Lawler was +400. 4-1. Line insinuates he has a 25% chance of winning.
Were you born this stupid or were you dropped on your head after birth?
You're a compete imbecile.
I think +400 represents a 20% chance of winning. The conversion for plus odds is 100/(x+100) where x is the moneyline. 100/(400+100)= 1/5 = 20%. If you bet 1 unit 5 times at +400 and win 1/5 of the time you break even.
0
Quote Originally Posted by rzagza:
Lawler was +400. 4-1. Line insinuates he has a 25% chance of winning.
Were you born this stupid or were you dropped on your head after birth?
You're a compete imbecile.
I think +400 represents a 20% chance of winning. The conversion for plus odds is 100/(x+100) where x is the moneyline. 100/(400+100)= 1/5 = 20%. If you bet 1 unit 5 times at +400 and win 1/5 of the time you break even.
i dont know how anyone can justify paying -400 for hendricks and even worse including him on a parlay when you can make a case that lawler should be no more than a +125 to +200.
i dont know how anyone can justify paying -400 for hendricks and even worse including him on a parlay when you can make a case that lawler should be no more than a +125 to +200.
You know exactly what I meant. It's smarter to sacrifice $500 to guarantee $2000 when there's a 25% chance you could end up with $0 as opposed to $2500.
0
25% chance of having $0.
You know exactly what I meant. It's smarter to sacrifice $500 to guarantee $2000 when there's a 25% chance you could end up with $0 as opposed to $2500.
If Lawler "should be" +125 to +200....he would be. In your eyes he should be. In the eyes of guys who set lines for a living, he isn't. In the eyes of people who drive lines up or down, he isn't.
0
If Lawler "should be" +125 to +200....he would be. In your eyes he should be. In the eyes of guys who set lines for a living, he isn't. In the eyes of people who drive lines up or down, he isn't.
never said "should be" so that shouldnt be set off in quotation marks as your making a qoute out of context
i said that you can make a case for lawler to be a +125 to +200 which i dont have a problem with you quoting me on.
you mentioned that "Anyone with a brain" would be on hendricks insinuating that one would have to be brainless to make a play on robbie and i am just pointing out that there are many fighters that are giving him a good shot at winning and i would take their opinion, by and large, over the opinions of others
most successful handicappers look at lines for value and i saw +375 and saw value in a fight that i felt should be no more than a +250 which was more than condit, josh, story and pierce were priced at in very competitive fights
seriously, calling people brainless because they find value in robbie and can factually back it up is a pretty brainless accusation in and of itself
this going back to our original discussion two weeks ago where you insinuated that robbie had no chance which i believe that many would think is not the case.
im not trolling you, rzazga, just giving a difference of opinion.
0
never said "should be" so that shouldnt be set off in quotation marks as your making a qoute out of context
i said that you can make a case for lawler to be a +125 to +200 which i dont have a problem with you quoting me on.
you mentioned that "Anyone with a brain" would be on hendricks insinuating that one would have to be brainless to make a play on robbie and i am just pointing out that there are many fighters that are giving him a good shot at winning and i would take their opinion, by and large, over the opinions of others
most successful handicappers look at lines for value and i saw +375 and saw value in a fight that i felt should be no more than a +250 which was more than condit, josh, story and pierce were priced at in very competitive fights
seriously, calling people brainless because they find value in robbie and can factually back it up is a pretty brainless accusation in and of itself
this going back to our original discussion two weeks ago where you insinuated that robbie had no chance which i believe that many would think is not the case.
Qncyk, you literraly did type "should be"....... I mean you can scroll up and see it......
okay, "make a case that he should be." im not impying that he should be just that one can make a case. ive said that it before that i have robbie as +200 to +250 and that was before the sherdog poll and pros pick.
from my perspective getting +375 was a great value that both myself and rzaga(hedge) couldnt pass up.
0
Quote Originally Posted by sharpstick:
Qncyk, you literraly did type "should be"....... I mean you can scroll up and see it......
okay, "make a case that he should be." im not impying that he should be just that one can make a case. ive said that it before that i have robbie as +200 to +250 and that was before the sherdog poll and pros pick.
from my perspective getting +375 was a great value that both myself and rzaga(hedge) couldnt pass up.
Johny, to my eyes, looked clearly sluggish tonight. Maybe the cut indeed did affect him, he just didnt look right. There was no explosion, his legs seemed to not be there. Still won a pretty clear 3-2 decision.
0
Johny, to my eyes, looked clearly sluggish tonight. Maybe the cut indeed did affect him, he just didnt look right. There was no explosion, his legs seemed to not be there. Still won a pretty clear 3-2 decision.
Identify where I complained? Was an honest assessment of the fight. Hendricks looked lethargic to me. How is that a complaint? Its an observation. Theres no such thing as a complaint when you end up being right. Had he lost then you could assess it that way, I suppose.
I do find it interesting that Hendricks ended up winning the exact type of fight that most people fight he would not win. On the feet, right in front of each other, for about 24 mins.
0
Identify where I complained? Was an honest assessment of the fight. Hendricks looked lethargic to me. How is that a complaint? Its an observation. Theres no such thing as a complaint when you end up being right. Had he lost then you could assess it that way, I suppose.
I do find it interesting that Hendricks ended up winning the exact type of fight that most people fight he would not win. On the feet, right in front of each other, for about 24 mins.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.
Hot Forum Topics
