I call it right now: KIMBO won't...

He was in the stance for a jab, wasn't he? His right foot out in front? I may be wrong. either way it appeared as nothing/lazy punch.

 

My best friend is an oddsmaker jackass. Odds can be made for different reasons. 1. The oddsmaker takes a position and wants people to bet a certain side. 2. You set a line to get 2 way action so you profit no matter what. How many fucking times do you have to be schooled about Petrozelli? The guy was in the UFC before, was prepared for a fight that night and was NOT an unknown. Yeah you are right, complete ownage because you are ignorant. The fact is +475 was GREAT odds.

 

I already mentioned setting the line, I thoroughly owned you on this, all you had to say is I don't know what I am talking but failed to show me ANYTHING I said that was wrong about how odds work. +475 is good odds, just not for this fight. Argue some more about semantics, you are getting pretty desperate TRYING to disagree. I already told you what you disagreed on, you failed many times to listen.

 

+475 was a great bet, your reasoning is completely wrong. Sorry your trolling is simply not working. This can continue for days. The facts are Petruzelli was not an unknown like you continue to foolishly imply. You have been schooled continuosly on every subject in this thread but I don't mind. :cheer: Hell you should send your teacher a check at this point. :atu:

LOL @ you saying STILL that the line should have been higher even after I TELL you the books lost a shitload of money on it. My god you are dumb.

 

So says the guy who thinks the odds go on a thought ::

....and again you neglected what I said about the +475, talk about trolling, hypocrite....

The line would have been higher if money didn't go on the lesser known, which I said it did......once again, owned.

 

The odds are made as I said they are. You can continue on with your weird posts regarding that but whatever. Odd's are made for the things I posted above. Either a bookmaker makes a position or looks to win on juice. period. I thought that was common sense but you know so little in your case it's not.

What you said about the +475? It's irrelevant because you think Petrozelli is a nobdy, bum. So based on that alone you have no idea what you are talking about. In your mind that is correct, the reality is it's not. Petrozelli once again was way more experienced than Kimbo and had fought on the big stage before. Hardly an unknown. Getting +475 when the line closes 30% lower is a great bet period. This stuff is really just common sense.

 

Odds are made exactly the way I said, this is indisputable fact. Keep trying to be desperately right when you can't, it amuses me.

 

Don't try to deflect the attention. I notice that about you. You get schooled, you try to latch on to some statement and run with that. Here are the facts....

1. Seth Petruzelli was not an unknown. He had fought on the big stage before, this was not a first for him.

2. The books got murdered on this fight. Contrary to popular belief the books don't always win.

3. When you get a number at it's very best you got a good bet. period. ESPECIALLY, when it closes 30% lower.

 

1. I told you the odds are determined on the amount bet for the repective team/person, NOT a thought.
2. You claim mainstream doesn't determine odds more than a small percentage of elitist fans who THINK they know the sport because they have heard of relatively unknowns.....then have to realize their know-it-all attitude made them lose on about every Kimbo fight to date and he didn't even lose the fight the way you elitist snobs THOUGHT he would.
3. Never said +475 was bad bet.
4. Only a straw man arguer would talk about the opening line.
5. You claimed I didn't know how odds work.
6. You are a liar.....you cannot read, and you are a hypocrite.

 

1. WTF, I said they make the odds and move them accordingly afterwards. You did catch that post right? Even so bookmakers take positions sometimes.

2. Irrelevant.

3. yes you did. Sorry but "Terrible odds" when he got the best odds available is self explanatory

4. Only an idiot wouldn't care about opening and closing lines. +475 was better than both.

5. You don't. There's more to it than you seem to think

6. Whatever, but I understand gambling. Something that you clearly don't. The opening line don't matter? :atu::atu: Oh fuck that's a STUPID comment.

 

The opening line doesn't matter because that is not what we are talking about, once again you read what you WANT to read and "think" ::

I hate to break this to you, but opening lines can be the highest. Another straw man for you because there is no reason to even bring up opening lines.

I said it should have been much higher, I stated my reasons, you continue to deny them. I NEVER said it was a bad bet. You are so desperate right now, I am blushing for you.

 

Blush for yourself since you have no idea what you are talking about. In fact fuck, you just made my point. The fact is Kimbo opened around -300 or so, went clear up to around -600 and went back down to -380 or so. In other words the opening wasn't the best and neither was the closing. Royness got it in the middle which WAS the best. Seriously you can't be this thick fucking headed. When you get a number at it's highest, that's a good bet and a good number. Not a "terrible" number. :atu:The openng and closing lines have EVERY reason to do with why he made a good bet. Like I said, you lack basic knowledge of gambling. Thanks though, that post 100% exposed what I was saying.

 

I made your point when you brought up the opening line in a strawman? If you think there is some text book for opening lines where they can't be the highest, I assure you are clearly in error. What that has to do with the price of tea, is amazing....no one is talking about opening or closing except you now and claiming some delusional victory only you can understand.....I said it should have been higher (8th time now?) which the reasons I stated would have made them that way, obviously (as I stated this several times too) there was more money being bet the other way.....I said it was a good bet and good odds, just not for this fight .....time for another strawman heh?

I have posted my gambling winnings on here since the inception, I have been doing this for 16 years like I said AGAIN, but of course what else do you have except straw man arguments and lies? You are going in circles now, bringing up the same lies and hypocrisy from one post to the next, please refer to post 99 on your next circle of twisting.

 

Like I said you lack the basic knowledge of gambling. There's nothing more important than getting the best number. Whether you get it off the opening line, closing line or somewhere in the middle don't matter. The fact is HisRoyness got the best line which made it a great bet. There's no argument to that. It was not "terrible odds":atu: You just don't seem to get it. That comment is what started this long, boring ass argument.

 

I have repeated myself many times, you still choose to latch on to a few words instead of explanations....but you are too afflicted to comprehend. Please refer to post 99 in future desperation responses.

 

.....

refer to post 98 I am tired of repeating myself.

 

I already read what you said and responded to the boring argument YOU made, no need. I like your style though, even if it is familiar ::

 

That was my way of saying your response (like all of your others in this thread), just didn't cut it. I am sure you are used to that by now.

 

Yeah, you said it enough.

 

Tyler you make a complete fool out of yourself. And if u think it's not your lack of betting knowledge then u just can't evaluate an MMA fighter. Sure the fanbase and hype around Kimbo made Petru a big underdog but let's not completely forget skills here they influence the odds, too and that's why there have never been better odds on a Kimbo opponent.

It just hasn't been clear up to that fight what he can do.


How many bets did u place in your 16 year Las Vegas career?? ::

 

He's been On a Fucking ROLL Lately...U Should Check Out Some of TURDen's Fine Work N the Football Threads Lately....


REED:laughing:

 

I can admit when i have no clue about something and that's the case in football so i can't judge who's talking shit there. But i know a little something about betting and there is not such thing as a 16 year winning streak in professional betting unless u make a bet every two years...

Usually i agree with Tyler a lot when he discusses things with Joe King he comes across as a pretty reasonable guy to me, but here he's just dead wrong. (his streak although isn't even the point i'm debating here)

 

That's THE BIGGEST Problem TURDen has...

Instead of just ADMITTING when he's WRONG, CONFUSED or Making an ASS of Himself, he'll ALTER his "Points" N a PATHETIC Attempt @ Making it Look like he's Right...

That's why this Latest Thread has Turned N 2 a Meaningless PAGES Loooooooong Exercise...But that's TURDen's M.O....N Addition to All that REED has just Stated, TURDen's the Quintessential "Last Word WHORE"...



REED:hammert:

 

Turden sucks. Who thinks I should ban him?

 

:::atu: There's the answer to your questions.

 

If you bothered to read and comprehend, 1-2 per year. If Kimbo can get -600 like someone mentioned, then the odds could have easily gone +800 or at least alot better than +475 if that is what the money dictated, which is what I said it SHOULD have. I never said odds are only determined by only fans, so you are jacking off like Valdosta with yet ANOTHER straw man. It is my opinion and I have seen odds do this plenty of times over the years, so that would be experience as well. You guys are obviously afflicted by arguments from the past, otherwise you would not be making this big a deal about it. I'm sure you will twist and only comprehend one word or neglect everything I have been explaining, but I expect as much since it has been repeated over and over, I expect it to continue as I dictate, so it is cool.

 

yeah, check out how you think "in spite of" is fundamentally different than "despite".....and ACTUALLY wanted to argue about it as I tried to let it go because of the bitches that whine about us.

 

I wrote CLEAR as day I average a bet or two a year in fighting. One time I was undecided on a Mosley/Barrera fight I went to and asked the board what would be the best bet because they both had shitty odds, I made the bet as recommended and won.......I gave everyone who wrote why Barrera was the best bet two custom DVDS of their choice. I only write this to show you it is well documented my winnings here even if you are unaware of it, RJp4p could probably verify what I say, I used to post my winning tickets here all the time. It really is unbelievable that a person would have this kind of streak, and I understand you doubt.....but do not question if I am a gambler, I assure you I am and probably the luckiest person you will ever meet.
:bears:

 

For what? I was responding to what everyone here said TO ME, on what grounds hypocrite?

 

I will be more than happy to compare my winnings with you when I go to Vegas for the Superbowl as I do every year. Not that I can show you what I win on craps, but I can show my tickets on the bowl. How often should I go to Vegas without becoming a loser? I don't get what is so funny about being a winner, maybe it is jealousy opcorn: