Dan Hardy: "Khabib has no footwork, Conor will use angles and KO him"

[Airdack]

Conor had a full camp

Chad didnt know if he was fighting conor or aldo or anyone at all and didnt have any time to get ready and still scored multiple takedowns like they were nothing

Maybe because hes a ncaa all american wrestler with the best takedowns in the division. No camp doesnt change that lol.

 

[welcometohavoc]

But are there any analysts who have a great track record?
I figure DC vs Stipe and Joanna vs Rose were both toss-ups.
Would be impressed if there was any known person who had a great track record on predicting fights like that.

True enough which only proves my point. These analysts are usually no more right than you or I.

 

[BRASIL WAND]

How’d those clever angles and footwork work for Hardy against the grappling of GSP and Rumble???

 

[hot carl]

No he actually usually is very good at it. If you watch his breakdowns. Not saying he is going to be correct but he does know his stuff.

Hardy thought he was going to beat gsp.

He lacks credibility when it comes to picking winners.

 

[hot carl]

True enough which only proves my point. These analysts are usually no more right than you or I.

I think they might be slightly more correct depending on the number of iterations, but not significantly so.

Some websites have polls and picks for their staff, and you might see bumps where someone goes on a run, but over the course of a year, the distribution looks fairly normal.

As far as my ability to predict winners, I am awesome unless the fight is close lol.

I expected khabib to beat Raging al, so bring right wasn’t that impressive, but, despite the shit that I talk about khabib and Conor, I think it is basically a toss up based on who imposes their will more successfully.

I’d say it is close to a 50-50. If we move the goal posts a bit and assume that khabib can’t take Conor down, that will heavily influence the outcome, and if Conor can’t utilize his striking advantage, that will also influence the probability of him winning.

The analysts that I prefer are the one that, in a close fight, say they can’t pick a winner because I find them more honest.

Hardy might selectively choose to over emphasize one aspect, and many analysts do that and hope to look clairvoyant after the fight if they are right, but I struggle to think that anyone will predict a winner in a closely ranked fight more than 55% of the time.

Lucky for us, this is why they fight.

There may be some cases where a person will choose an upset, and may do it a few times, but there are so many fights and so many variables that over time, they will regress towards the mean, which is, based on the law of probability, about 50%.

Of course, I’m my efforts to educate all of you neckbeards and ham and eggers with this post, I have ignored outliers, meaning the possibilities of draws or disqualifications because these are so rare that they are statistically insignificant.