Weekend Picks and Betting Tips

oubobcat

oubobcat

Well-known member
First, I will summarize last week's results and they weren't pretty:

Ryan Martin (+900) - wagered $50 and lost - Loved the value on Martin despite the fact I liked Taylor to win the fight. Unfortunately, Martin looked like a deer in headlights.
Burnett-Donaire Over 10 1/2 rounds - wagered $100 and lost - freak injury to Burnett, what else can be said. Hope he recovers to be an alternate in the tournament.
Berchelt-Roman Over 9 1/2 rounds - wagered $50 and lost - I really wasn't concerned with the wager here, I wanted this fight stopped much earlier and was cringing at the amount of punishment Roman was taking. Should have been stopped much sooner.

Final results - Wagered $200 and won zero (that's how it goes). Total so far is down $271.43.

Now to this week.

Daud Yordan (+255) over Anthony Crolla (-335) - This is more of a hunch though will probably have to sweat out a decision in the UK. Like the value on Yordan and he is fighting a a very high level still with a lot at stake in this fight. However you look at it, not an easy fight for Crolla at this stage of his career. Wagering $50 for a payout of $177.50

Ricky Burns (-550) and Oleksandr Usyk (-800) as a parlay - I'll keep this simple, unless either suffers a Burnett like injury do not see either losing. Wagering $150 for a payout of $199.43

Maksim Vlasov (-145) over Krzysztof Glowacki (-115) - I do not like how Glowacki has looked recently and feel he may be on a quick downward sloop in his career. Check out his narrow win against Serhiy Radchenko in February. Vlasov knows how to fight and seems to be peaking. Money has also been coming in on Vlasov. Wagering $50 for a payout of $84.48

Miguel Beltran (+600) over Yuriorkis Gamboa (-1000) - As much as I'd like to see Gamboa-Lopez finally happen, something just seems to be preventing this fight. It is so close now but has been before. Plus, Gamboa has looked horrible recently. Wagering $25 for a payout of $175

Hopefully, I get better results this week.
 
I like million dollar Crolla for the win. The Indonesian looks good but he hasn’t fought any top guys. Crolla went 12 ( twice) against Linares and lived to tell a story.

Some English books have Usyk at just -500 , I guess Liverpool is putting some $$$ on Tony.

I like Usyk for the win and they have the fight not going the distance at -175. That -175 looks like a great bet

I don’t think Bellew makes it the full 12. Maybe not even 6.
 
DEEPWATER3 said:
I like million dollar Crolla for the win. The Indonesian looks good but he hasn’t fought any top guys. Crolla went 12 ( twice) against Linares and lived to tell a story.

Some English books have Usyk at just -500 , I guess Liverpool is putting some $$$ on Tony.

I like Usyk for the win and they have the fight not going the distance at -175. That -175 looks like a great bet

I don’t think Bellew makes it the full 12. Maybe not even 6.
Click to expand...

Yeah I have seen that on Usyk. Money does seem to be coming in on Bellew too. UK fans tend to do this, remember when they bet Klitschko-Haye down to even money before the opening bell?

Personally, I see Bellew's corner rescuing him and stopping the fight at some point late. However I look at this fight though, do not see a path to victory for Bellew.
 
Big balls there OBC.

After last weekend’s “value betting” didn’t come through on Martin, you’re back going against Gamboa; whom most lines have at a 90% chance of winning.

Remember, a good value bet is only one that wins.

That’s why the odds were so (perhaps overly) long on Martin winning last weekend; it reels punters in to think value rather than statistical improbability.



Now, I don’t know much about Beltran.

So, perhaps there’s something there you know I don’t; if so please tell.



However, Gamboa seems up for this fight.

Have things really deteriorated and/or become that bad for Gamboa that (with these odds) Beltran is (still) favored (by you) over Gamboa?



I know Yuriorkis is not what he used to be.

But what he used to be was (save for the low hands) one of the most fluent/skilled boxers out there.



If Beltran beats him it will surely be the end of the road as far as any return to championship form is concerned.




Cheers,

Storm.

:) :)
 
Great fights tonight. Usyk p4p best. Bellew went out with respect.
Bellew made it past 6.
million dollar showed his boxing skills.
all in all a good night.
put $ on Fury !
 
StormCentre said:
I know Yuriorkis is not what he used to be.

But what he used to be was (save for the low hands) one of the most fluent/skilled boxers out there.
Click to expand...

What you could say about many fighters from Nasim Hamed to Roy Jones is low hands and lighting reflexes will not serve you forever. So what can Gamboa do against younger, sharper guns?

​​​​​​​Bellew went out like a champ. He looked cool in the early rounds, trying to land big counters off copious head movement, and pressing forward. Usyk as usual was patient and sticking that jab at the edge of range. What a couple of simple and brutal combos at the end. What a fighter.
 
Yes I suppose you could say that about a lot of fighters SL.

Agreed.



Gamboa almost closed the show in round 1.

He floored Beltran and nearly won the fight with a spectacular first round knockout of Miguel Beltran; as Beltran ended up face down on the canvas in the neutral corner as a result of Yuriorkis’ right cross and/or left hook.

As it was, Beltran was saved by the bell.

Which wasvery lucky as it was a solid knockdown; Gamboa dropped Beltran beautifully.



So it was a big effort for Miguel to rise from that and see the fight through.

In the end it didn’t matter though.

As, for the most part Gamboa (whom, according to some, Beltran called a gay Puerto Rican gigolo before the fight) out boxed Beltran with relative ease by utilizing superior hand speed effective footwork/movement.

As such, the fight Beltran brought Yuriorkis was really only a few notches above a difficult spar for Gamboa; and that was reflected in the final scorecards.

As far as I’m concerned Gamboa shut Beltran out (10-9) in every round except for the first (10-9).



This fight was (in my humble/inexperienced opinion) another example of how unusually long odds sometimes seem to present good value when in fact an element (if not all) of their purpose is (as per my above post #4) to apply statistical probability to human psychology so as to make punters think there is a bargain there.

One aspect of this is called; Loss aversion.

This is why StormCentre almost always speaks of odds/lines in terms of success percentages and statistical/other probabilities.

What this means is that;
.
A) There is usually a reason (that includes and goes beyond the bookies/lines makers as to) why a guy like Beltran only has 10% chance of beating Gamboa.

B) There is usually a reason (that includes and goes beyond the bookies/lines makers as to) why a guy like Beltran is pegged at +600 when it may seem + 500 more accurately reflects the situation.

C) There is usually a reason (that includes and goes beyond the bookies and/or lines makers as to) why a guy like Ryan Martin is pegged at +900 when it may seem + 600 more accurately reflects the situation.

D) More often than not - particularly if you consistently overlook the true statistical probability of a fighter’s potential success (some of which can be found in the odds) and willingly/otherwise misinterpret long odds as value - you will consistently lose far beyond any large win the long odds may bring you now/then.​



Still, some love to bet and seem genuinely happy to lose more often than win, because that “feeling” of beating the odds those few times they do win holds more psychological value to them.
Each to their own.


Now, I need to jump over to the pound for pound thread, as . . . .

I believe there are some folks over there that (aside from advancing questionable claims/arguments as they both, bullied/insulted me and also claimed Usyk would lose, when they) promised - in no uncertain terms - to set me straight and give me a lesson after (supposedly) Usyk lost to Bellew.



I wonder what pearls of wisdom will come from this. :)

And, to close the discussion in the context of probability; the odds on it being a meaningful apology from all involved are not looking real flash.





Cheers,

StormCentre.

:) :) :)
 
Yes, point taken about the odds. I'm not a gambling man, and I'd probably go broke if I was.

Re: Gamboa and Beltran, I haven't watched the bout. I'm partly playing devil's advocate/being a bit cheeky, but my point still stands. Even when I first started watching the Cubans (Rigondeaux,, Lara, Gamboa) as part of homework from my coach, I noted Gamboa looked spectacular, had some powerful cracking shots, but was open to copping a few whacks on the way.

I was more enamoured of Rigo's in-out, jab and pivot, but I never really liked that ultra low ducking and weaving despite it serving him well most of the time.

The likes of Bernard Hopkins have long careers at a high level for very good reason. I also believe structural speed is more lasting than very fast/dazzling hand and foot speed. But that is a favourite topic of mine, and probably one for a thread of its own.
 
Yes you're right, Gamboa had those liabilities.

It’s a shame, as when he 1st arrived from Cuba and hit the scene he was probably one of the most fluent punchers I have seen.

Just beautiful.



He had this special combination he threw.

It was a left jab - right cross - left hook, but then he would finish with a straight right; and that last punch (in addition to the left hook) would be the money punch.



He really knocked a few guys senseless with that combination, and it took me a while to work out what he was doing exactly.

It’s really hard to maintain composure and balance and throw that combination the way he did, and I think he did it by segmenting the first 2 punches and the last 2.

But he had it down pat so fluently and well that the time/space between each pair of punches in the combination was less than most people have between any 2 punch combination most guys throw.

Very hard combination to master; particularly in competition.



You just always knew that Yuriorkis, with his ego, was going to get clipped once the competition caught up with him and/or he moved up in weight; if he persisted with keeping his hands low.

As it was, Gamboa got starved of earnings and shut out by his promoter (Arum) for not turning up to a promotion for a fight (with Rios) he really never signed and/or was the appropriate weight for, and then (after a protracted separation with top Rank) he was sideswiped by SMS (50c) and pretty much had no option (desperately starved of earnings by then) but to fight Crawford. By then Gamboa had not fought for a long time and was giving away a lot of weight/height.

He still performed admirably considering all factors.

But the long layoff, the weight/height handicap, and - of course - those low hands caught up with him in the Crawford fight.



Anyway, Yuriorkis Gamboa cruised to an easy victory on the weekend so (to some extent) it seems he has adjusted and is on his way to redemption.

A prime Gamboa (without the aforementioned defensive liabilities) would be a problem for Lomachenko.

Just look at what Yuriorkis did (despite all the handicaps) to Crawford (before he was stopped)



If the fight gets made, it will be interesting to see what the odds are for Gamboa V Lopez.





Cheers,

Storm.

:) :)
 
Thanks for posting the link. I'm happy to nibble humble pie in saying Gamboa looked as sharp as ever in head movement, and hand and foot speed.

Against Beltran he showed off his hand speed with multiple rapid lead hand hooks to head, and with sharp body rips. He also used a couple of combos that Mike Tyson favoured: rear hand uppercut to lead hook, and 3B-3. I've tried out the former and love it. The latter always felt unnatural to me, but it works well in the right hands!

Interesting point about the 1-2-3-2 combination. I haven't really watched out for it, but understand breaking the rhythm with a (Gamboa speed) half-beat would be as challenging for less accomplished fighters as it's disconcerting for opponents. Indeed one is usually doing well to land 2-shot combinations, let alone 3 and 4.
 
Not all bets are alike. The kind of bet you make depends on what you are betting on. A bet you make on the performance of a person or a team, or a company is called a bet for performance. A bet you make on the outcome of a competition or an election is called a bet for the outcome. A bet you make on the success of a technology, such as a new computer chip, is called a bet for technology. I have been in the betting market for around 3 years. You can find all the best tips on https://kidsportshadley.com. In this way, I made approximately 10000$ in five months.​
 
Last edited:
I’m betting the house on Tyson Fury (-300)this weekend!
usyk is the only heavyweight that has a small chance to beat Fury
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top