so u telling me hes gambling in a sport he doesn't understand? He needs to start predicting cricket scores. He would probably be better at it....
He uses the same phrases over and over again. Sounds good the first time he does it, after the 100.000th time not so much.
I've been subbed to his channel for a while now, this guy knows what he's talking about. Check him out.
Not sure about that, because I've seen one of his videos for that calling the match-up an outrage, and that Oscar would brutalize Manny. Nothing wrong with saying that of course, because I believed the same thing too. But let's not pretend that he was one of the few people who picked Manny to win, because he didn't (from what I can remember). PS, this thread is hilarious . Dwyer's a joke. "Let me just say, I'm just a stranger, and the opinion you should follow should be your owwwwn" :dead
then you would have lost on zbik. like the guy says, the decisions should be your own. i had a large play on chavez jr and a small play on johnson. worked out well for me.
dwyer picked oscar,margarito and mosley over pac. He usually favours technicians in fights. Also notice how all his bets are made so he can rarely lose, something like this, bet ward to win and straddle it with abraham ko, and then bragging like its some masterclass decision. I used to really like dwyers predictions but since last year he has become strange in his bets.
Dwyer's business is not picking winners. He is a gambling adviser in the sense that he looks for favourable odds and ways to exploit them. Some of his picks may look crazy but they're usually influenced by odds that do not necessarily reflect the difference between two fighters, or their styles and previous record. Froch v Johnson was a good example, GJ was something like 7/1 underdog. Now based on that, did Glen really look like the 7/1 underdog last night? Fair enough, Froch won by a few rounds, but the difference between them was never reflected in the odds and that is the type of situation Dwyer talks about.
As I said, he isn't bad at breaking down fights, but he almost always underrates or overrates an attribute of one or both fighters that makes him end up picking the wrong guy. Katsidis, Solis, Margarito, etc. He's also looking for the best bet, not just a flat out winner. This is why he hypes up underdogs and then recommends you straddle them. He'd be a bad gambling adviser if he told you to take safe bets on favorites of he sees *****s in their armor
Dwyer and Bigragu both know a lot of boxing. Especially the later who actually boxed in the amateurs. The problems I've seen sometimes with Dwyer is the tendancy to put too much emphasis on the stylistic match, leaving out the overall quality/form. Bigragu generally puts too much emphasis on boxing fundamentals, when we've seen many boxers go outside the box and be successful. (Sergio Martinez) They're both good, much better than me anyway.
Dwyer completely embarrassed himself with his Vitali vs Solis prediction. He even went as far as to claim that VK was ducking Solis, and after that never materialised spent two 10 min videos building a case for a Solis win. Still, even Dwyer pales in comparison to 'the boxing historian' as far as a personal bias goes. In this video he picked Peter over Wlad in their second fight despite admitting that Wlad had improved more since the first bout [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VgzvWqtRPgQ&feature=player_profilepage[/ame]
Xacta, you're LITERALLY not going to believe this. Dwyer just LITERALLY used the word "Literally" to describe how Wlad/Haye is one month away in his last literal video. Literally, within the first twenty seconds: [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azaovpH1Kbo[/ame]