Tyson was a 42-1 favorite over Buster Douglas...I do know this much - to make a $100 profit, one would have to bet $4,200. In other words, people who bet at least $4,200 on Tyson won $4,300. Not much at all. Not even worth the bet. But how much would someone have had to put on Douglas to make a profit? Is it as simplistic as this - you put down $1 on Douglas and win $42? Or, put down $100 and win $4,200? If so, oh, if I only had a time machine! Anyway, this might sound like a silly question, but I'm not too affluent in the betting game...maybe someone can enlighten me.
Let's do the odds for Pacquiao - Clottey Manny " Pac Man " Pacquiao -525 Joshua " Grand Master " Clottey +350 This mean if you put $525 on Pac and he wins you win $100. Put $100 on Clottey and you win $350. So if Douglas was a 42-1 underdog. That would mean $100 on him would win you $4200.
You pretty much got it. "The opening line made Tyson a 35-1 favorite; someone reportedly wagered $70,000 to win $2,000. This forced the line upward until it settled at 42-1. There were reports that someone bet $100,000 somewhere between 35 and 42 to 1, hoping for a return of less than $3,000. The largest bet on Douglas was reported to be $1,500 at 38-1 odds which, when Douglas won, returned a tidy $57,000 profit."
two sports you NEVERRRRR bet on are 1. NFL - Any given sunday, sounds stupid, but goddamn its too true. :-( 2. Boxing - Usually if you have good knowledge, you will be able to place a safe bet, but somtimes CRAZY ASS **** happens Stick to horse track Thats all mafia anways, so at least their is some kind of regulation and predictability as long as you know somone :hey
LOL, remeber when hatton said "take out your mortgage and bet the house on me vs pac, there is no way i will lose" Ever since that statement, i have always seen hatton as a **** human.... because i know 1 POOR SOB put his house up for him:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl
I used to gamble for a living. No one who knew what they were doing would ever event contemplate putting money at Tyson at the price, I can guarantee you. So the people that did were most likely high, high-rollers to whom the loss barely even registed. Even Pac over Clottey would be overlooked because at -300 or more it doesn't reflect a sound investment. For the record though, I am seriously looking at Pac by TKO.
You are exactly rite tho i have called several big upsets in boxing and after said **** i should have wagered
but how many times have you thought the name fighter will win, and some no name comes out of nowhere and turns into some kind of monster??? Boxing is dumb to bet on because, The BEST fighter doesnt always WIN, the BEST boxer that NIGHT always WINS
Not even. A sport with various degrees of "robbery" on an almost monthly basis doesn't get my hard earned cash trifled away on it.
I remember I called Maskaev Rahman 2 and if I remember properly the odds were way in Rahman's favor despite what happened in the first match But I never bet on any fights before and dont plan to drain a house on it.
I forgot about that... That must be the most heart breaking situation of all... But you have to take it all in stride.. Boxing will NEVER get rid of the mafia, thank god at least today its not as bad as it used to be
I never knew why people favored Rahman in that rematch so heavily. Maskaev hadn't had any great success in a while and neither had Rahman and just by seeing both men fight over the years they were about equal in ability so I saw it as a pck 'em kind of fight.
