Professional Fighters League- 2018 Season

Foster looked really good
 
Foster looked really good

He made mistakes and it was anyone's fight before he landed that knee. But man, one thing I'll say is that you have to like betting on guys who still fight their asses off even when they look dead tired in their corner between rounds. Foster is the kind of guy you probably have to straight up put to sleep before he'll stop coming at you.
 
So the question is, will this format motivate Brooks to try to finish? Or is it gonna be 15 minutes of him being Firmino's Snuggy?
 
Crazy how big of a bust Will Brooks was in the UFC.

Seemed like he had all of the tools prior to entering the UFC, but just couldn't put it all together while in the UFC.

Firmino has a ton of heart and never stops, but he should lose this fight.
 
Brooks rd 1 I guess.
 
R1: Firmino (he was better in the striking department, and got a TD at the end; Brooks did nothing with his time on top)

Brooks can lose this fight for not being active enough.
 
Close rd. Brooks probably stole it with the late TD.
 
R2: Brooks (Firmino was just too inactive, especially when he had Brooks' back when they were against the cage, and just stood there for 1 minute trying to catch his breath or something)

1-1
 
R1: Firmino (he was better in the striking department, and got a TD at the end; Brooks did nothing with his time on top)

Brooks can lose this fight for not being active enough.

I bet Firmino and hope you're right, but I thought Brooks got the better of the striking. His jab was landing a lot and Firmino was missing or getting his punches blocked mostly.
 
R1: Firmino (close round)
R2: Brooks (clear)
R3: Brooks (clear)

Brooks 2-1 at worst.
 
The only finish Will Brooks has on his record in the past 5 years is his TKO win against Michael Chandler, when Chandler lost some brain cells and didn't know where he was (literally) in the middle of the fight.
 
A lot of Brooks game is built off his athleticism. When he's not being tested by USADA he is able to enhance that athleticism. Will will never be effective in the UFC. However, everywhere else he will do just fine. For the record I think USADA is a joke & have libertarian beliefs in regard to testing in sports. For all sports.
 
Entertaining card with some controversial results. Four underdogs won out of thirteen fights but neither Watley nor Escudero should have gotten the victories with those inept rulings on the groin strike and phantom submission. Terrible athletic commission in Illinois. Wish I bet more on Kayla Harrison. She'll be a force as the new Ronda Rousey in WMMA. Moderate loss of 4.53 units this time.

PFL 2 Results
Risk $1661.50

Luiz Firmino (+310) vs Will Brooks $100.00 for $310.00= -$100.00
Luiz Firmino (+305) vs Will Brooks $100.00 for $305.00= -$100.00

Efrain Escudero (+215) vs Jason High $100.00 for $215.00= $215.00
Efrain Escudero/Jason High Over 2½ (-126) ~$67.50 for ~$53.57= -~$67.50

Ramsey Nijem (+295) vs Brian Foster $75.00 for $221.25= -$75.00
Ramsey Nijem (+145) vs Brian Foster $100.00 for $145.00= -$100.00

Kayla Harrison (-260) vs Brittney Elkin $260.00 for $100.00= $100.00

Ronny Markes (-300) vs Sean O'Connell $300.00 for $100.00= -$300.00

Smealinho Rama (+130) vs Brandon Halsey $100.00 for $130.00= -$100.00
Smealinho Rama (+135) vs Brandon Halsey ~$87.75 for ~$118.46= -~$87.75

Robert Watley (-182) vs Thiago Tavares ~$101.25 for ~$55.63= ~$55.63

Parlay:
Vinny Magalhaes (-556) vs Jamie Abdallah + Islam Mamadov (-556) vs Yuki Kawana ~$270.00 for ~$105.86= ~$105.86
-----
Sub-Total= -$460.00
Sub-Total= ~$6.24

Total Loss= -$453.76
 
I know High did not tap, but I can kind of see where the ref is coming from. This is going from my memory from last night, but it looked like he went to grab the hand once and pulled back. I could see the ref thinking that was a phantom tap. Then he goes back in quickly the next time. In a choke like that, it's definitely best to make sure it's a tap, but I can sympathize with the ref. The choke looked deep, it was on for a while, and there were those two motions. Anyone have a gif of it?
 
I know High did not tap, but I can kind of see where the ref is coming from. This is going from my memory from last night, but it looked like he went to grab the hand once and pulled back. I could see the ref thinking that was a phantom tap. Then he goes back in quickly the next time. In a choke like that, it's definitely best to make sure it's a tap, but I can sympathize with the ref. The choke looked deep, it was on for a while, and there were those two motions. Anyone have a gif of it?

I get what you are saying, but it was a brutal call, clearly didn't tap and if he went out his legs wouldn't of stayed posted.
 
There is a massive need for regulation in the sports betting market. From over rounds to variable customer limits, it’s criminal what they get away with. We need some sort of overarching governing body like the banking industry to protect customers.

Over rounds?

How are variable limits "criminal"? Why shouldn't a book be able to control risk?

I do not want the government getting involved. Self-regulation has worked well in my view. Books depend on their reputation, and in the age of the internet people are sharing their experiences almost instantly. No need for bureaucrats to get involved.
 
Over rounds?

How are variable limits "criminal"? Why shouldn't a book be able to control risk?

I do not want the government getting involved. Self-regulation has worked well in my view. Books depend on their reputation, and in the age of the internet people are sharing their experiences almost instantly. No need for bureaucrats to get involved.

Over-rounds/Vig/Juice whatever you want to call it - I have seen these vary from 3% up to 70% - this is quite simply ridiculous, especially to those customers who have no idea what this means.
Don't try to blame the customer for not being smart, in the financial industry everything is supposed to be black and white so that nobody can be mis-sold a product.

Variable limits including bans, please show me another retail platform that denies customers equal opportunity and access to its products and services?

The governments are already involved in terms of licensing so I wouldn't worry about that having a negative effect on your experience.

At the end of the day, running a book is easy, they exploit customers (marks) and exclude those who threaten to derail their money trains.
 
Over-rounds/Vig/Juice whatever you want to call it - I have seen these vary from 3% up to 70% - this is quite simply ridiculous, especially to those customers who have no idea what this means.

Vig is necessary for the books to profit. It's a hypercompetitive market. Bettors can switch books if they don't like the vig. 5D and Pinnacle have low vig and that's one of the main reasons they are popular.

Don't try to blame the customer for not being smart, in the financial industry everything is supposed to be black and white so that nobody can be mis-sold a product.

Foolish people make bad investments all the time in the financial industry. Even smart people do it. Regulation is not free. Taxpayers fund it, and ham-handed regulation creates compliance costs. These costs are often passed onto the consumer.


Variable limits including bans, please show me another retail platform that denies customers equal opportunity and access to its products and services?

Some books do that, others don't. To my knowledge, Bookmaker and Pinnacle don't do that.

The governments are already involved in terms of licensing so I wouldn't worry about that having a negative effect on your experience.

Not really. Bookmaker and 5Dimes are two of the best books around and they are effectively unlicensed. Same went for Pinnacle until recently. I've been able to work out special treatment with management of these books which would be impossible at Pinnacle or any other regulated book.
 
Back
Top