out to be an easy winner. Since Silva's never been KO'd, the oddsmakers seem to have installed the over / under accordingly, giving him more credit than he's worth. I'll take this soft line give that this has the feel of a 5th or 6th round KO for Mexican favorite.
Sam Peter vs. Eddie Chambers Chambers -105 (Bodog) 5.25 units
I'm getting on this one early because the odds on Chambers have been steadily increasing, and I expect him to be in the -150 range by fight time. Chambers' fast hands and evasive head movement should be enough to steadily take rounds from the slower Peter, who relies on wide, looping shots. Chambers is quick enough to steer clear of danger while racking up points. Although Chambers' workrate in the last half of his fight against Alexander Povetkin was a concern, Povetkin has more athleticism and skill than Peter, and I definitely don't see Peter outworking Chambers. In fact, Chambers should have learned something from that fight: he has the talent to compete at the world-class level as long as he's in shape to go 12 strong rounds. Moreover, Peter's apparently lost a bit of his desire since being outclassed by Vitali Klitschko, so I doubt that we see a re-energized Peter on Friday night. A decision for Chambers is the logical outcome, but I won't be surprised if Peter quits late in the fight after Chambers continually clowns him around the ring.
This is very solid stuff. The exact reason to bet the younger, faster, in shape fighter. However, we know a lot about Peter but very little about Chambers. To assume that Chambers will show the world class ability to score and move out of grave danger is a very large assumption. He hasn't dominated a single contender, let alone a guy that is elite at this weight. (I know, it's sick to say, but it's true)
You base too much of your picks based on line movement. Usually nothing wrong with that. However, you are putting your dollar based on someone else's projections. You are very sharp and display great boxing knowledge in most situations, hence the projection of why Chambers will win. If he does win, it will be exactly why you stated above. I see the fatboy finding a way to break down the green kid from the Burgh. The exact reason boxing is so great... two sides to every coin.
Best of luck,
0
Quote Originally Posted by A2C:
2007: +12.45 units 2008: +25.3 units
2009: +1.58 units
Sam Peter vs. Eddie Chambers Chambers -105 (Bodog) 5.25 units
I'm getting on this one early because the odds on Chambers have been steadily increasing, and I expect him to be in the -150 range by fight time. Chambers' fast hands and evasive head movement should be enough to steadily take rounds from the slower Peter, who relies on wide, looping shots. Chambers is quick enough to steer clear of danger while racking up points. Although Chambers' workrate in the last half of his fight against Alexander Povetkin was a concern, Povetkin has more athleticism and skill than Peter, and I definitely don't see Peter outworking Chambers. In fact, Chambers should have learned something from that fight: he has the talent to compete at the world-class level as long as he's in shape to go 12 strong rounds. Moreover, Peter's apparently lost a bit of his desire since being outclassed by Vitali Klitschko, so I doubt that we see a re-energized Peter on Friday night. A decision for Chambers is the logical outcome, but I won't be surprised if Peter quits late in the fight after Chambers continually clowns him around the ring.
This is very solid stuff. The exact reason to bet the younger, faster, in shape fighter. However, we know a lot about Peter but very little about Chambers. To assume that Chambers will show the world class ability to score and move out of grave danger is a very large assumption. He hasn't dominated a single contender, let alone a guy that is elite at this weight. (I know, it's sick to say, but it's true)
You base too much of your picks based on line movement. Usually nothing wrong with that. However, you are putting your dollar based on someone else's projections. You are very sharp and display great boxing knowledge in most situations, hence the projection of why Chambers will win. If he does win, it will be exactly why you stated above. I see the fatboy finding a way to break down the green kid from the Burgh. The exact reason boxing is so great... two sides to every coin.
i'm sure a2c can defend himself, but all he said was he bought and posting chambers early rather than later because he was getting more expensive....i don't think he was buying eddie because that's where all the money was going...
walk...hedge your bet man. chambers is too sharp and peters is going to look worse in this fight than in his last. 265? ugh...
0
i'm sure a2c can defend himself, but all he said was he bought and posting chambers early rather than later because he was getting more expensive....i don't think he was buying eddie because that's where all the money was going...
walk...hedge your bet man. chambers is too sharp and peters is going to look worse in this fight than in his last. 265? ugh...
i'm sure a2c can defend himself, but all he said was he bought and posting chambers early rather than later because he was getting more expensive....i don't think he was buying eddie because that's where all the money was going...
walk...hedge your bet man. chambers is too sharp and peters is going to look worse in this fight than in his last. 265? ugh...
I have no problem with that. I have no problem with the pick. There are many reason to love Chambers. I can't argue any of his reasons - they are very valid. I don't believe he is making his pick based on the movement, but it comes up way too often. We'll see. I wish everyone the best of luck.
0
Quote Originally Posted by capmaster2000:
i'm sure a2c can defend himself, but all he said was he bought and posting chambers early rather than later because he was getting more expensive....i don't think he was buying eddie because that's where all the money was going...
walk...hedge your bet man. chambers is too sharp and peters is going to look worse in this fight than in his last. 265? ugh...
I have no problem with that. I have no problem with the pick. There are many reason to love Chambers. I can't argue any of his reasons - they are very valid. I don't believe he is making his pick based on the movement, but it comes up way too often. We'll see. I wish everyone the best of luck.
most of my feeling is based on sam peter being crap versus eddie being some type of magnificant fighter. sam peter ko'd lesser opposition dramatically because he's a big boy wingin' big punches. but once he stepped up he put together a bunch of decision wins and a couple losses (barring the one ko over ancient maskaev)...
he looked horrible his last time out and got hammered and dominated by someone who'd been very inactive ...now he's coming in at 265? I think eddie will box circles around this dude and be too smart to get involved in exchanging with peter. the fight is 10 rounds, so less time to catch eddie if he slows down ..
some of my feeling is also based on eddie's comments. he's talking smart and acknowledging his mistakes with povetkin. not that talk matters so much, but i'd rather him the way he is than talking a bunch of shit about knocking peter out and going to war etc..
i just don't see any reason here to back peter. i hope you're at least getting plus money on him..
if i'm wrong, i'm wrong... good luck.
0
walk, you also man...
most of my feeling is based on sam peter being crap versus eddie being some type of magnificant fighter. sam peter ko'd lesser opposition dramatically because he's a big boy wingin' big punches. but once he stepped up he put together a bunch of decision wins and a couple losses (barring the one ko over ancient maskaev)...
he looked horrible his last time out and got hammered and dominated by someone who'd been very inactive ...now he's coming in at 265? I think eddie will box circles around this dude and be too smart to get involved in exchanging with peter. the fight is 10 rounds, so less time to catch eddie if he slows down ..
some of my feeling is also based on eddie's comments. he's talking smart and acknowledging his mistakes with povetkin. not that talk matters so much, but i'd rather him the way he is than talking a bunch of shit about knocking peter out and going to war etc..
i just don't see any reason here to back peter. i hope you're at least getting plus money on him..
I have no problem with that. I have no problem with the pick. There are many reason to love Chambers. I can't argue any of his reasons - they are very valid. I don't believe he is making his pick based on the movement, but it comes up way too often. We'll see. I wish everyone the best of luck.
I disagree with you Walk, as I only bring up the line movement when it's relevant. Boxing is one of the few sports where there really is a "right" pick, and that's often painfully obvious after making the wrong play. In other sports (like basketball, football, or baseball), it's still debatable after the fact whether a pick was "right" or "wrong," as luck often has a major hand in deciding those outcomes. In boxing, on the other hand, the better fighter usually wins, and luck plays a minimal role. The people who consistently make money by betting boxing realize this fact, and there's a core group of sharps who move the lines. Line movement in this sport is completely different from line movement in the NCAA tourney (to give a current example), as dumb public money can often drive those lines. Personally, I believe that a consensus of experts can achieve a better winning percentage in the long run, as opposed to one person's opinions. That doesn't mean that I don't bring my own analysis to the table, as I take extensive notes on every fight I see, and I refer back to these notes in forming my opinion. But I also am not egotistical enough to believe that I am the sole boxing authority, and line movement (along with taking into consideration respected cappers' opinions) gives me a good glimpse at what the experts/insiders think is going to be the final result. I believe that I've been consistently successful (as evidenced by my tabulated record) because I take multiple factors into consideration when making a pick, rather than going on my gut instinct. If I think a fight's going one way, while all other respected cappers disagree, then I'd better have a darn good reason to go against the flock.
0
Quote Originally Posted by walktheline:
I have no problem with that. I have no problem with the pick. There are many reason to love Chambers. I can't argue any of his reasons - they are very valid. I don't believe he is making his pick based on the movement, but it comes up way too often. We'll see. I wish everyone the best of luck.
I disagree with you Walk, as I only bring up the line movement when it's relevant. Boxing is one of the few sports where there really is a "right" pick, and that's often painfully obvious after making the wrong play. In other sports (like basketball, football, or baseball), it's still debatable after the fact whether a pick was "right" or "wrong," as luck often has a major hand in deciding those outcomes. In boxing, on the other hand, the better fighter usually wins, and luck plays a minimal role. The people who consistently make money by betting boxing realize this fact, and there's a core group of sharps who move the lines. Line movement in this sport is completely different from line movement in the NCAA tourney (to give a current example), as dumb public money can often drive those lines. Personally, I believe that a consensus of experts can achieve a better winning percentage in the long run, as opposed to one person's opinions. That doesn't mean that I don't bring my own analysis to the table, as I take extensive notes on every fight I see, and I refer back to these notes in forming my opinion. But I also am not egotistical enough to believe that I am the sole boxing authority, and line movement (along with taking into consideration respected cappers' opinions) gives me a good glimpse at what the experts/insiders think is going to be the final result. I believe that I've been consistently successful (as evidenced by my tabulated record) because I take multiple factors into consideration when making a pick, rather than going on my gut instinct. If I think a fight's going one way, while all other respected cappers disagree, then I'd better have a darn good reason to go against the flock.
Fernando Montiel vs Diego Oscar Silva Under 8.5 rounds (Even) (Sportsbook) 3 units
This line has been moving fast and currently sits at 140 over at The Greek. Stupid 5 DImes is taking forever to post their odds this week, but it wouldn't surprise me to see it open at the same number there. Thankfully, Sportsbook usually move a little slower on their numbers (props to them for posting their lines early this week though) and you can still catch this one at even money there. In boxing, perhaps more so than any other sport, you have to have more than one book and this is a perfect example why. A Montiel KO here seems practically inevitable, as his punching power seems increasing with each bout. I got to see him in action vs Castillo on the Pavlik undercard and made the mistake of stepping out into the lobby for a margarita in the 2nd round. By the time I got back, it was over. Silva seems far less durable than a guy like Castillo, evidenced by 4 knockdowns in his last 11 fights. Although he's never been knocked out, he's never faced a guy as powerful as Montiel. This line reminds me of a Brazilian soccer match I played the other night where a team that was an overwhelming favorite was getting a great price on the over 2.5 goals prop since they had been in a bit of a scoring lul. Well, they covered the over with ease (in fact, they would have covered it in the first 15 minutes had a couple shots not gone off the post) and the soft line turned out to be an easy winner. Since Silva's never been KO'd, the oddsmakers seem to have installed the over / under accordingly, giving him more credit than he's worth. I'll take this soft line give that this has the feel of a 5th or 6th round KO for Mexican favorite.
I love this play too and see Montiel KOing Silva within four rounds. I also like the Soto/Davis under. Antonio Davis is long in the tooth and was nearly KO'd by Luevano in 2007 who's far less aggressive than Soto. Fairly tough dude but I expect him to be taken out in rounds 6-9. He's not gonna like Soto's body attack (if I recall correctly, Luevano killed him to the body).
0
Quote Originally Posted by A2C:
Fernando Montiel vs Diego Oscar Silva Under 8.5 rounds (Even) (Sportsbook) 3 units
This line has been moving fast and currently sits at 140 over at The Greek. Stupid 5 DImes is taking forever to post their odds this week, but it wouldn't surprise me to see it open at the same number there. Thankfully, Sportsbook usually move a little slower on their numbers (props to them for posting their lines early this week though) and you can still catch this one at even money there. In boxing, perhaps more so than any other sport, you have to have more than one book and this is a perfect example why. A Montiel KO here seems practically inevitable, as his punching power seems increasing with each bout. I got to see him in action vs Castillo on the Pavlik undercard and made the mistake of stepping out into the lobby for a margarita in the 2nd round. By the time I got back, it was over. Silva seems far less durable than a guy like Castillo, evidenced by 4 knockdowns in his last 11 fights. Although he's never been knocked out, he's never faced a guy as powerful as Montiel. This line reminds me of a Brazilian soccer match I played the other night where a team that was an overwhelming favorite was getting a great price on the over 2.5 goals prop since they had been in a bit of a scoring lul. Well, they covered the over with ease (in fact, they would have covered it in the first 15 minutes had a couple shots not gone off the post) and the soft line turned out to be an easy winner. Since Silva's never been KO'd, the oddsmakers seem to have installed the over / under accordingly, giving him more credit than he's worth. I'll take this soft line give that this has the feel of a 5th or 6th round KO for Mexican favorite.
I love this play too and see Montiel KOing Silva within four rounds. I also like the Soto/Davis under. Antonio Davis is long in the tooth and was nearly KO'd by Luevano in 2007 who's far less aggressive than Soto. Fairly tough dude but I expect him to be taken out in rounds 6-9. He's not gonna like Soto's body attack (if I recall correctly, Luevano killed him to the body).
I disagree with you Walk, as I only bring up the line movement when it's relevant. Boxing is one of the few sports where there really is a "right" pick, and that's often painfully obvious after making the wrong play. In other sports (like basketball, football, or baseball), it's still debatable after the fact whether a pick was "right" or "wrong," as luck often has a major hand in deciding those outcomes. In boxing, on the other hand, the better fighter usually wins, and luck plays a minimal role. The people who consistently make money by betting boxing realize this fact, and there's a core group of sharps who move the lines. Line movement in this sport is completely different from line movement in the NCAA tourney (to give a current example), as dumb public money can often drive those lines. Personally, I believe that a consensus of experts can achieve a better winning percentage in the long run, as opposed to one person's opinions. That doesn't mean that I don't bring my own analysis to the table, as I take extensive notes on every fight I see, and I refer back to these notes in forming my opinion. But I also am not egotistical enough to believe that I am the sole boxing authority, and line movement (along with taking into consideration respected cappers' opinions) gives me a good glimpse at what the experts/insiders think is going to be the final result. I believe that I've been consistently successful (as evidenced by my tabulated record) because I take multiple factors into consideration when making a pick, rather than going on my gut instinct. If I think a fight's going one way, while all other respected cappers disagree, then I'd better have a darn good reason to go against the flock.
This is really good stuff man. Thanks for taking out the time.
I've followed boxing with much more consistency than the major sports over the last ten years or so, but it's actually betting and winning with boxing that drew me in to making plays on CBB and CFB. I don't think there's much question that the role of the public and line movement are extremely different in the more publicly bet sports. For one, it's much easier with point spreads to know exactly where the money is and who is driving the line, or why the line is holding steady. And the motivational factors and tactical elements make them a completely different "language". For example, you can't begin to compare "home field" to the outright corruption you see sometimes in boxing.
I've got one question for you. Do you chalk up the "wideness" of boxing odds more to oddsmakers looking for balanced action (as you see in most other sports) or just general ignorance due to it being such a fringe sport? You see bad lines set from time to time in every sport, but the lines in boxing sometimes are so awful, that approaching them the way I would a basketball game makes my head spin.
0
Quote Originally Posted by A2C:
I disagree with you Walk, as I only bring up the line movement when it's relevant. Boxing is one of the few sports where there really is a "right" pick, and that's often painfully obvious after making the wrong play. In other sports (like basketball, football, or baseball), it's still debatable after the fact whether a pick was "right" or "wrong," as luck often has a major hand in deciding those outcomes. In boxing, on the other hand, the better fighter usually wins, and luck plays a minimal role. The people who consistently make money by betting boxing realize this fact, and there's a core group of sharps who move the lines. Line movement in this sport is completely different from line movement in the NCAA tourney (to give a current example), as dumb public money can often drive those lines. Personally, I believe that a consensus of experts can achieve a better winning percentage in the long run, as opposed to one person's opinions. That doesn't mean that I don't bring my own analysis to the table, as I take extensive notes on every fight I see, and I refer back to these notes in forming my opinion. But I also am not egotistical enough to believe that I am the sole boxing authority, and line movement (along with taking into consideration respected cappers' opinions) gives me a good glimpse at what the experts/insiders think is going to be the final result. I believe that I've been consistently successful (as evidenced by my tabulated record) because I take multiple factors into consideration when making a pick, rather than going on my gut instinct. If I think a fight's going one way, while all other respected cappers disagree, then I'd better have a darn good reason to go against the flock.
This is really good stuff man. Thanks for taking out the time.
I've followed boxing with much more consistency than the major sports over the last ten years or so, but it's actually betting and winning with boxing that drew me in to making plays on CBB and CFB. I don't think there's much question that the role of the public and line movement are extremely different in the more publicly bet sports. For one, it's much easier with point spreads to know exactly where the money is and who is driving the line, or why the line is holding steady. And the motivational factors and tactical elements make them a completely different "language". For example, you can't begin to compare "home field" to the outright corruption you see sometimes in boxing.
I've got one question for you. Do you chalk up the "wideness" of boxing odds more to oddsmakers looking for balanced action (as you see in most other sports) or just general ignorance due to it being such a fringe sport? You see bad lines set from time to time in every sport, but the lines in boxing sometimes are so awful, that approaching them the way I would a basketball game makes my head spin.
This is very solid stuff. The exact reason to bet the younger, faster, in shape fighter. However, we know a lot about Peter but very little about Chambers. To assume that Chambers will show the world class ability to score and move out of grave danger is a very large assumption. He hasn't dominated a single contender, let alone a guy that is elite at this weight. (I know, it's sick to say, but it's true)
You base too much of your picks based on line movement. Usually nothing wrong with that. However, you are putting your dollar based on someone else's projections. You are very sharp and display great boxing knowledge in most situations, hence the projection of why Chambers will win. If he does win, it will be exactly why you stated above. I see the fatboy finding a way to break down the green kid from the Burgh. The exact reason boxing is so great... two sides to every coin.
Best of luck,
I can clearly see he's NOT taking Chambers because of the line is moving that way. He is trying to catch the line before it goes way up so the less of a lay he has to make when he cashes in.
To call Sam Peter an Elite fighter is disturbing, Peter had the potential but he showed he's only in boxing for the money and doesn't give a rats ass about boxing.
Boxing is about skills and conditioning and a lot of it is MENTAL, and Peter's ONLY prayer is if he uses his jab, but that's a big IF.
Styles make fights, Eddie has Peter beat in almost every every category. Peter has faced better opponents I agree but he also lost to many of them.
I don't see Chambers in a land slide, but after the 4th or 5th round, Peter is in trouble because he's based his whole career on K.O's. Forget Peter that was up and coming, see Sam Peter for what he is NOW Mckline, Klitcho.. you see the painting on the wall.
Should be a good fight I wish you both the best my pick would be $1 on Eddie Chambers, but I wish you both the best as it's hard to find common ground when two people are picking the opposite man to win and you both think they will win easily.
You both have valid points, clearly we all know boxing. Let's hope this is a great fight and not some snoozer!
Good luck!
0
Quote Originally Posted by walktheline:
This is very solid stuff. The exact reason to bet the younger, faster, in shape fighter. However, we know a lot about Peter but very little about Chambers. To assume that Chambers will show the world class ability to score and move out of grave danger is a very large assumption. He hasn't dominated a single contender, let alone a guy that is elite at this weight. (I know, it's sick to say, but it's true)
You base too much of your picks based on line movement. Usually nothing wrong with that. However, you are putting your dollar based on someone else's projections. You are very sharp and display great boxing knowledge in most situations, hence the projection of why Chambers will win. If he does win, it will be exactly why you stated above. I see the fatboy finding a way to break down the green kid from the Burgh. The exact reason boxing is so great... two sides to every coin.
Best of luck,
I can clearly see he's NOT taking Chambers because of the line is moving that way. He is trying to catch the line before it goes way up so the less of a lay he has to make when he cashes in.
To call Sam Peter an Elite fighter is disturbing, Peter had the potential but he showed he's only in boxing for the money and doesn't give a rats ass about boxing.
Boxing is about skills and conditioning and a lot of it is MENTAL, and Peter's ONLY prayer is if he uses his jab, but that's a big IF.
Styles make fights, Eddie has Peter beat in almost every every category. Peter has faced better opponents I agree but he also lost to many of them.
I don't see Chambers in a land slide, but after the 4th or 5th round, Peter is in trouble because he's based his whole career on K.O's. Forget Peter that was up and coming, see Sam Peter for what he is NOW Mckline, Klitcho.. you see the painting on the wall.
Should be a good fight I wish you both the best my pick would be $1 on Eddie Chambers, but I wish you both the best as it's hard to find common ground when two people are picking the opposite man to win and you both think they will win easily.
You both have valid points, clearly we all know boxing. Let's hope this is a great fight and not some snoozer!
This is really good stuff man. Thanks for taking out the time.
I've followed boxing with much more consistency than the major sports over the last ten years or so, but it's actually betting and winning with boxing that drew me in to making plays on CBB and CFB. I don't think there's much question that the role of the public and line movement are extremely different in the more publicly bet sports. For one, it's much easier with point spreads to know exactly where the money is and who is driving the line, or why the line is holding steady. And the motivational factors and tactical elements make them a completely different "language". For example, you can't begin to compare "home field" to the outright corruption you see sometimes in boxing.
I've got one question for you. Do you chalk up the "wideness" of boxing odds more to oddsmakers looking for balanced action (as you see in most other sports) or just general ignorance due to it being such a fringe sport? You see bad lines set from time to time in every sport, but the lines in boxing sometimes are so awful, that approaching them the way I would a basketball game makes my head spin.
Whereas in the major sports there's a team of guys setting the lines correctly, some books depend on individuals to set boxing lines, which often results in the "mistakes" we see at the books we shop at on wednesdays or thursdays.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Zumbize:
This is really good stuff man. Thanks for taking out the time.
I've followed boxing with much more consistency than the major sports over the last ten years or so, but it's actually betting and winning with boxing that drew me in to making plays on CBB and CFB. I don't think there's much question that the role of the public and line movement are extremely different in the more publicly bet sports. For one, it's much easier with point spreads to know exactly where the money is and who is driving the line, or why the line is holding steady. And the motivational factors and tactical elements make them a completely different "language". For example, you can't begin to compare "home field" to the outright corruption you see sometimes in boxing.
I've got one question for you. Do you chalk up the "wideness" of boxing odds more to oddsmakers looking for balanced action (as you see in most other sports) or just general ignorance due to it being such a fringe sport? You see bad lines set from time to time in every sport, but the lines in boxing sometimes are so awful, that approaching them the way I would a basketball game makes my head spin.
Whereas in the major sports there's a team of guys setting the lines correctly, some books depend on individuals to set boxing lines, which often results in the "mistakes" we see at the books we shop at on wednesdays or thursdays.
Whereas in the major sports there's a team of guys setting the lines correctly, some books depend on individuals to set boxing lines, which often results in the "mistakes" we see at the books we shop at on wednesdays or thursdays.
Take for example the other day. The Purdue/ Uconn O/U was set at 134. I knew (from my own gut reaction, lol) that every square in the world would pound that over. The line never budged, even dropped a point at some shops, and the game came in under at 132. I didn't bet the under, but was smart enough to lay off the over.
Now if I used that same reasoning on a line like Afolabi +600 against Enzo, I'd convince myself that the LVSC "knew" something and was inflating the line for a good reason. It turns out they just were horribly underestimating an "unknown" fighter.
I'm curious how the oddsmaking process works for boxing. I'd have thought that the LVSC sets lines and sends them out, but you're saying that each individual book basically comes up with their own number?
Interesting.
0
Quote Originally Posted by A2C:
Whereas in the major sports there's a team of guys setting the lines correctly, some books depend on individuals to set boxing lines, which often results in the "mistakes" we see at the books we shop at on wednesdays or thursdays.
Take for example the other day. The Purdue/ Uconn O/U was set at 134. I knew (from my own gut reaction, lol) that every square in the world would pound that over. The line never budged, even dropped a point at some shops, and the game came in under at 132. I didn't bet the under, but was smart enough to lay off the over.
Now if I used that same reasoning on a line like Afolabi +600 against Enzo, I'd convince myself that the LVSC "knew" something and was inflating the line for a good reason. It turns out they just were horribly underestimating an "unknown" fighter.
I'm curious how the oddsmaking process works for boxing. I'd have thought that the LVSC sets lines and sends them out, but you're saying that each individual book basically comes up with their own number?
Good luck A2C, late to the party this week, but I gotta side with you on Chambers, but I don't think I am going to play him. As much as he pissed me off against Povetkin, I do think he has all the tools to win this against a fat/stationary Peter. I put all my chips on the under, I think even though it's a 10 rounder at +200 I think it's worth a solid play; Chambers will start to swell up Peter by round 4 and of course this covers a Peter HR shot also. I just don't think Peter has much of the will anymore and he will hang them up if things aren't looking good. I think 10 rounds will be a struggle for Peter to last if Eddie is active, his best shot is to take Chambers out early which makes me like this play even more.
2.5 units on under 9.5 rounds in Peter-Chambers (+200)
0
Good luck A2C, late to the party this week, but I gotta side with you on Chambers, but I don't think I am going to play him. As much as he pissed me off against Povetkin, I do think he has all the tools to win this against a fat/stationary Peter. I put all my chips on the under, I think even though it's a 10 rounder at +200 I think it's worth a solid play; Chambers will start to swell up Peter by round 4 and of course this covers a Peter HR shot also. I just don't think Peter has much of the will anymore and he will hang them up if things aren't looking good. I think 10 rounds will be a struggle for Peter to last if Eddie is active, his best shot is to take Chambers out early which makes me like this play even more.
2.5 units on under 9.5 rounds in Peter-Chambers (+200)
Take for example the other day. The Purdue/ Uconn O/U was set at 134. I knew (from my own gut reaction, lol) that every square in the world would pound that over. The line never budged, even dropped a point at some shops, and the game came in under at 132. I didn't bet the under, but was smart enough to lay off the over.
Now if I used that same reasoning on a line like Afolabi +600 against Enzo, I'd convince myself that the LVSC "knew" something and was inflating the line for a good reason. It turns out they just were horribly underestimating an "unknown" fighter.
I'm curious how the oddsmaking process works for boxing. I'd have thought that the LVSC sets lines and sends them out, but you're saying that each individual book basically comes up with their own number?
Interesting.
Laughably, there's one person setting lines, and the off-shores copy him. He's off quite a bit sometimes. And it gets even worse (?) when certain books copy him wrong.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Zumbize:
Take for example the other day. The Purdue/ Uconn O/U was set at 134. I knew (from my own gut reaction, lol) that every square in the world would pound that over. The line never budged, even dropped a point at some shops, and the game came in under at 132. I didn't bet the under, but was smart enough to lay off the over.
Now if I used that same reasoning on a line like Afolabi +600 against Enzo, I'd convince myself that the LVSC "knew" something and was inflating the line for a good reason. It turns out they just were horribly underestimating an "unknown" fighter.
I'm curious how the oddsmaking process works for boxing. I'd have thought that the LVSC sets lines and sends them out, but you're saying that each individual book basically comes up with their own number?
Interesting.
Laughably, there's one person setting lines, and the off-shores copy him. He's off quite a bit sometimes. And it gets even worse (?) when certain books copy him wrong.
Laughably, there's one person setting lines, and the off-shores copy him. He's off quite a bit sometimes. And it gets even worse (?) when certain books copy him wrong.
Wow. Never knew that.
0
Quote Originally Posted by A2C:
Laughably, there's one person setting lines, and the off-shores copy him. He's off quite a bit sometimes. And it gets even worse (?) when certain books copy him wrong.
Congrats Chamber backers and A2C, well done guys. I just don't know why the guy didn't do more tonight, he had a dead man walking in front of him for the last half of the fight.
2.5 units on under 9.5 rounds in Peter-Chambers (+200)
0
Congrats Chamber backers and A2C, well done guys. I just don't know why the guy didn't do more tonight, he had a dead man walking in front of him for the last half of the fight.
2.5 units on under 9.5 rounds in Peter-Chambers (+200)
you also man... 
Hot Forum Topics
