Betting to Risk Free Fights

[wheelz1200]

Nope no fight is risk free.  I witnessed the most risk free fight possibly ever.  Tyson vs buster Douglass.  No way was buster even going to last the first round against Mike.  Think he was a 40-1 chump.  Buster wrecked him and most betters along the way.  No gamble or bet is risk free unless you have the known outcome already (cheating).

[cabron]

Nope no fight is risk free.  I witnessed the most risk free fight possibly ever.  Tyson vs buster Douglass.  No way was buster even going to last the first round against Mike.  Think he was a 40-1 chump.  Buster wrecked him and most betters along the way.  No gamble or bet is risk free unless you have the known outcome already (cheating).

There are risk-free fights but it's just something you analyze yourself. Many will disagree and some will agree but this is because it's how they see the match and the fighters.

Take for instance the Poirer vs McGregor this July 11. We know Poirer is just as good as Mcgregor, these are top-notch martial artists and a bettor might not foresee which will win until it ends. This fight is a high-risk fight.

[rodskee]

Would you be able to decide which fight could be risk free that you will bet your weekly pay despite the small odd like 1.50 or would you still rethink if there is an upset like Weili Zhang and Rose Namajunas.  

How about Jairzinho Rozenstruik vs Augusto Sakai, is this a risk free fight to you?



Jairzinho Rozenstruik by the way is the one that did the nasty cuts to Allistair's mouth.

Sorry mate but what you are looking is impossible to happen , This is why Sports and gambling are almost the same , know why? because they are both risky and has 2 sides.

The Winner and the Loser..

That is what gambling and sports must be so looking for free fights means you are wanting to have FIXED FIGHTS and that is not a Legit way of betting .

[zanezane]

~

Indeed! you can assure yourself that just because the odd is really small for the heavy favorite then they'll going to win it
easily, not all the time that it will be like that.

There's still a chance that you'll experienced bad luck and your pick will suffer, gambling always accompanied by risk its
always that way.

Isn't the heavy favorite with low odds the one that you should be betting on a risk free fights because I think in this kind of set up, they try to lower the odds for the favorite pick and sweeten the pot for the least favorite?

[hahay]

Nope no fight is risk free.  I witnessed the most risk free fight possibly ever.  Tyson vs buster Douglass.  No way was buster even going to last the first round against Mike.  Think he was a 40-1 chump.  Buster wrecked him and most betters along the way.  No gamble or bet is risk free unless you have the known outcome already (cheating).

There are risk-free fights but it's just something you analyze yourself. Many will disagree and some will agree but this is because it's how they see the match and the fighters.

Take for instance the Poirer vs McGregor this July 11. We know Poirer is just as good as Mcgregor, these are top-notch martial artists and a bettor might not foresee which will win until it ends. This fight is a high-risk fight.

That's right and besides, when they say it is a risk free bet then at least they will only get small odds and thus, a risk free bet can also be said to be a bet with no profit or only a small profit. But regarding the Poirer vs McGregor match, I think Poirer will be the favorite even though both of them fill the top ranks but with Poirer's position being better, then I'm pretty sure the match will be won by Poirer. Well, this match is an example, although I predict Poirer will win but still, I can't say it's a risk free bet because both of them still have a chance to win. It's different if the match is very unbalanced by giving odds like 1.xx vs 10 or higher, then with the difference in odds we can at least say whether it will be a risk-free bet or not.

[South Park]

Unless you're talking about arbitrage sportsbetting, I don't see any risk-free bets here.

No matter how low the odds may get, there will be a chance that the opponent gets upset once in a blue moon. Heck, if things were really guaranteed to be a win, then why would bookies even offer an odd on these events to begin with?

In fact, fights that you think are the most guaranteed wins are likely going to turn out to have the least EV out of the bunch because there is not a lot of interest in the market and hence the spreads are very high.

And even then those kind of bets are not really risk-free, you still need to make your bets  correctly and even then casinos will eventually realize what you are doing since your betting patterns are going to be very different, most gamblers concentrate in just a few markets giving away your preferences, if you bet in all kind of sports and the casinos realize that you are always taking their best lines then they will realize that you are making arbitrage bets and limit your account.

[decodx]

...then they will realize that you are making arbitrage bets and limit your account.

This is easy to avoid if you use some common sense. Many people use arbitrary betting, and there is nothing a casino can do about it.

[South Park]

...then they will realize that you are making arbitrage bets and limit your account.

This is easy to avoid if you use some common sense. Many people use arbitrary betting, and there is nothing a casino can do about it.

It will be interesting to know how this can be done as casinos realize how this is done in several ways, arbitrage bettors take the best lines all the time and this makes the casinos suspicious that you are betting professionally and nor for recreation, arbitrage gamblers use weird betting sizes in order to obtain profits so this is a giveaway of what you are doing as well, and as I said the fact an arbitrage gambler will bet in almost any market is also a way to flag them as one.

[Lanatsa]

...then they will realize that you are making arbitrage bets and limit your account.

This is easy to avoid if you use some common sense. Many people use arbitrary betting, and there is nothing a casino can do about it.

It will be interesting to know how this can be done as casinos realize how this is done in several ways, arbitrage bettors take the best lines all the time and this makes the casinos suspicious that you are betting professionally and nor for recreation, arbitrage gamblers use weird betting sizes in order to obtain profits so this is a giveaway of what you are doing as well, and as I said the fact an arbitrage gambler will bet in almost any market is also a way to flag them as one.

Really hard to be determine but casinos aren't that numb on not to notice those kind of arbitrage and even if you do make some constant winning then there would be some possible limitation

or something like that will happen on you. Arbitrage is something different compared into the thing we've been talking about risk free bets specially on those typical ones.

Arbitrage can really be considered risk free but it wont be a noob friendly strategy but of course the risk does always lies ahead.

[KTChampions]

It will be interesting to know how this can be done as casinos realize how this is done in several ways, arbitrage bettors take the best lines all the time and this makes the casinos suspicious that you are betting professionally and nor for recreation, arbitrage gamblers use weird betting sizes in order to obtain profits so this is a giveaway of what you are doing as well, and as I said the fact an arbitrage gambler will bet in almost any market is also a way to flag them as one.

I think the big casinos/bookmakers exchange information about the players and the bets they make. Although they are competitors, they are on the same side of the front in relation to the players. So I think if you want to seriously engage in arbitration and not get caught very quickly, you should use accounts registered for different people, this makes the task much more difficult for the casino.

[Fortify]

Would you be able to decide which fight could be risk free that you will bet your weekly pay despite the small odd like 1.50 or would you still rethink if there is an upset like Weili Zhang and Rose Namajunas.  

How about Jairzinho Rozenstruik vs Augusto Sakai, is this a risk free fight to you?

-snip-

Jairzinho Rozenstruik by the way is the one that did the nasty cuts to Allistair's mouth.

You will quickly go bankrupt if you are placing a lot of bets at 1.5 thinking that they are a sure fire win. I have seen several bets at 1.03 get switched into a loser in the final few minutes of a game and it can all start going wrong very quickly. Maybe fighting it different from the sports that I follow or the odds might solidify towards the end. The whole idea of betting your weekly pay packet on anything is a dangerous game and you must not have bills or responsibilities if you could consider being so wasteful with your money for such a measly "return on investment".

[lixer]

Isn't the heavy favorite with low odds the one that you should be betting on a risk free fights because I think in this kind of set up, they try to lower the odds for the favorite pick and sweeten the pot for the least favorite?

Indeed and people will mostly go for higher odds. I mean if Djokovicis playing against a new player there would be no value in betting on Djokovic because gamblers don't want to win 5 USD on a 100 dollars bet. Hence I always feel that more gamblers bet on the least favorite outcome because everyone chases higher odds all the time.

This is easy to avoid if you use some common sense. Many people use arbitrary betting, and there is nothing a casino can do about it.

Are you even serious? You don't make sense here. You said nothing the casino can do about it, firstly it's a sportsbook, not a casino that accepts sports bets and then you say they cannot do anything but you also say it's easy to avoid, which contradicts your own statements. Anyways arbitrage betting is quite popular nowadays and yes sportsbook will quickly find and limit your account if they find out you are doing it.

[dunfida]

Would you be able to decide which fight could be risk free that you will bet your weekly pay despite the small odd like 1.50 or would you still rethink if there is an upset like Weili Zhang and Rose Namajunas.  

How about Jairzinho Rozenstruik vs Augusto Sakai, is this a risk free fight to you?

-snip-

Jairzinho Rozenstruik by the way is the one that did the nasty cuts to Allistair's mouth.

You will quickly go bankrupt if you are placing a lot of bets at 1.5 thinking that they are a sure fire win. I have seen several bets at 1.03 get switched into a loser in the final few minutes of a game and it can all start going wrong very quickly. Maybe fighting it different from the sports that I follow or the odds might solidify towards the end. The whole idea of betting your weekly pay packet on anything is a dangerous game and you must not have bills or responsibilities if you could consider being so wasteful with your money for such a measly "return on investment".

When it comes to gambling then its never been a good idea for you to make it as a source of income or does really mind about on how to make money or profits with it.
You would really turn out to be desperate and believing into something which isnt really applicable in reality and you would surely realize that when you do experience it for  yourself.
Even 1.03 odds wont really make out guarantee or even 1.01 on where i have seen some gamblers do make out all in bet with that odds which i cant see for it to be
that worth of the risk.

[RealMalatesta]

Nope no fight is risk free.  I witnessed the most risk free fight possibly ever.  Tyson vs buster Douglass.  No way was buster even going to last the first round against Mike.  Think he was a 40-1 chump.  Buster wrecked him and most betters along the way.  No gamble or bet is risk free unless you have the known outcome already (cheating).

That's so true and although I haven't watched the fight you mentioned, I have seen enough comebacks and upsets that I have the same opinion, no bet is ever risk-free and the odds usually indicate that only. If a fight or match is risk-free, there would be no odds on that event.

I have seen big upsets and hilarious comebacks in cricket, tennis and recently NBA so I would rather prefer to bet on the underdogs and them to win because losing a bet with 1.01 or such odds sucks.

Yes sometimes odds are misleading and bettors can take advantage of that but that rarely happens because the odds are developed based on how much the bettors are picking which player/fighter.

Conor was favorite against Poirier in the 2nd fight they had which Poirier won and that was because people favored Conor neglecting the fact that Dustin was better prepared for that fight.

[South Park]

It will be interesting to know how this can be done as casinos realize how this is done in several ways, arbitrage bettors take the best lines all the time and this makes the casinos suspicious that you are betting professionally and nor for recreation, arbitrage gamblers use weird betting sizes in order to obtain profits so this is a giveaway of what you are doing as well, and as I said the fact an arbitrage gambler will bet in almost any market is also a way to flag them as one.

I think the big casinos/bookmakers exchange information about the players and the bets they make. Although they are competitors, they are on the same side of the front in relation to the players. So I think if you want to seriously engage in arbitration and not get caught very quickly, you should use accounts registered for different people, this makes the task much more difficult for the casino.

That option has never passed my mind but it makes sense, after all when it comes to physical casinos we know they share information with each other about cheating gamblers or gamblers that are able to beat them so it makes sense that online casinos could do the same as they would like to protect their profits from gamblers that are able to beat them, in any case the point is that casinos can eventually find out that you are an arbitrage bettor and limit your account when they realize this.

[Pamadar]

That option has never passed my mind but it makes sense, after all when it comes to physical casinos we know they share information with each other about cheating gamblers or gamblers that are able to beat them so it makes sense that online casinos could do the same as they would like to protect their profits from gamblers that are able to beat them, in any case the point is that casinos can eventually find out that you are an arbitrage bettor and limit your account when they realize this.

Very possible that casino owners will do that.

Sharing information on how this kind of activities is being facilitated and how they'll be able to stop it asap!
They know that if they don't act as quick as they can those pro gamblers will continue to suck out their money, arbitrage betting strategy do really exist, but the risk are high since casino can easily tagged your account and freeze your money.

[Twinkledoe]

That option has never passed my mind but it makes sense, after all when it comes to physical casinos we know they share information with each other about cheating gamblers or gamblers that are able to beat them so it makes sense that online casinos could do the same as they would like to protect their profits from gamblers that are able to beat them, in any case the point is that casinos can eventually find out that you are an arbitrage bettor and limit your account when they realize this.

Very possible that casino owners will do that.

Sharing information on how this kind of activities is being facilitated and how they'll be able to stop it asap!
They know that if they don't act as quick as they can those pro gamblers will continue to suck out their money, arbitrage betting strategy do really exist, but the risk are high since casino can easily tagged your account and freeze your money.

If the casino is fast in gathering their investigation, the user doing that can very well end up not getting his money. Would be unfortunate if he is using somebody else's money. Anyway, I don't know if these online casinos really do communicate with each other. Because they are competitors and it is hard to talk with your competitors in the business.

[KTChampions]

I think the big casinos/bookmakers exchange information about the players and the bets they make. Although they are competitors, they are on the same side of the front in relation to the players. So I think if you want to seriously engage in arbitration and not get caught very quickly, you should use accounts registered for different people, this makes the task much more difficult for the casino.

That option has never passed my mind but it makes sense, after all when it comes to physical casinos we know they share information with each other about cheating gamblers or gamblers that are able to beat them so it makes sense that online casinos could do the same as they would like to protect their profits from gamblers that are able to beat them, in any case the point is that casinos can eventually find out that you are an arbitrage bettor and limit your account when they realize this.

By the way, it is actually not known how many independent casinos exist at all. The situation may be similar to the situation with drinks and chocolates - when several of the most popular supposedly competing brands belong to the same player in the market. Therefore, it is possible that we are not even talking about the exchange of information, but only about the accumulation of it from different sources managed by one management.

[South Park]

That option has never passed my mind but it makes sense, after all when it comes to physical casinos we know they share information with each other about cheating gamblers or gamblers that are able to beat them so it makes sense that online casinos could do the same as they would like to protect their profits from gamblers that are able to beat them, in any case the point is that casinos can eventually find out that you are an arbitrage bettor and limit your account when they realize this.

By the way, it is actually not known how many independent casinos exist at all. The situation may be similar to the situation with drinks and chocolates - when several of the most popular supposedly competing brands belong to the same player in the market. Therefore, it is possible that we are not even talking about the exchange of information, but only about the accumulation of it from different sources managed by one management.

Now the difficulty with such records is that when it comes to physical casinos since you need to be there paying on their installations then this means they have a very easy way to identify you, but this is not as easy to do online as an arbitrage bettor could convince a friend to open an account on their own name and just follow their system and begin to win that way while they share their profits until they are banned or limited again, so while what you are explaining is definitely happening it is easier to circumvent it online.

[cabron]

UFC 269: Oliveira vs. Poirier this December 11 seems to have good matches that seem less risky.
Lightweight   Charles Oliveira    vs.   Dustin Poirier           
Women's Bantamweight   Amanda Nunes    vs.   Julianna Peña
Bantamweight   Raulian Paiva   vs.   Sean O'Malley   

It's just these 3 that I'm looking at since they are the most dominant in their division and most likely going to win. Although Oliveira has a chance to win, I don't think he can actually beat Poirier.

No say for Nunes and Omalley, it would take a huge lucky punch to beat these two. Takedown defense of Nunes is just too much for Pena to successfully execute.