Boxing Discussion VII

Status
Not open for further replies.
NinjaCat456 said:
Where did you see 7/2?

These gift lines always drop when I don't check the thread for a day or two ffs.
Click to expand...
Basically every bookie has slashed them to unbackable odds EXCEPT sportpesa they were the last to change their odds! I was very lucky I spotted them.
 
JimGunn said:
Can I chime in and say I also have no idea what "middled" is supposed to mean the way I see it used sometimes in this thread. How can there be a middle with two mutually exclusive outcomes like Fighter A wins by decision and Fighter B wins by decision? Neither bet could win, or one out of two bets can win, not both. I can see like someone said if you bet an over 2½ at one sportsbook and an under 3½ at a different book and the fight ends in the latter half of round 3, that both bets win. Or if you bet Fighter A moneyline and Not Fighter B ITD and Fighter A wins and you win both of those bets.
Click to expand...

if fighter a dec is offered at +200 and fighter b dec is offered at +250 im going to proportionately bet both sides so if one dec hits i make the same profit regardless of which one hits

theoretically, the above scenario could come out to around a +125 if one of the decisions hit.

i have no idea how else you would describe the above bet other than trying to find a middle
 
quincy k said:
if fighter a dec is offered at +200 and fighter b dec is offered at +250 im going to proportionately bet both sides so if one dec hits i make the same profit regardless of which one hits

theoretically, the above scenario could come out to around a +125 if one of the decisions hit.

i have no idea how else you would describe the above bet other than trying to find a middle
Click to expand...
Using the phrase "regardless of which ones hits" makes it sound like it's a foregeone conclusion that one of the decision props has to hit, rather than the very real possibility that neither one of them hits. To me, this seems like another odd turn of phrase and one in which you're stuck on the end by losing every bet, and not exactly in the middle of anything. That's just my viewpoint, maybe others see it differently, but I'm struggling to understand the concept of middlleing, at least the way you use it.
 
JimGunn said:
Using the phrase "regardless of which ones hits" makes it sound like it's a foregeone conclusion that one of the decision props has to hit, rather than the very real possibility that neither one of them hits. To me, this seems like another odd turn of phrase and one in which you're stuck on the end by losing every bet, and not exactly in the middle of anything. That's just my viewpoint, maybe others see it differently, but I'm struggling to understand the concept of middlleing, at least the way you use it.
Click to expand...

if neither decision hits...i lose.

why is this so hard to understand, im playing two decisions.

i have no idea why you are struggling with this

its really basic...easy actually

also, there is no foregone conclusion with any +125, dont know where you got that from
 
Last edited:
quincy k said:
if neither decision hits...i lose.

why is this so hard to understand, im playing two decisions.

i have no idea why you are struggling with this

its really basic...easy actually
Click to expand...
Alright, maybe I should re-phrase. It's not so much that I don't understand that you're betting two mutually exclusive decision props, that's pretty clear. It's more that 1- I think using the phrase "middle" to describe that situation doesn't makes any sense or convey the situation accurately 2- I think that myself and other people have seen or even used the phrase "middle" to describe something completely different, like perhaps some of the examples I gave above.
 
JimGunn said:
Alright, maybe I should re-phrase. It's not so much that I don't understand that you're betting two mutually exclusive decision props, that's pretty clear. It's more that 1- I think using the phrase "middle" to describe that situation doesn't makes any sense or convey the situation accurately 2- I think that myself and other people have seen or even used the phrase "middle" to describe something completely different, like perhaps some of the examples I gave above.
Click to expand...

agree, middled can be construed as betting one side and then betting the other with no risk and a guaranteed profit

i have no idea how to word what im am doing other than using the word middle

middle

1. at an equal distance from the extremities of something; central.
"the early and middle part of life"
synonyms: central, mid, mean, medium, medial, median, midway, halfway
"the middle point"
 
JimGunn said:
Can I chime in and say I also have no idea what "middled" is supposed to mean the way I see it used sometimes in this thread. How can there be a middle with two mutually exclusive outcomes like Fighter A wins by decision and Fighter B wins by decision? Neither bet could win, or one out of two bets can win, not both. I can see like someone said if you bet an over 2½ at one sportsbook and an under 3½ at a different book and the fight ends in the latter half of round 3, that both bets win. Or if you bet Fighter A moneyline and Not Fighter B ITD and Fighter A wins and you win both of those bets.
Click to expand...
I've brought this up before. Many don't know what 'middle' means and seem to think it means 'hedge'
 
quincy k said:
if neither decision hits...i lose.

why is this so hard to understand, im playing two decisions.

i have no idea why you are struggling with this

its really basic...easy actually

also, there is no foregone conclusion with any +125, dont know where you got that from
Click to expand...
Why not just bet FGTD instead? That covers the draw scenario as well. Are the odds that much better the way you're betting it?
 
NinjaCat456 said:
Why not just bet FGTD instead? That covers the draw scenario as well. Are the odds that much better the way you're betting it?
Click to expand...

the spreads on fgtd are big, i rarely even check them anymore and never bet them for that reason
 
burge13 said:
I've brought this up before. Many don't know what 'middle' means and seem to think it means 'hedge'
Click to expand...

what word would you use for someone that is playing both decisions and if either one hits then you win the same amount?

i guess you can list each bet to proportinatlely show what each will win but for me that seems kind of anal.
 
quincy k said:
agree, middled can be construed as betting one side and then betting the other with no risk and a guaranteed profit
Click to expand...

If there's no risk and you've bet both sides via moneylines for a guaranteed profit that's usually referred to as a freeroll, never a middle.
 
quincy k said:
what word would you use for someone that is playing both decisions and if either one hits then you win the same amount?

i guess you can list each bet to proportinatlely show what each will win but for me that seems kind of anal.
Click to expand...
I don't think that situation is even notable or common enough to deserve its own word or phrase or to borrow one already in existence. I've rarely ever bet both sides' decision props because I don't really even like that betting strategy, but if I did, I don't think it would matter a whit that I did the math to make appropriate sized bets that resulted in winning the same amount of money no matter who won a decision. Especially since both bets could lose. I think using 'middle' here is a case of an (odd) solution looking for a (nonexistent) problem. Anyway, that's my take on it. I couldn't help but comment when I saw someone else question it because every time I see it, I'm always wondering what the hell I was missing.
 
Last edited:
JimGunn said:
I don't think that situation is even notable or common enough to deserve its own word or phrase or to borrow one already in existence. I've rarely ever bet both sides' decision props because I don't really even like that betting strategy, but if I did, I don't think it would matter a whit that I did the math to make appropriate sized bets that resulted in winning the same amount of money no matter who won a decision. Especially since both bets could lose. I think using 'middle' here is a case of an (odd) solution looking for a (nonexistent) problem. Anyway, that's my take on it. I couldn't help but comment when I saw someone else question it because every time I see it, I'm always wondering what the hell I was missing.
Click to expand...

i think continuing to debate this topic is a case of fabricating a (odd) problem that requires no solution.

seriously, if you dont see the logic in betting two decision props when there is an assumption of a ko creating a bad line(sosa) or the possibilty of a bad decision like what happened when gbp gamboa beat sosa on a golden boy promoted card then i dont know what to tell you. i bet both decisions, +250 on sosa and +700 on gamboa and also hedged draw(+4500 iirc) as well as 6-10.

the 6-10 was a hedge on the decision props, the draw value somewhat irrelevant at +4500, and if you do the math on betting a +700 and a +250 then, well, thats a great fuken bet if one of the decisions hits and youve middled the value, which i didnt in this case but still profited as most of the profit was on sosa and not gamboa

i have no idea whatsoever how you cant see betting two decision cant be a viable play if one if not both are at good plus money

youre being kind of wierd about this...bizarre, actually
 
Guys, we have two fucking big cards this weekend, plus another one on Wednesday.

Are we really going to discuss semantics?

Pascal as a dog vs Elbiali? Hmmmm. Even if it's his last fight, he can surely take this..
 
Last edited:
Final list for my weekend :

2u Selby dec @ 1.61
1.6u Degale dec @ 2.61
1.5u Pascal DNB @ 2.41
2u Yarde dec @ 7.00
6u Dubois R1 @ 4.50
20u Dubois under 3.5 @1.83
1u Christopher Diaz dec @ 3.00
1u Shakur dec @ 2.40
0.5u Ogawa DNB @ 10.50

BOL to everyone
 
pytycrys said:
Final list for my weekend :

2u Selby dec @ 1.61
1.6u Degale dec @ 2.61
1.5u Pascal DNB @ 2.41
2u Yarde dec @ 7.00
6u Dubois R1 @ 4.50
20u Dubois under 3.5 @1.83
1u Christopher Diaz dec @ 3.00
1u Shakur dec @ 2.40
0.5u Ogawa DNB @ 10.50

BOL to everyone
Click to expand...
Casually going down and seeing 20U
<Baelish01>
 
pytycrys said:
Guys, we have two fucking big cards this weekend, plus another one on Wednesday.

Are we really going to discuss semantics?

Pascal as a dog vs Elbiali? Hmmmm. Even if it's his last fight, he can surely take this..
Click to expand...

elbiali is garbage, his footwork especially, but there are three florida judges and a florida ref.

pascals going to have to ko or get 2 kds in two separate rounds to win, this while throwing 30 punches a round. imo, the over 8.5 is unplayable as well at -300.

if there was a elbiali decision at +150 i think thats a solid play
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,695
Messages
55,435,376
Members
174,774
Latest member
kilgorevontrouty

Share this page

Back
Top