Why would you bet on the person you aren't picking?

Yes It Is!		15%	(5)
Nope, it's taking advantage of the system		85%	(29)

I prefer the newer wager system but if people are going to be picking one guy and then wagering on the other, isn't that pretty much cheating? I for one think that you should only be allowed to wager on the guy that you are picking in the fight. If you don't follow that rule then it allows for someone to possibly win the money title for the event without even getting the fight picked correctly. I'm sure that I'm not the only person who's annoyed with people doing this, so I encourage you to speak out and hopefully we can get the rules changed.

But betting and picking someone to win are two completely different things. At the upcoming UFC 73 i have a winner picked for a fight but im wagering on the other person, its all because of odds. I dont think it's cheating at all, if you always think the better fighter to win and then always bet on him, you have to wager to much to be able to win any money, and then if your wrong you get screwed.

How is that cheating? Do you have any idea what you are talking about. There are two seperate categories. Picks and Wagers.

Hypothetical situation here.

Silva vs Marquardt

I think Silva will win 60% of the time. I pick him in the picks section.
For wagers I can get 15:1 on Nate. Even though I think Silva will win, I'm going to bet on Nate because of the odds.

If your bet has positive expected value, then you take it.

---

Posted by ProfessorChaos

How is that cheating? Do you have any idea what you are talking about. There are two seperate categories. Picks and Wagers.

Hypothetical situation here.

Silva vs Marquardt

I think Silva will win 60% of the time. I pick him in the picks section.
For wagers I can get 15:1 on Nate. Even though I think Silva will win, I'm going to bet on Nate because of the odds.

If your bet has positive expected value, then you take it.

---

I guess that I have a huge problem with people saying, "Yeah, I think that Silva will win the fight, but I want to put money on the other guy just incase he doesn't win." I think that since you are picking Silva, you shouldn't be allowed to put money on the other guy. It's just my way of thinking. It's kinda like the Pete Rose situation where he wanted the Reds to win but placed bets against the Reds some nights. It's totally a weak way of playing the game. Everyone cried about the guys cheating and in my eyes there isn't any different. You should have to stand behind the person that you picked. Isn't the point of this whole game to win both the Top Score and Top Money Maker for each event, not if I get the wrong pick, I might still have a shot at the Money Maker Title? Your way of playing the game is taking advantage of the system. That's your way of playing and I didn't agree.

You don't agree with it because you are just not intellectually capable of understanding it.

People were pissed at Pete Rose BECAUSE HE WAS THE MANAGER OF THE TEAM. He could influence how the game went. Thats why it was cheating for him.

I can pick someone and wager on the other guy and still be trying to win the money title. Did you even read my post. Sometimes the correct play is wagering on the guy you think will lose more time than the other guy. Are you in third grade or something?

it's neither but it's dumb

---

Posted by tberg420

I prefer the newer wager system but if people are going to be picking one guy and then wagering on the other, isn't that pretty much cheating? I for one think that you should only be allowed to wager on the guy that you are picking in the fight. If you don't follow that rule then it allows for someone to possibly win the money title for the event without even getting the fight picked correctly. I'm sure that I'm not the only person who's annoyed with people doing this, so I encourage you to speak out and hopefully we can get the rules changed.

---

dude you got it WAAAAAAY wrong. wagering is gambling man. you can pick a fighter to win becusae you think he will win. but you can wager on a fighter you think will lose becuase the payout is so big. in that offchance that he DOES win. ---->THEY ARE TWO COMPLETLY DIFFERNT THINGS<-----

let me put it like this.

lets say Anderson Silva fights Chris Leben again. who would you pick to win? probably silva.

and lets say you are over at my house and i go hey want to bet me that leben will win? and you go what! no way man.

and i go ok fine fine.. but i tell you what ill bet you my 500 bucks to your 10 bucks that silva will win the fight.

if i gave you those odds (becuase its gambling) you would be a fool not to take that. why?

becuase anything can happen an your only losing 10 bucks. its worth it.

so you see you think silva will win but the gambling odds are so good you just cant pass up putting a little down to make a whole lot of money.

or conversly if you felt like winning 10 bucks easy you could wager 500 bucks on silva. but wheres the fun in that? AND your Risking 500 bucks on your fighter to make 10 dollars. would you take that bet in real life? i wouldnt. the fun is actually seeing who has the balls to throw down alot of money on a fighter that is a TOTAL gamble.

youve got the seperate the two..
1)point system is to see who can make more educated guesses.
2)wagering is purely to make money.

they are two differnt parts of the game.

so no its not cheating.

P.s- Your poll is even inaccurate too. option 1) yes it is (when no its not) option 2) no, its taking advantage of the system (no its not taking advantage of the system.

you should change your options to 1)yes 2)no to see just how wrong people think you are. dont be bias and throw "taking advantage of the system in there.

60 percent of the time. silva wins everytime.hahaha

I guess that I have a huge problem with people saying, "Yeah, I think that Silva will win the fight, but I want to put money on the other guy just incase he doesn't win." I think that since you are picking Silva, you shouldn't be allowed to put money on the other guy. It's just my way of thinking. It's kinda like the Pete Rose situation where he wanted the Reds to win but placed bets against the Reds some nights. It's totally a weak way of playing the game. Everyone cried about the guys cheating and in my eyes there isn't any different. You should have to stand behind the person that you picked. Isn't the point of this whole game to win both the Top Score and Top Money Maker for each event, not if I get the wrong pick, I might still have a shot at the Money Maker Title? Your way of playing the game is taking advantage of the system. That's your way of playing and I didn't agree.

---

pete rose never bet aginst the reds

---

Posted by FeelTheJoy

60 percent of the time. silva wins everytime.hahaha

---

is it legal in real life 2 place bets on both fighters/teams

ya whatever it doesnt reallt matter

---

Posted by ProfessorChaos

You don't agree with it because you are just not intellectually capable of understanding it.

People were pissed at Pete Rose BECAUSE HE WAS THE MANAGER OF THE TEAM. He could influence how the game went. Thats why it was cheating for him.

I can pick someone and wager on the other guy and still be trying to win the money title. Did you even read my post. Sometimes the correct play is wagering on the guy you think will lose more time than the other guy. Are you in third grade or something?

---

I love the insults over the keyboard as this turns into a Sherdog message board. I realize that people with a different opinion from you might be hard for you to accept but really get over it. I just didn't like the idea as I stated. I don't play that way and just wanted some feed back not really bad insults from someone who takes this stuff way too seriously. And btw..Pete Rose did bet against the Reds. You might want to check your facts before you post.

I never said he didn't you moron. That was a different poster. You really need to work on your reading comprehension problems. I said it was considered cheating because he had an influence over the game.

Yes it is legal in real life to bet on both fighters or teams or whatever. It's called hedging.

I get upset at it, because it actually hurts me inside that someone can be as dumb as you are. My problem with people like you is just your pure stupidity. You actually called it cheating. It's called having a brain and playing the odds. The reason bookies make money is because of people like you.

Sorry I didn't realize your favorite fighter was Tito until now. I guess it kind of explains your limited capabilities.

---

Posted by ProfessorChaos

Sorry I didn't realize your favorite fighter was Tito until now. I guess it kind of explains your limited capabilities.

---

As far as my limited capabilities go, at least I didn't pick Andy Wang. Beautiful Wang indeed.

umm.. go ahead and compare records. I think you'll find that mine obliterates yours(62% vs 77%), but way to bring the thread off topic. I guess it's better that way since your OP was so dumb.

We had the same record last event. You picked Geraghty...wow
You missed 2 on UFC 72...I missed 0
You picked Burkman over Parisyan

Oh and your ranking is almost 1k below me with the $$$ over 500.


It's ok to have a differing view point on an issue. Don't call it cheating just because you don't understand basic wagering though. Calling people cheaters for no reason is not ok in my book.

I think that anyone would agree that Geraghty was a more logical choice then Andy Wang anyday. However, I was looking for advice on this subject and not a bi**hfest of horrible remarks that I got. Another example of a typical Keyboard Warrior doing his part to ruin another message board. I appreciate all of the knowledge from everyone. I've been a member since this whole thing started and picked 11 events compared to your 4. So if you truly want to compare records then lets do it when you've been through 10 events.

becuz of the odds.

im picking antonio nogueria, but im betting on herring for the great odds. either way i get the win and lose some money, or i get the loss and win alot of money.

He's a rookie gambler, give him a break

Either way your winning something,but i would just go for it all and bet on who i think is gonna win.