- Joined
- Feb 20, 2017
- Messages
- 235
- Reaction score
- 0
If they've done their research and are presenting WHY they are backing said fighter, not sure what the issue is.
You are kind of being confusing in asking for "accountability" and then turning around and complaining about someone who's right out in front telling everyone here who they are betting on. The accountability is built in.
I was absolutely HUGE on Ferg vs Khabib. I posted all the reasons why, repeatedly. A lot of my action was actually NOT Khabib itd and I posted the reasons why for those bets. If Khabib liked dessert a bit less, I'm confident I'd have added to my BR.
BUT....
...had Khabib come out and finished Ferg, all my posts would still be there. The "accountability" is that I made my bets clear prior to the event. If I'm wrong, everyone has read my rationale for my bets. If I say "Khabib doesn't do damage to good guard players" and then he goes out and smashes someone like Ferg, I've put my view out there prior to the fight.
I guess I'm not sure the issue you have.
Yeah you were actually one I was thinking of (no offense at all). You must have made a least 100 posts constantly explaining and reexplaining why you liked Tony in that fight. My impression was that you never considered any opposing argument. Instead, you felt that it was your role to make the Tony case over and over and over. My point is that that kind of thing hurts the community as a whole. When your approach is to push back on everyone who disagrees you rapidly reach a point where you are not helping anyone.
I understand you are betting your own money, which is the ultimate personal responsibility. My point is more that that approach hurts the community as a whole. The community would benefit from everyone knowing who the people are who refuse to consider a dissenting opinion. It becomes challenging when some of these posters are perceived to be big winners because their opinions are weighted too heavily.