Thread: UFC 76
View Single Post
  #128  
Old 09-23-2007, 06:44 PM
igetbadbeat igetbadbeat is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 782
Default Re: UFC 76

[ QUOTE ]
u obv are some couch potato who cant compare being pysically fit and conditioned to just be physically fit and unconditioned.

Props to forrest but if the Bills beat the Pats this week, im not gonna say bills are the better team.

Im not worried at all and this loss doesnt really affect me. I know why he lost, i know how hes gonna learn from this. Better for his long term ufc career.

He basically just got humiliated, worst performance of his career, wasnt conditioned , didnt even have enough energy to perform his lifelong craft.

Best thing that ever happened to him, and yes it was because he was like 25% that he lost and obv the guy whos gonna fight the best in the world will be 110%

it aint easy being on top and not having that fire.

How hes gonna make sure he always lights the candle before each fight.

U HAD ZERO legit basis for picking shogun.

u just got lucky.

I dont equate this to crocop at all. and hes my second fav fighter.

I do equate it to GSP vs Serra
peace

[/ QUOTE ]

Amen, I'm pretty sure DannyOcean said he blocked me so he can't read my posts and I'm 100% happy about that. He's convinced he had the proper reasoning for picking Kongo and Forrest, and while I agree with his Kongo bet in 20/20 hindsight, I feel forrest @ +300 is still marginal value at best and not a goldmine.

Shogun came into that fight looking like absolute trash...absolute trash. Forrest came out looking like the best Forrest ever, and he did what he said. He used Shogun's moves on shoguns, ie the omaplata and the takedown. But that doesn't mean his reasons for picking forrest were sound. It is of course true MMA isn't a science and that's why we go over possible scenario's and outcomes and try to loosely put %'s on them and come up with an overall feel. DO's reasoning was one based on variance...well you have to account for the variance or else you are just betting to get lucky. Sure we can't do statistical analysis like in baseball and account for misconceptions (IE, lucky hits, unlucky batters which is really already accounted for in the %'s) Also, how often is Crocop going to break his rib in the first round? How often is he going to get kneed in the nuts twice? How often is forrest going to come in such great shape? How often is shogun going to come in such horrible shape? It doesn't matter who shows up to fight, it matters what the likelihood of them showing up like that is. That's the bottomline when you're betting.


And this "give credit to the man who won" BS. The logical fallacy is so obvious. Anyone who doesn't give credit to Forrest for the win is INSANE. Forrest came out like a monster and earned the greatest win of his career. That is so obvious. But the person who gives credit to himself for getting lucky is just as insane.
Reply With Quote