[anatta]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Actually it seems to me that you guys can just bet the underdog, especially if the dog is the bigger man (Kongo, Jardine, Forrest, Rampage v Chuck) , and do just fine.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's not a bad notion. Unfortunately it's pretty hard to gauge before they fight a lot of the time. You could go by weight for the heavyweights, but who would have thunk Couture, giving up x pounds, would manhandle Gonzaga in what basically looked like a strength-based competition.

[/ QUOTE ]

Its a little weaker I think, betting the bigger man, for the heavyweights. I think strength plays less of a role in a fight when both men are basically super big and strong. I always think of the Monson v. Silvia fight where a strong wrestler did poorly. However, Randy did use his strength advantage when he was a big dog vs. Silvia (who needs steroids to be strong, but a weak giant still quite strong)

I agree, as soon as they get in the ring, you can always see who is bigger, but by then its too late. GSP v Kos, GSP, I know he wasn't a dog but my point is he was much the bigger man when they had the staredown, it was pretty obvious that Kos was going to have trouble. Fitch vs. Sanchez, on the other hand, was probably an easier call. Sanchez (Kos and Fitch) and the Count (Hammer) will always have trouble IMO vs world class wrestlers.

But if the dog is weaker, especially below heavyweight, you get Hughes vs. Gracie blowouts.