BoxRec

expe wrote:

reggaereggae wrote:

reggaereggae wrote: one of thse guys will lose is what I think

Usmanee's stepped in on short notice, so I'd say Buglioni is most likely to lose, Khomitsky has given a few good fighters some problems.

reggaereggae wrote:Did anyone take my Buglioni bet? :-) The price bet was decent considering..... Roll on!

reggaereggae wrote:Did anyone take my Buglioni bet? :-) The price bet was decent considering..... Roll on!

Riddick Blowe wrote:

GlobalBox wrote:Strange to have backed a person I think will lose but have had to back Mckenzie Rounds 1,2 and 3 against Conquest with PP 55,50,40, just seem way to big

There are 18s about for those three which is the right call as you cant go too low obviously or it will mess up what you do for the other rounds but they are just too big

Sometimes you just have to give the bookie your money when you think it will probably lose because the prices make you, however sometimes it just comes back.

My most famous two like this were Rahman/Lewis 1 , I backed Hasim in rounds 1-6 all at 100 even though I thought Lennox would win and indeed desperately wanted him to, just thought the prices were crazy what with Lennox playing his role in Oceans 11 etc. Also backed Sanders against Wlad at 125/1 rounds 1,2 and 3.

Only had a fiver on each of the rounds but it was tidy pick up, there have been many times the prices have been wrong since and had the odd little tickle but thought I would try my luck tonight
Fancy Conquest 2nd half of the fight around 8-10, but although would not have backed McKenzie rounds at 20s as that would be reasonable this seems big.

Good post. So often people forget betting is about finding value. Crucially this doesn't necessarily mean you're backing the result you think will happen but rather the result that has a better chance of happening than the bookies are giving it.

expe wrote:

Riddick Blowe wrote:

GlobalBox wrote:Strange to have backed a person I think will lose but have had to back Mckenzie Rounds 1,2 and 3 against Conquest with PP 55,50,40, just seem way to big

There are 18s about for those three which is the right call as you cant go too low obviously or it will mess up what you do for the other rounds but they are just too big

Sometimes you just have to give the bookie your money when you think it will probably lose because the prices make you, however sometimes it just comes back.

My most famous two like this were Rahman/Lewis 1 , I backed Hasim in rounds 1-6 all at 100 even though I thought Lennox would win and indeed desperately wanted him to, just thought the prices were crazy what with Lennox playing his role in Oceans 11 etc. Also backed Sanders against Wlad at 125/1 rounds 1,2 and 3.

Only had a fiver on each of the rounds but it was tidy pick up, there have been many times the prices have been wrong since and had the odd little tickle but thought I would try my luck tonight
Fancy Conquest 2nd half of the fight around 8-10, but although would not have backed McKenzie rounds at 20s as that would be reasonable this seems big.

Good post. So often people forget betting is about finding value. Crucially this doesn't necessarily mean you're backing the result you think will happen but rather the result that has a better chance of happening than the bookies are giving it.

And the bookies have thrown another one out there, Munyai 10/1 to beat Quigg.

JayMc wrote:What do people think of Malignaggi chances to beat Porter - 9/4 on points ?

Hopkins by decision @ 8/13 is not great value but will no doubt be the outcome.

Still no odds available for Murray v Crolla ?

reggaereggae wrote:Did anyone take my Buglioni bet? :-) The price bet was decent considering..... Roll on!

Riddick Blowe wrote:I'm tempted by a hail mary on Luis Collazo. waiting for the stoppage odds to drop. The bookies are going to be massive scaredy-cats on that market though, they'll all wait for someone else to put it up.

Interesting to see the graphs on Oddschecker. It says that 78 per cent of money wagered on this fight through Oddschecker has gone on Collazo, yet Luis is still a 10/3 dog. Unbelievable, to think there must be a hell of a lot of rubes out there going direct through bookies shovelling money on Khan.

SteveDow wrote:

Riddick Blowe wrote:I'm tempted by a hail mary on Luis Collazo. waiting for the stoppage odds to drop. The bookies are going to be massive scaredy-cats on that market though, they'll all wait for someone else to put it up.

Interesting to see the graphs on Oddschecker. It says that 78 per cent of money wagered on this fight through Oddschecker has gone on Collazo, yet Luis is still a 10/3 dog. Unbelievable, to think there must be a hell of a lot of rubes out there going direct through bookies shovelling money on Khan.

Khan is a ridiculously skinny price for that fight given that he has no experience at welter.

Deno1986 wrote:Missed the boat on the Munyai 10/1 odds but 17/2 still represents good value as does the draw odds of 33/1.