UFC Gambling Analysis: Breaking Down 2011 Underdog Performance

by Brent Brookhouse on Aug 14, 2011 12:00 PM EDT in MMA Gambling

Tito Ortiz was both a success and a failure at odds longer than +300 this year.

After noticing that no underdog with longer odds than +135 (Constantinos Philippou) pulled off a win at UFC 133, it got me wondering how underdog wins have broken down in the UFC lately. I went back over every 2011 fight and used the fighter's best available odds at belltime. Here is how the data breaks down:

Odds Range	Record
+115 to +149	18-16-1 (.514)
+150 to +199	7-28-1 (.194)
+200 to +249	8-19 (.296)
+250 to +299	4-14 (.222)
+300 and above	5-27 (.156)

There were nine fights that were "pick 'em" fights with closer than +115 odds which I did not count.

The first thing that jumped out to me was seeing that underdogs under +150 actually have a winning record to this point in the year. There is a huge drop from +150 to +199, which is surprising given that coming in I assumed we'd see a pretty steady decline as odds got longer.

The five men to win at over +300 were Rani Yahya (+300 vs. Mike Brown), Dennis Siver (+354 vs. George Sotiropoulos), George Roop (+400 vs. Josh Grispi), Charlie Brenneman (+425 vs. Rick Story) and Tito Ortiz (+525 vs. Ryan Bader).

Clearly, what I'm saying is that you should run out and lay some money on Donald Cerrone (+115) and Ed Herman (+123) for tonight's UFC on Versus 5 card but stay away from Ben Henderson at +150.

Tweet Comment 17 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

That difference between < +115 and < +150 is actually shocking to me. That really shouldn’t happen, even with a data sample that small.

by Lauren J Darkbloom on Aug 14, 2011 12:12 PM EDT reply actions

actually it could be just a quirk of the data and the ranges you chose

Where can you find final lines data? What happens if you study more years?

by Lauren J Darkbloom on Aug 14, 2011 12:15 PM EDT up reply actions

Best Fight Odds is awesome.

I’ll probably look and extend it over 2010 as well. i just thought it was interesting and some nice weekend filler so posted this little bit.

Managing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.

by Brent Brookhouse on Aug 14, 2011 12:29 PM EDT up reply actions

i do love all of the focus on gambling on this site these days. Gambling on MMA has treated me well for the past few years, and always love to see more stories about it. thanks

by mo dogg on Aug 14, 2011 12:38 PM EDT reply actions

were you using vig free lines?

i.e if the fight ended as +140/-170 did you consider it +151 (the midpoint between the two lines) or +140?

i think a lot of the +150 – +199 lines only winning 25% is due to some of their vig free lines being more than 2:1 dogs, and just standard variance over a small sample.

by ryan daut on Aug 14, 2011 12:39 PM EDT reply actions

I didn’t want to go through that much work for a light weekend post. So I just went by the straight underdog’s line at bell time.

If I decide to expand on this into a larger piece I’ll probably refine it down quite a bit.

Managing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.

by Brent Brookhouse on Aug 14, 2011 1:21 PM EDT up reply actions

you should stay away from hendo

because there’s a really, really strong shot that he loses. Miller is a fantastic value bet and one I’ve personally put a couple hundo on with these surprisingly good odds.

Mel Gibson shot the movie Apocalypto on location at the center of my taint.
-Fake Emcee

by Cory Braiterman on Aug 14, 2011 12:51 PM EDT reply actions

i love jim miller

but i think hes vastly overrated. hes obviously a top 10 caliber fighter, but to think hes a huge favorite over anyone in the 5-15 area when he has 0 wins vs top 15 guys is a stretch to me. i thought he lost to bocek and probably would have scored the tibau fight a draw.

someone on the sherdog roundtable made a great point that henderson is a little wild and fights very open in every aspect of mma while miller is very tight and has great defense everywhere so its very possible miller picks him apart in that sense without giving openings to ben, but i think henderson could be too big, strong, athletic and just kinda overwhelm him in that sense.

i think miller -150 is a pretty accurate line given what we know about each guy

by ryan daut on Aug 14, 2011 1:44 PM EDT up reply actions

Who is Hendo fighting? Hardy?

by Fausto Geraci on Aug 14, 2011 5:28 PM EDT up reply actions

He means Bendo. Ben Henderson.

"You are a miserable human being." - Mike Fagan

My twitter: @TB_Money

by Tim Burke on Aug 14, 2011 5:37 PM EDT up reply actions

So, basically it’s saying that underdogs of +150 or higher win about 20 percent of the time?

Assume that you have 10 fights where the favorite goes off at -150 and the underdog is at least +150. Bet $100 on the favorite in each fight. If the percentages hold up, you’d win the bet in 8 of the fights for a return of $533 on your $800 risked and you’d lose $200 on the underdogs who won. Net gain: $333 on $1,000 risked. Nice.

What am I missing here? I understand that the sample size is small and unreliable as a predictor, but I’m wondering if my math is way off. Please go back and calculate the success rates for underdogs since 2008, and include all Bellator, Strikeforce, and Tachi Palace fights. Report back to us very soon. This is important.

Standing by. Thank you.

.....

Stylin' in my Speedos® and darin' you to stare.

by Scabby Knuckle on Aug 14, 2011 12:55 PM EDT reply actions

This is exactly it. People should bet up the favorites and bet them up HUGE because in general, MMA bettors have been too willing to take significant underdogs and give them the “anything happens in MMA” benefit of the doubt when betting. However, to be fair, the favorite (figuring in the sportsbook’s greasing) would be more like -210 – still, you’d have a healthy, healthy return.

by VirtualBalboa on Aug 14, 2011 4:16 PM EDT up reply actions

have to disagree

you play the best bets. making some great money tonight with the dogs. lines can be set wrong (in my opinion). Hammen and Ludwig are good examples tonight

by mo dogg on Aug 14, 2011 10:12 PM EDT up reply actions

I completely agree with your three picks at the end.

When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are in a confederacy against him. - Jonathan Swift
Editor, HeadKickLegend.com
Still Subo at Fightlinker.com

by Derek Suboticki on Aug 14, 2011 5:11 PM EDT reply actions

Not good, usually I fade you. I have Cerrone, Herman, AND Bendo.

by Fausto Geraci on Aug 14, 2011 5:29 PM EDT up reply actions

I’ve got enough faith in Miller that Bendo is going to have to take it from me. Bocek is good, but Miller is on another level.

When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are in a confederacy against him. - Jonathan Swift
Editor, HeadKickLegend.com
Still Subo at Fightlinker.com

by Derek Suboticki on Aug 14, 2011 5:30 PM EDT up reply actions