Pick'em Leagues: THE BIG SHOW CASUAL BEST OF THE REST Single Event PvP: FANTASY POOLS Betting Leagues: THE BIG SHOW BEST OF THE REST

User opinions wanted: help decide the future of the wagering system

Print  
What would you like to see done with the site's wagering system?
Leave things as they are and just spend some time policing wagers after each event 89 30%
Change/replace the current system with an odds-based house only wagering system 72 25%
Leave the current system in place but force all wagers to loosely adhere to a money line 18 6%
Add an odds-powered house wagering system, but leave the current system in place as it is 68 23%
Add an odds-powered house system and leave current system in place with odds guidelines 36 12%
Something else entirely 9 3%
  Page 6 of 6   <<   3     4     5     6  
Posted By Message

turbozed

Learning to Sprawl

turbozed Avatar
1
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:11
Career:126-85
Joined:Jan 2007
Camp: Bloodyknux.com
Chips:
2

Posted by nellyhiphophead


the points are competitive the money isjsut do go have fun with. they don't wnat ppl to be scared to wager the money so there int much to it. if the money ment more ppl would think more befor they made wagers.



Wouldn't that be better?

Post #76   2/17/07 1:51:10AM   

FutureLWchamp

Learning to Sprawl

 
 
 


 
 
Posts:38
Career:244-196
Joined:Feb 2007
Camp: Stomp Em Out
Chips:
Add an odds-powered house wagering system, but leave the current system in place as it is - i think this choice should make everyone happy cuz u could bet whichever style u want

Post #77   2/19/07 11:35:16AM   

Cajetan

Learning to Sprawl

Cajetan Avatar
1
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:3
Career:241-157
Joined:Jan 2007
Camp: Snatch As Snatch Can
Chips:
why not add a vegas style system as well, it gets hard to find wagers sometimes, if you just want to bet others that is available to you as well

Post #78   2/24/07 12:22:25PM   

Kazmierz21

MMA Regular

Kazmierz21 Avatar
1
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:52
Career:729-446
Joined:Jan 2007
Camp: Snatch As Snatch Can
Chips:
4
I think there should be a house to bet against just so those of us who do not have enough free time to try and make wagers with people will always have a house to bet against at the last minute

Post #79   2/24/07 5:21:43PM   

WarCreed

Learning to Sprawl

WarCreed Avatar
1
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:29
Career:237-112
Joined:Jan 2007
Chips:
1
Math I got to say that wagering against the house is the only credible way to keep it even. There is only one real answer to the poll.

Post #80   3/1/07 3:42:03PM   

MartyMorgy

MMA Regular

MartyMorgy Avatar
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:61
Career:19-18
Joined:Jan 2007
Chips:
I definitely think a house wagering system should be put in place and be the ONLY system. What happens when somebody gets a ton of money and can't find enough people to lay bets down. Finding and actually making the bets would take forever.

Make it house only that way you don't have to worry about fraud or taking hours and hours of your time or even finding enough people.

Post #81   3/4/07 1:36:55AM   

Collinreuter

Learning to Sprawl

Collinreuter Avatar
2

 
 
 


 
 
Posts:10
Career:170-109
Joined:Feb 2007
Chips:
2

Posted by Pyrenus

Why not require a unique IP and/or email with validation for each user account to cut down on people creating multiple accounts to place wagers against themselves?



What about people who have more than one people in one house with an account? My brother has an account also and we share the same IP

Post #82   3/4/07 4:24:04AM   

CWall33

MMA Regular

CWall33 Avatar
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:228
Career:413-243
Joined:Jan 2007
Chips:
17

Posted by Collinreuter


Posted by Pyrenus

Why not require a unique IP and/or email with validation for each user account to cut down on people creating multiple accounts to place wagers against themselves?



What about people who have more than one people in one house with an account? My brother has an account also and we share the same IP



I know this point has been has been brought up several hundred times, but I just wanted to add my .02 to the discussion. Please DO NOT only allow one account per household

My wife has never been an MMA fan. In fact, she downright hated it. That is, until I got her involved in this site. Now she is just as excited as I am for both Pride and UFC events. (She's also kicking my butt in the point standings, btw). If they only allow one account per household, we would probably both drop out. It just wouldn't be the same without the in-house competition.

Also, we would spend way less on PPV events (i.e. not get the ALL, as we are doing now), therefore taking money out of the fighters pockets. I'm sure mmaplayground wouldn't want to be responsible for that, whould they? (guilt guilt).

Post #83   3/9/07 9:33:37AM   

Bigsexydaddy

MMA Regular

Bigsexydaddy Avatar
2

 
 
 


 
 
Posts:116
Career:875-568
Joined:Jan 2007
Chips:
7
Finding, making and getting people to accept my bets is a giant pain in the ass because of the other people involved.

There needs to be SOME sort of house wagering. Allow us to bet with each other AND the house, or just the house.

Either way, we need a house to bet against w/ proper odds.

Post #84   4/9/07 7:56:04PM   

Tamara

Learning to Sprawl

Tamara Avatar
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:42
Career:190-182
Joined:Feb 2007
Chips:
2
http://www.mmaplayground.com/forums/topic3937-1.html

VOTE NO!

Post #85   4/13/07 3:01:33AM   

veengrd

Learning to Sprawl

 
 
 


 
 
Posts:2
Career:411-243
Joined:Mar 2007
Chips:
Yeah, I'm for #2

Odds betting is good, if someone picked Serra over St Pierre they deserve a massive payout. Even if it was just crazy luck with that pick

Post #86   4/16/07 8:02:21PM   

berzeck

Learning to Sprawl

berzeck Avatar
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:10
Career:118-66
Joined:Feb 2007
Camp: Bolivian Top Team
Chips:
1
i think that in order to place bets between players, these players must be "certified" first ( a la neteller.com), this means that players should pass an ID validating process ... for those players who doesn't want to go through that process, a house odds system should be the only option for betting.

maybe there should be an incentive to "certified" players, ex: 1st prize for certified players = 600 $us

PD: sorry my bad english

Post #87   4/16/07 9:12:21PM   
 
  Page 6 of 6   <<   3     4     5     6