Betting Questions

slightly disagree with people saying there is no benefit to parleys, the math works out the same if you don't account for odds movement, so if you anticipate odds getting worse then locking them up in a parley can be valuable, not to mention the time saved and the inability to roll over single winnings onto something happening simultaneously (like ignp mentioned) which happens a lot in soccer, basketball, gridiron, tennis etc. but this goes both ways, alternatively if you think the odds on something might get better than holding out and rolling winnings over onto the next selection can be a good idea too.

there's nothing about odds changing that's a phenomenon, it's 100% natural otherwise everyone is basically agreeing that the odds are right. there's many ways to predict movement such as public sentiment, comparing various sites to look for trends one way or the other, your own analysis of the event to name a few.

but yeah the emphasis on parleys with the general public is all psychological, casuals bet for fun and think they are being smart when they make some long-shot parleys which if you factored in the overround taken out of each selection means they are mainly getting terrible value. parleys only are worth doing if the odds aren't too juiced and you think they infer value. one way to get around the overround is to roll over winnings on exchange markets (if you have access) where the juice removed from the lines is minimal.
Exchange markets?
 
New question re: 5dimes. When live betting MMA, what is the difference between live betting "extra" and live betting "ultra" and is it safe to assume that's where you go for MMA live betting?
 
Thanks. That's really interesting. Is it weird that it somehow sounds less legit than a traditional bookmaker?
I'm guessing it's safer because once a bet is matched you've got a guaranteed payout if you win(?). I'm into arbing and I'm always nervous a bet will get refunded if a book doesn't like a price you got on a selection.
 
Thanks. That's really interesting. Is it weird that it somehow sounds less legit than a traditional bookmaker?

I guess it makes sense, most of the public has no idea they exist so there will naturally be some scepticism.

I'm guessing it's safer because once a bet is matched you've got a guaranteed payout if you win(?). I'm into arbing and I'm always nervous a bet will get refunded if a book doesn't like a price you got on a selection.

yeah it's a guaranteed payout, books can scrap your bets whenever they want but if you take really good odds they will generally just limit you after the bet is settled rather than cancel the bet, unless it's a line error. and on top of that there is zero limitations imposed on exchanges unlike bookmakers
 
New question re: 5dimes. When live betting MMA, what is the difference between live betting "extra" and live betting "ultra" and is it safe to assume that's where you go for MMA live betting?
I always find Live In-Play on the Straight & RIF page on the bottom of the Fighting column below Reduced. It will only appear in the hours before a televised UFC fight card and disappear and re-appear with a refresh during the card itself. I have never once gone to a special live betting page to live bet MMA at 5Dimes.
 
Ok, so, sorry for being thick but I'm just a little fuzzy on this.
Let's say we take Ngannou vs Overeem, and I'm positive (I'm not, but let's say) that either Ngannou wins only by KO or Overeem wins only by decision.
Are "Not N'Gannou by 3 round decision" and "Not Overeem inside distance" equivalent in this scenario?

Edit: More generally, if I choose Not x win by y, does that bar x from winning by w or z?
 
Last edited:
there are NO stupid questions and this is a 100% judgment-free zone
I'm going to challenge that with this post, methinks.
Is there money to be made from betting favorites? I tend to focus my attention mainly on finding dogs that I think can win, but i'd also like to nickel and dime my way into profits from betting favorites also. Assuming that can be an effective strategy (this mix is how I assume most bettors do it) how do you choose which favorites you're going to wager on?
 
Ok, so, sorry for being thick but I'm just a little fuzzy on this.
Let's say we take Ngannou vs Overeem, and I'm positive (I'm not, but let's say) that either Ngannou wins only by KO or Overeem wins only by decision.
Are "Not N'Gannou by 3 round decision" and "Not Overeem inside distance" equivalent in this scenario?

Edit: More generally, if I choose Not x win by y, does that bar x from winning by w or z?

If you bet NOT Ngannou by decision you win if Ngannou wins inside the distance or Overeem wins by any method. Maybe someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe you win in the case of a draw as well.

So, to answer your question, no those two options are not equivalent. Essentially:

NOT Ngannou by decision breaks down as:
Ngannou ITD - Win
Ngannou DEC - Loss
Overeem ITD - Win
Overeem DEC - Win

NOT Overeem inside the distance breaks down as:
Ngannou ITD - Win
Ngannou DEC - Win
Overeem ITD - Loss
Overeem DEC - Win
 
I'm going to challenge that with this post, methinks.
Is there money to be made from betting favorites? I tend to focus my attention mainly on finding dogs that I think can win, but i'd also like to nickel and dime my way into profits from betting favorites also. Assuming that can be an effective strategy (this mix is how I assume most bettors do it) how do you choose which favorites you're going to wager on?

IMO, whether you're betting favorites or underdogs is irrelevant. Bets should be made based on perceived "value". Basically, what that means is figuring out what percentage of the time you believe a particular outcome will happen. Once you've determined that (until you get the hang of it) you can determine the implied probability of a line using a calculator like this one: https://www.aceodds.com/bet-calculator/odds-converter.html

When the implied probability of a line differs from where you think the line should be set, you typically will want to place a bet. Let's use Ngannou (-270 currently) vs Overeem (+230 currently) again as an example. -270 implies that Ngannou wins 73% of the time and +230 implies that Overeem wins 30% of the time. If you think those percentages are correct, you probably wouldn't want to bet the fight. But, if you believe that Overeem wins 45% of the time, for example, there would be perceived value in his moneyline and you'd probably want to bet it.
 
If you bet NOT Ngannou by decision you win if Ngannou wins inside the distance or Overeem wins by any method. Maybe someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe you win in the case of a draw as well.

So, to answer your question, no those two options are not equivalent. Essentially:

NOT Ngannou by decision breaks down as:
Ngannou ITD - Win
Ngannou DEC - Loss
Overeem ITD - Win
Overeem DEC - Win

NOT Overeem inside the distance breaks down as:
Ngannou ITD - Win
Ngannou DEC - Win
Overeem ITD - Loss
Overeem DEC - Win
Thanks, but I meant equivalent in the sense the both pay if either N'Gannou wins by KO or Reem wins by decision. I know the list of winning outcomes are different.
 
Thanks, but I meant equivalent in the sense the both pay if either N'Gannou wins by KO or Reem wins by decision. I know the list of winning outcomes are different.

Gotcha. In that sense then I suppose they would be equivalent, but that line of thinking can be dangerous. No outcome is ever impossible in MMA, as I'm sure you know.
 
Gotcha. In that sense then I suppose they would be equivalent, but that line of thinking can be dangerous. No outcome is ever impossible in MMA, as I'm sure you know.
Of course. My thought about it is this: right now on 5D,
Not Overeem inside distance is -485 but
Not N'Gannou by 3 round decision is -1170. I wouldn't take either bet right now, mind you, but you can see there's a huge difference in the line.
 
Last edited:
RE:
"if fight goes to scorecards all wagers are no action"
Aldo (scorecards = no action) +435
Holloway (scorecards = no action) -635
Is this essentially a straight bet on Aldo at +435 or Holloway at -635, but with the proviso that the bet is cancelled if they see the scorecards? Seems like I'm missing something.
 
RE:
"if fight goes to scorecards all wagers are no action"
Aldo (scorecards = no action) +435
Holloway (scorecards = no action) -635
Is this essentially a straight bet on Aldo at +435 or Holloway at -635, but with the proviso that the bet is cancelled if they see the scorecards? Seems like I'm missing something.

Basically, yes. A bet on Aldo NSC breaks down as:

Aldo wins by any method but decision - Win
Aldo loses by any method but decision - Loss
Any type of decision - Push
 
Basically, yes. A bet on Aldo NSC breaks down as:

Aldo wins by any method but decision - Win
Aldo loses by any method but decision - Loss
Any type of decision - Push
I see. Thanks.
 
IMO, whether you're betting favorites or underdogs is irrelevant. Bets should be made based on perceived "value". Basically, what that means is figuring out what percentage of the time you believe a particular outcome will happen. Once you've determined that (until you get the hang of it) you can determine the implied probability of a line using a calculator like this one: https://www.aceodds.com/bet-calculator/odds-converter.html

When the implied probability of a line differs from where you think the line should be set, you typically will want to place a bet. Let's use Ngannou (-270 currently) vs Overeem (+230 currently) again as an example. -270 implies that Ngannou wins 73% of the time and +230 implies that Overeem wins 30% of the time. If you think those percentages are correct, you probably wouldn't want to bet the fight. But, if you believe that Overeem wins 45% of the time, for example, there would be perceived value in his moneyline and you'd probably want to bet it.

what t6p said
 
How is everyone's betting year been? Up 146 units or so before 219, after getting my s__t together a couple of months ago
 
Back
Top