palooka wrote:
I'm not familiar; I may put a tenner on Angulo - am I throwing money away?
I and others here think he's good value, probably should be 3/1. The bookies give him a 16.6 per cent chance of winning, so if he has more chance that that you're winning this type of bet at 5/1 in the long term. I do, so I've bet him in accumulators.
Riddick Blowe wrote:
You must not be familiar with how fights are priced up. Outside of obvious squash jobs (which this isn't) 16/1 is crazy.
I'm quite familiar with how fights are priced up thanks.
Let's for a minute assume they're priced up using your infallible "obvious squash job" / "not obvious squash job" method...what is it about Isaaac Quaye that makes you think he's a "not obvious squash job"? Have you seen him and he looks handy? Do you just not rate Satchell?
If you're so familiar with how fights are priced up you'll know 16/1 is the kind of price you could have got on Anthony Joshua's last opponent. I AKS YOU THIS - why not 8/1? 9/1 on a tough, busy Quaye? The bookies are giving him a 6 per cent chance to win. 16/1 is crazy, full stop. If anyone disagrees with me I'm sure they'll say so.
Riddick Blowe wrote:
If you're so familiar with how fights are priced up you'll know 16/1 is the kind of price you could have got on Anthony Joshua's last opponent. I AKS YOU THIS - why not 8/1? 9/1 on a tough, busy Quaye? The bookies are giving him a 6 per cent chance to win. 16/1 is crazy, full stop. If anyone disagrees with me I'm sure they'll say so.
Again, have you actually seen evidence of this "tough, busy Quaye" or is it just what you've read? I'm genuinely interested . I didn't join the thread trying to be awkward, like you I was looking for something to throw in a trixie with Angulo and Arakawa. On the face of it Quaye's record is abysmal...aside from knocking over a series of debutants and never-won fighters he lost every round in the only fight over here we could possible use as a benchmark. There is absolutely no value in backing an away fighter like that at 16/1 on the bare statistics, though I suspect you will disagree with that. Good luck with your bets anyway.
reggaereggae wrote:Hmmm I agree with Riddick Blowe - 16-1 is way too long. I have never heard or seen Quaye; but Satchell is no puncher.
Also there is the possibility of a cut, swollen eye esp over 12. I thiunk 16-1 is a good bet
Quaye lost every round to Don Broadhurst, the best fighter he's faced by some way, 16-1 may be a bit wide, but I wouldn't bet on Quaye winning it, Satchell points is the best bet for this one, but even that's below evens.
Boxing Prospect wrote:Nihito Arakawa @ 5.00
Alfredo Angulo @ 5.00
Alfredo Angulo by KO, TKO or Disqualification @ 6.50
David Alonso Lopez @ 5.00
Marvin Quintero @ 3.75
Permed Patent
...if this comes off...I'll be kicking myself for playing very small
Permed Patent is a great shout for this type of bet...I've shied away in the past because I didn't fully understand it but I guess all you need to know is there's some leeway for things to go wrong. Any advice though on placing one of these would be appreciated
Riddick Blowe wrote:
If you're so familiar with how fights are priced up you'll know 16/1 is the kind of price you could have got on Anthony Joshua's last opponent. I AKS YOU THIS - why not 8/1? 9/1 on a tough, busy Quaye? The bookies are giving him a 6 per cent chance to win. 16/1 is crazy, full stop. If anyone disagrees with me I'm sure they'll say so.
Again, have you actually seen evidence of this "tough, busy Quaye" or is it just what you've read? I'm genuinely interested . I didn't join the thread trying to be awkward, like you I was looking for something to throw in a trixie with Angulo and Arakawa. On the face of it Quaye's record is abysmal...aside from knocking over a series of debutants and never-won fighters he lost every round in the only fight over here we could possible use as a benchmark. There is absolutely no value in backing an away fighter like that at 16/1 on the bare statistics, though I suspect you will disagree with that. Good luck with your bets anyway.
I haven't seen Quaye (thought that was pretty obvious :P ) but I respect Old Bones Ian and bennie and if they think this is a better match than the price, I believe them. That alone makes 16/1 crazy and the accumulator punts I've had are tiny. We're talking an absolute ton of value the bookies are giving away here, probably an 8/1 difference, it's as if they're plucking numbers out of their arse.
Can I ask, what does Quaye have to do in the fight to make you think 'Cripes, this guy actually was priced too long'?
Riddick Blowe wrote:
We're talking an absolute ton of value the bookies are giving away here, probably an 8/1 difference, it's as if they're plucking numbers out of their arse.
Can I ask, what does Quaye have to do in the fight to make you think 'Cripes, this guy actually was priced too long'?
we'll have to agree to disagree on this one mate...you're the one betting blind and yet you say the traders are picking numbers out of their arse. I really don't understand your argument to be honest...you seem to be saying any underdog you haven't researched should be 8/1. It's bizarre.
For Quaye to outperform his odds he'd have to perform better than his record suggests he will...seeing as noone has given any reasons that this might happen I've skipped over the fight and not bothered to watch any video so its impossible for me to guess his true chances...on the face of it 16/1 looks fine and he'll most likely lose a very lopsided decision. I hope he wins for you though.
Riddick Blowe wrote:
We're talking an absolute ton of value the bookies are giving away here, probably an 8/1 difference, it's as if they're plucking numbers out of their arse.
Can I ask, what does Quaye have to do in the fight to make you think 'Cripes, this guy actually was priced too long'?
we'll have to agree to disagree on this one mate...you're the one betting blind and yet you say the traders are picking numbers out of their arse. I really don't understand your argument to be honest...you seem to be saying any underdog you haven't researched should be 8/1. It's bizarre.
For Quaye to outperform his odds he'd have to perform better than his record suggests he will...seeing as noone has given any reasons that this might happen I've skipped over the fight and not bothered to watch any video so its impossible for me to guess his true chances...on the face of it 16/1 looks fine and he'll most likely lose a very lopsided decision. I hope he wins for you though.
If it means I get a little more value out of my low-stake accumulators, I'm happy betting blind on a punt. Information doesn't have to be gathered solely through what you see, I've backed a lot of guys on tips from others I respect (although I always watch previous fights when I'm staking a serious amount). From the info I had 16/1 is too long. Satchell I have seen and like someone else said he isn't a puncher and overall I'm not that impressed with him. Anyway, good luck whatever you choose to bet on.
Wolves scored 16 goals in their last 6 (won all 6) and Walsall a paltry 4 (not won in 6). Great price that is.
Easy money that one, we played shite against Walsall last week and still won comfortably, didn't even have to hang on at the end like usual, apart from a world class save from Rudd to keep out a 35 yarder in the last minute, making up for his cock up for their goal, they were the only two shots he had to save. It is a local derby though and Walsall will be right up for it, think they're expecting a full house, so they might be able to nick a point, but they will have to be much improved from last week.
domjon wrote:
Let's for a minute assume they're priced up using your infallible "obvious squash job" / "not obvious squash job" method...what is it about Isaaac Quaye that makes you think he's a "not obvious squash job"? Have you seen him and he looks handy? Do you just not rate Satchell?
A poor evening all round. Arakawa totally outgunned by a very big looking linares, angulo a real disappointment looked like he was fighting through treacle. Still not sold on canelo personally, think his questionable stamina will be shown up at 160...looked very clever defensively though
Unbeaten Kevin Satchell retained his Commonwealth flyweight title with a convincing decision over one of those sturdy Ghanaians at the Aintree Centre in Liverpool last night.
The champion, who rarely strays from home, is a work in progress but easily outboxed the stocky Isaac Quaye, who went into the fight with more stoppages than Satchell's 12 fights and had never been stopped (and still hasn't) but "Satch" is the most successful Liverpool flyweight since the days of Peter Culshaw and, interestingly - tall and lean - he actually looks a little like the former world class "Choirboy" who licked Baby Jake Matlala in South Africa.
It will also be interesting to see how they move the 25-year-old Satchell who is not a big puncher with just two stoppage wins but throws lots of shots - body and head - and maintains a hot pace. He was a bit easy to tag in recent 12-rounders with Iain Butcher and Luke Wilton (Butcher, a very tasty Scot, had him on the deck) but what can you really expect after just a dozen outings. Perhaps a rematch with Butcher is in order.
Satchell, who also holds the British flyweight title, is now one successful defence away from a Lonsdale Belt for life.
Wolves scored 16 goals in their last 6 (won all 6) and Walsall a paltry 4 (not won in 6). Great price that is.
Easy money that one, we played shite against Walsall last week and still won comfortably, didn't even have to hang on at the end like usual, apart from a world class save from Rudd to keep out a 35 yarder in the last minute, making up for his cock up for their goal, they were the only two shots he had to save. It is a local derby though and Walsall will be right up for it, think they're expecting a full house, so they might be able to nick a point, but they will have to be much improved from last week.
Stayed away from the Boxing last night as there was just nothing out there.
Good decision insider, I thought there was some value in angulo but probably put took too much from the Lara performance. My last post was probably a bit harsh on canelo actually, he's obviously a very decent fighter.
Star of the night was LSC for me I just love watching him fight...Frampton and quigg would be in deep waters there I feel
The difference between Scott outright and Scott stoppage will probably be 7/2 against 6/1 or something which is huge when you consider how unlikely it is for he fight to go 12 given Deontay's power, bad chin and openness, and Scott very capable of being stopped too.
Late reply. I was going to go for Crawford points, but didn't bet in the end. Just laziness I guess.
I wouldn't mind a few quid on Malik Scott to stop Wilder, but it's such an unpredictable match up. I don't think Scott has the mentality to go all the way. Wilder chin appears to be a fragile as my gran's old tea set.
I think I'm going to have a £200 double (I never do doubles) on Stuart Hall to win and Jon-Lewis Dickinson to win on points. Although I'll decide for certain in the days leading up. I might go and watch Dickinson train and have a chat, see if I can gat anything from that.
domjon wrote:A poor evening all round. Arakawa totally outgunned by a very big looking linares, angulo a real disappointment looked like he was fighting through treacle. Still not sold on canelo personally, think his questionable stamina will be shown up at 160...looked very clever defensively though
I stuck 60 on canelo stoppage minutes before going to bed @ 8/13.
Apart from that my other acca was beat.
Angulo was seriously slow of hand and foot. He was hit with wide looping hooks all night right in front of Alvarez. Tough guy though.
I was going to go for Crawford points, but didn't bet in the end. Just laziness I guess.