UFC 98 Betting Preview: Early Lines Edition

The one thing I don’t like about his point fighting style is that it is a little stop and start. What I mean by this is that he needs time to get his bearings back after he has thrown his flurry – I think this is why Machida circles out so often to reestablish his advantage. Though his timing on a fresh exchange is second to none and has stopped many fighters in their tracks, if Rashad can get through that initial barrier he should have success. GSP mentioned a slowish reset time in regards to BJ despite quick reflexes, I think the same is true for Machida as well. Boxing and wrestling seem to lend themselves better to continuous fighting and quick transitions in close quarters.

I don’t have too much problem with Lyoto’s point fighting because all really you need in MMA is one stun to put someone a bad position. If you get the guy on his back and land a couple of big punches while he’s dazed, that can easily lead to a KO. Heck, Machida did it vs. Thiago (the weak chin made him pretty easy to stun, but the idea still stands).

The thing that is bad about point fighting is that at the higher echelons of MMA, especially with 4 ounce gloves, is that fighters are always dangerous. In some cases, taking the risk to finish a fight early (finish = win) may be a better move than keeping the door for another few rounds. Some guys are safer to let hang around than others (Leites for one), and if you can help it you should try and finish guys with big power. Look at what Scott Smith did in R3 since Radach couldn’t put him away.

I might go big on Rashad here, some seem to be recommending against it but I’m not particularly worried and the payout is hefty. Also like Xavier (kickboxer – mimiced Ando for Hendo) at positive odds – McFedries is a coin flip type of fighter who likes to bang and so it always ends early. I will likely parlay those two – given the above odds, you are already at or above 7x so a small bet could pay off very nicely on something that is somewhat likely. Anyone x either of these guys is solid really.

I agree with Roland generally – Roop, Nover, Barry all look good for the time being. I could see sneaking in on Serra now or later on too because he can definitely put Hughes down given the right circumstances. Or get smothered.

Sherk/Edgar gives me some trouble because I like Edgar but he has usually done best when he sets the pace and Sherk is one of the most aggressive fighters at controlling pace. Luckily, Edgar likes to fight quickly – for me the choice of taking Edgar would come down to his standup (as he is a solid wrestler), but I don’t have a good bead on it and Sherk can take a lickin’. I like your Sherk pick but beware as it will probably go to decision and you never know when or where Cecil Peoples will strike.

Really, I prefer not going for small parlays, three guys at -300 or worse won’t really get you much and MMA is often prone to upsets. You’d need to win Sherk (1.4), Hughes (1.25), Barry (1.25) to equal simply picking Larson (2.2). I think picking and choosing underdogs can be more fun and more profitable – it always seems like half of the fights are -300 or worse for the favourite. Really, I try to stay away from the undercard, betting on guys I haven’t seen before leads to trouble.

Parlays are more fun, definitely. The payouts are really just a multiple of the odds you would get on a single bet.

Parlay 3 even fights (2.0) for $10, your payout will be $80 (10 × 2.0 × 2.0 x 2.0) – profit of $70.

Contrast this with:

3 even fights (2.0) for $3.33 each ($10 total) – payout of $20 – profit of $10 as compared with $70.

or

$70 of profit requires $70 of wagers as compared with $10 on a parlay.

Assuming you do pick correctly, you win more and put up less. Or put up the same and win MUCH MORE. But your odds of losing the parlay are the combined odds of any of your bets losing so you can walk away empty handed quite easily.

In Ontario, where I’m from, the gaming commission has a sports betting lottery game where they force you to parlay 3+ games. People complain about not winning, but that’s because of the nature of parlays. The problem is not particularly with it being hard to win (they just can’t pick), it’s just that even if you were on point it’s an uphill battle with such poor odds.

But as long as you like the payouts offered, there’s no reason not to parlay. Particularly since you are confident in your selections. Just remember that straight bets pay more consistently and you can’t win any money back once you’ve lost it all.

Please post your picks :D