I can't believe that Conor Mcgregor is the favorite against Chandler.

[Like a fiddle]

One thing Conor has always been, is a manlet slayer. Chandler will gladly stand & bang with him too just because.

 

[krelianx]

I seriously doubt those odds will stay in Conor's favor come fight night.

Conor has a good history against that type of fighter: short, athletic, muscular wrestler types with brawling tendencies (Mendes, Alvarez...).

But he has shown to have some glaring weaknesses on the ground, and conditioning problems. He is carrying more muscle than ever, is coming off a huge injury, has been on a perpetual bender, has to lay off the juice, is older, and hasn't looked good in years. Khabib destroyed him, Poirier outboxed him, and in the third fight GnPd him almost to a first round stoppage, before the leg broke, in an arguable 10-8 round. Conor doesn't deal well with pressure.

I expect Chandler to knock him out actually.

 

[HeffDoesWant]

Meh +100 and holding my money till the fight gets cancelled, nahhh.

A week out with those odds I probably but a few bucks down.

 

[Dionysian]

Call me naive but I dont think the UFC would risk losing the company, the brand and the promotor license.. for fixing a Conor fight.
The closet we get to fixed fights is favorable match ups and short notice fights.

I am pretty sure Brock and Ronda would still be champs if they fixed fights. They did what they could with out breaking rules / laws with Conor..
It took ages for them to strip him, he got title shots with no fights in the divisions.

But paying fighters to take a dive?
No.
The risk it too great and it aint worth it.

See bottom message. They fixed the literally most watched fight of all-time. We are WAY past the "they are too scared of public perception of corruption" stage. Zuffa didn't fix fights. Endeavor has multiple times and doesn't give a shit what the MMA fan peons think, as evidenced by the frequency of fight fixing increasing.

You and I have different definitions of "fixed" by the way. Your definition assumes 100% buy-in from the opponent to take a dive. Mine doesn't preclude that but assumes losing publicly is something most fighters are averse to and is something extremely rare in practice. Hence the org working against the will of the fighter they want to lose... ie Herb Dean trying to ensure Conor won UFC 229 despite Khabib ensuring it did not happen. Still a fixed fight (ie: org is doctoring the desired result) despite the desired result not happening for the org.

this is the sort of dumb shit people say to emphasise their point but when you’re talking about gambling, it’s naive.

And if you truly believe that, Chandler as the underdog with the bookies, is a certainty, then fair enough. But don’t go betting your house on it when it’s clearly a close fight. You’re being naive if you think it’s a certain outcome either way here.

I don't think the outcome is certain yet / see bottom message

If you're so certain this shit is rigged you'd bet the house on Conor.

See bottom message

Post leg snap

Anderson 1-5 -1nc

Weidman 1-1 (eye poke combo "win")

yup ... and both those guys were #1 of their division once upon a time so those extreme inversions of win/loss ratios (coupled with how degraded they actually looked in cage) is as night/day as it gets

If it's fixed for Conor and you're that confident, bet on Conor!

229 was fixed for Conor (in the running for the most obviously fixed fight of all time) too but he still lost so betting wise you can't be sure. It all boils down to the level of complicity of the opponent. Khabib fought not only Conor that night but also Herb "best fight fixin in the biz" Dean and the whole UFC and still won. Dustin stood on his principles and passed on the extra pay when he KOd him/short-circuited Conor's career when UFC did their do-over. Wouldn't be surprised if part of his unusually-animated "kiss my whole asshole" speech that night was directed at not just the crowd by the way.

Cerrone advertised he would drop the fight prior to the fight even happening. Happily bet against Cerrone / got that free money as soon as he advertised he would throw the fight.

I wouldn't touch this money-wise until Chandler reveals more. If Chandler says in an interview he would be "happy to lose" (Cerrone) and that he promises not to grapple (Cerrone) then yes... bet the fucking house and your children's future on Conor.

I think it is certainly possible right now solely due to Endeavor's history of fight fixing (Zuffa-era didn't fix fights btw) + Chandler embracing more than a year of inactivity (clearly hurting his own career for...) and him advertising repeatedly how much of a good company boy he is. Whether or not that translates to him agreeing to take a dive... will wait to see how much of a good company boy he is in pre-fight interviews before I touch this bet AT ALL. Right now it is "coming off having no leg" Conor vs "advertising he is a good company boy but not yet committing" Chandler so no thanks, no safe bets there yet.

 

[BigOlJeet]

Believe it, Conors style is Chandler's kryptonite. It won't be close and I don't care how long Conor has been out for. I would say why I think this but it's late, I'm tired AF. I'll probably write something up the days leading up to the fight. I'll be placing a bet too.

Btw, everyone should know by now that I despise Conor.

Becoming a fan are you now?

 

[Poirierfan]

Becoming a fan are you now?


View attachment 1040196

Never

 

[bjjwar]

He's 2-3 in the UFC.

Those losses were to top 3 guys, he nearly finished Charles and porier, and the fight with gaetje was fight of the night.

And his 2 wins were over Ferguson who is like 0-10 in his last fights and Hooker who was like 0-5 or sth. Like i said he’s the only guy that made Ferguson look good, dude’s mediocre. Probably the only guy Conor could beat, that’s why these 2 bums are fighting each other.

 

[Young Calf Kick]

Conor’s made a career of knocking out “short, stuffed wresters with an overhand”