dwayer from gamblers advisory thinks ortiz and maidana are the 2 best at 140

You could hardly say Maidana was a bad pick either considering he's coming at it from a betting angle. At nearly 3/1 Maidana lost by a very narrow margin, and if Khan had not displayed the ability to take a punch that we've never ever seen before, and infact was nearly unthinkable prior to the fight and shocked us all, he would have been sparked out.

Let's be honest, those of us that picked Khan, the fight went nothing like how we imagined. Maidana got a lot done.

 

Lazarus too :rofl

 

Everyone has their wrong picks but to just say afterwards that your man would win in a rematch is kids stuff.

 

is this thew geezer bobby Palmer copies his predictions on

 

What is it with these seriously rabid Dawson fans?

I've never been as glad to see a fighter get beat as I was when he lost. Never bought into the hype..... even though it was only coming from a few annoying Yanks and Calzaghe haters :yep

 

I understood his Dawson pick, but the pathetic way he gave barely any credit to Pascal exposed a lack of impartiality. Not a good trait for someone betting on boxing. And I was glad to see Pascal take advantage of Dawson's very glaring flaws. Great skills, awesome talent, no boxing brain. Pascal beats him every time, I think.

Never understand this whole “he has his number, he’ll get him in a rematch”. If you lost the first time, it means the other guy had your number, and he’s not likely to lose it. How many times does a guy reverse his loss in a rematch?

 

I think he does too..... unless Dawson makes some radical changes he's going to lose to Pascal again.

But can he make those?

He's been in with old man after old man, suddenly against an opponent his own age that had mobility and something slightly different he looked lost.

As for reversing losses..... would be interesting to find out :think

 

As far as gambling goes I dont understand how he could money with his strategy , if anything he should be in deep minus .

Basically this is his strategy :

Bet on fighter A , also bet on fighter B to win via certain method .

Something like : Mares to win at 1/2 and Vic to win via KO/TKO at 3/1 .

If Mares wins he would make a very small profit , if Vic won via stoppage he makes small profit but if the last judge gave the fight to Vic he would be fawked .


Really doesn't take a genius to understand how crappy his strategy of betting is .

 

Agreed. The profit margins are too small for me. When it just so happens something unexpected happens you lose all your money and the winnings are not enough to pull it back.

I've always believed in boxing just bet on who you think wins. I'm not even a huge lover of over/unders or methods, if you bet on what your fighters end result is going to be you can't go far wrong.

 

Have you made much gambling, mate? Just curious - I've never had the nerve for it.

 

For sure .

I rather lose my bet on Mares at 1/2 ( actually really had money on him ) instead of investing even more on some very questionable stuff ( Vic hasn't KO'ed many people recently and neither does Mares have a weak chin as we have seen in the actual fight ) . If Mares doesn't win so be it I lose some but no need to invest more money .
Lets say fight ends in a draw , he loses Vic via TKO/KO bet and maybe even the Mares outright if he placed it at some european bookie with draw option . Not to speak about Vic being a round or two shy from getting the decision win and both bets would lose .

 

He has an opinion as we all do - he just airs his on youtube ...

We all air ours on ESB !

 

Its the only way to make cash punting on boxing ... the fighters ultimate goal is a victory .. he has no hidden agenda for KO or points or over 9.5 rounds ..

I personally back doubles n trebles on good things ... recently had £550 on Juanma and JMM for £450 profit and Burns , deGale and Khan £500 for £400 profit ...

 

I don't think that's what people are getting at. It's the way certain people seem to hold him in high regard. If the title was "Dan Rafael thinks..." or "Steve Bunce thinks..." etc then fine but some random bloke off Youtube?

 

In the past yes. Particularly when I was at uni. I've posted my results before in the betting thread.

I don't bet as often or as much since my son was born since I feel I should be a bit more responsible now. In the past I wasn't too bothered if I'd lose 200 because it was only my concern, but now I feel like it should have gone in a savings account and I feel a dickhead. So that takes the fun out of it even though I'm generally successful. Plus I don't have time to work, post often here, look after him and research enough to be successful at betting, and since its more of a habit than a need for money its easy to cut down.

I feel like I was only successful because I treated it as a part-time job. I don't think I have the talent some people do for gambling where they have a knack and feel for picking correctly. I spent hours studying the leagues I bet on by watching matches I wasn't even invested in to understand the mentality of the teams, keeping up to date on all injury situations, researching stats and trends, and it was the same for boxing. Now I can't do that I'm definitely past my betting prime.