Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Saturday's Boxing Odds

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Saturday's Boxing Odds

    Well here are the odds and my thoughts for Saturday's HBO tripleheader.

    Billy Joe Saunders (-110) vs. David Lemiuex (-120)

    To me, this is a difficult fight to handicap. Saunders is a good boxer with good skills and has the hand speed edge. One side of me thinks this could potentially be an easy fight for him. But he always seems to struggle in bouts and in bouts where he is the superior athlete. He had some narrow escapes against lesser fighters and his last fight against Willie Monroe was dreadful despite the win. I don't know what to make of Saunders, if he puts it all together it could be easy work. But not sure he can.

    As we all know, Lemieux is aggressive and can bang. One has to wonder how Saunders will respond if hit clean. But Lemiuex can also be out boxed and still has stamina issues though not as bad as earlier in his career. The chin of Saunders has also been put into question.

    My hunch here is that we know early how this fight will play out. But I am really laying back here, maybe a small wager on Lemiuex to win.

    Antoine Douglas (-250) vs. Gary O'Sullivan

    I love this fight and think it steals the show. But so many questions about both makes this a tough fight to forecast. Douglas is so gifted and far and away the superior athlete. He is quicker and can easily beat O'Sullivan to the punch. The issue with Douglas is two fold. First, his only loss was to a relentless pressure fighter in Avtandil Khurtsidze who imposed his style on Douglas. And second, he took a thrashing from Khurtsidze and how just how much did that take from Douglas?

    O'Sullivan is a pressure guy like Khurtsidze but I don't see O'Sullivan as having the power that Khurtsidze possessed. Khurtsidze overwhelmed Douglas and got Douglas' respect. For O'Sullvan to succeed, he has to do the same. But does he have the power?

    I like Douglas here as the tape that I see just doesn't make me think that O'Sullivan has the power to get the respect of Douglas. But the unknown about Douglas does concern me and enough to lay off the -250. Instead, I see a knockout happening one way or the other. Either Douglas overwhelms O'Sullivan whose defense is blocking punches with his head much like the late Arturo Gatti or Douglas folds again to a pressure fighter. I am going with the under 8.5 (+155) and placing a midsize wager on that outcome.

    Cletus Seldin (-175) vs. Yves Ulysee Jr. (+145)

    As everyone here know, I love boxing. But I also like using tendencies to my advantage in all sports. I play a lot of DFS (daily fantasy sports) and a strategy I use is to avoid players coming off big games as they tend to attract most ownership. For example, if Tom Brady throws 5 TD's and for over 400 yards against the Browns in one week then the following week ownership tends to gravitate strongly toward him regardless of the matchup. It is called recency bias and a seasoned DFS can use that to their advantage when forecasting ownership to win tournaments. In this example, the following week I would avoid Brady in all lineups and hope a lot of folks select him. Then for my QB, I look to someone who I forecast will score better than Brady (will probably make multiple lineups) and gain a big edge.

    Okay so where am I going with this. Seldin is coming off a big HBO win where he looked great. He beat a guy with a glossy record in spectacular fashion. Seldin is hot. Yves Ulysee is coming off a split decision loss. As such, money is flowing toward Seldin due to recency bias.

    But look more closely at this fight and this is where skilled investors can win big. Seldin's opponent, Roberto Ortiz, was suited perfectly to make Seldin look great. The glossy record for Ortiz was built on hopeless competition. Ortiz was ko'd early by Lucas Matthysse with the first significant punch landed by Matthysse and struggled to a draw against 18-5-1 Diego Cruz. This was an opponent set up on a tee for Seldin to hit a home run.

    Ulysee was a tight split decision to a solid experienced guy in Steve Claggett. Claggett is a good fighter who can box very effectively from range. His style was a troublesome one for Ulysee but gave him a great learning experience.

    This is my lock pick of the year. Ulysee is going to easily out box Seldin. Ulysee has a telephone pole like jab and is very athletic. He is also a sharp accurate puncher behind that jab. Seldin has no head movement and comes forward aggressively but exposed. He is going to get picked apart. This is an easy fight for Ulysee.

    This is the time to benefit on recency bias in boxing. Invest in Ulysee like I am doing and do so big.

  • #2
    Saunders was easy money
    same way Fury was easy money over WK.
    boxing beat The Hebrew hammer in the same story,
    i had to root for my gym mate Seldin though.
    good pick on that fight OU

    Comment


    • #3
      I couldn't find any line on Seldin. What sports book do you use OU?

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by DEEPWATER3 View Post
        I couldn't find any line on Seldin. What sports book do you use OU?
        I use Bovada. Interesting that line closed at +115 for Ulysse. There was quite a bit of sharp money that came in late on Ulysse.

        Yeah watching Saunders school Lemiuex did remind me of Fury-Klitschko. Saunders is also similar to Fury in that he seems to fight to the level of his opponent. Honestly, I underestimated him in part to some bad performances against inferior opponents.

        Comment


        • #5
          Geeez.

          What analysis took place here?


          Look at Lemiuex’s last 8 or so opponents.

          Out of them how many fast of hand/foot southpaws are there that David has beaten?

          So that alone tells you the slow Lemieux - whom (if we’re being brutally incisive; as odds makers must be) has not ever lived up to the hype when placed in with top level fighters that can box.

          It also tells you that he may have issues with Saunders; whom has beaten one of the fastest/slickest middleweights out there; Eubank.

          Eubank Jr. (despite his vulnerabilities and his resume wanting for a decent name) still is - within the context of the relevant boxing traits he possesses for any Saunders V Lemieux analysis sakes - a decent approximation to both Saunders and N’Dam.

          Now, N’Dam gave David a pretty good account of himself in losing; and (for analysis sake) he is therefore not an entirely poor approximation to BJS.

          Remember also N’Dam fought David before Triple destroyed him; and when David was arguably the best version of himself he could be - he won’t get any better.

          Imagine if N’Dam were a lefty; and he met Lemiuex after he had been exposed by Triple?

          That’s what Saunders had; but Saunders - last weekend - was probably better than N’Dam when he fought Lemieux.



          Furthermore, (another indicator is) many of the guys Lemieux struggles with can - unlike himself - box with reasonable aplomb.

          So that needs to go into the analysis.

          Since Eubank can box and Saunders beat him (on points); then Saunders can box - David can’t.



          Hell, Eubank Jr. may have just beaten Lemieux last weekend too; if he stayed away from all the telegraphed power-punches David threw.

          Now look at the last 2 lefties that Lemieux has fought; Rios and Guerrero.


          What there that tells you that Lemieux can fight Saunders competently?


          Guerrero; if you take into account the various weight thresholds of the minor belts he previously owned and also his actual stature/size you can see - even though he is reasonably well skilled and not entirely slow - he was not a fully blown middleweight (the way Lemieux is and was) when he fought Lemieux.

          Furthermore, Guerrero was knocked out by Quillan and then had a pretty easy fight after that; before meeting David.

          Once again; more information screaming that Lemieux was out of his depth with Saunders.



          Rios; well, he had recently lost to someone far less experienced (Langford) than Lemieux 2 fights before fighting David.

          The fight directly before Lemieux Rios fought someone with almost 40% loss ratio.



          The best stoppage wins Lemieux has recently was with Stevens, Rosado, and Tapia.

          Rosado and Tapia can't box at championship level and probably can't spell defence.

          Curtis, even in his best form (which was not what David beat) possessed a skill set that was - across the entire spectrum of boxing, from footwork to punches and defence - a far, far, cry from that which Saunders has; even though Billy’s is not complete.



          So . . . .

          Given all that, and also what we know about how hard fast lefties are to fight for even those whom can box well, there was nothing aside from the hometown advantage (and the other odds making sites out there that pitched the odds almost identical you yours) that said Lemieux would win.

          And that’s because Lemieux has been stopped before - he’d been exposed before - he can't box at the top level (even with capable orthodox fighters) - and he has absolutely no defence and/or understanding of how to effectively fight a guy that moves a lot and has fast hands.

          With Saunders, the greatest negative was probably that not too many people could get a decent read on what his performance would be like.

          That’s the case almost all the time with Lemieux since Triple; unless he is matched with guys that have compromised skill sets and/or he can easily hit



          But, even if you took a compromised version of Billy’s best abilities it still was more capable/reliable and proven than Lemieux.

          Furthermore, Saunders is a big middleweight; so David wouldn’t be bullying him around.



          So, what analysis took place here?



          Surely - with the new fancy smancy forum and all its bells and whistles - I don’t have to come back and give a lesson in how fights/odds are analysed?

          I mean what analysis went into this?



          Surely . . . .

          No it can't be.

          Surely I don’t have to come back and starting kicking more azz?





          I mean . . . . .

          I don’t want to.

          I don’t like doing it.

          But, if I really have to . . .

          I will.





          Anyway, at least you had a go.

          I made a (very) small profit backing Saunders; as I know Lemieux can't compete at the top level without an advantage.



          Storm(Eternal)Centre.

          Comment


          • DEEPWATER3
            DEEPWATER3 commented
            Editing a comment
            Storm, score my amatuer fight from last month please. Thanks in advance.

        • #6
          Storm, great to hear from you. I missed going back and forth with you analyzing fights.

          As for Lemieux-Saunders, I did see a scenario in which Saunders out boxed Lemieux. I also saw the possibility of Lemieux bringing into question the chin of Saunders. There is no question too Saunders has not looked great in some other fights. To me, it was a tough fight to call and I mostly laid off with just a small wager in Lemieux to make things interesting.

          In hindsight, Saunders proved to be the classier fighter. Let's see him now step up and fight someone else. I'd like to see how his boxing ability matches up with Jacobs, Canelo, Golovkin and others at 160.

          Comment


          • #7
            Originally posted by stormcentre View Post
            Geeez.

            What analysis took place here?


            Look at Lemiuex’s last 8 or so opponents.

            Out of them how many fast of hand/foot southpaws are there that David has beaten?

            So that alone tells you the slow Lemieux - whom (if we’re being brutally incisive; as odds makers must be) has not ever lived up to the hype when placed in with top level fighters that can box.

            It also tells you that he may have issues with Saunders; whom has beaten one of the fastest/slickest middleweights out there; Eubank.

            Eubank Jr. (despite his vulnerabilities and his resume wanting for a decent name) still is - within the context of the relevant boxing traits he possesses for any Saunders V Lemieux analysis sakes - a decent approximation to both Saunders and N’Dam.

            Now, N’Dam gave David a pretty good account of himself in losing; and (for analysis sake) he is therefore not an entirely poor approximation to BJS.

            Remember also N’Dam fought David before Triple destroyed him; and when David was arguably the best version of himself he could be - he won’t get any better.

            Imagine if N’Dam were a lefty; and he met Lemiuex after he had been exposed by Triple?

            That’s what Saunders had; but Saunders - last weekend - was probably better than N’Dam when he fought Lemieux.



            Furthermore, (another indicator is) many of the guys Lemieux struggles with can - unlike himself - box with reasonable aplomb.

            So that needs to go into the analysis.

            Since Eubank can box and Saunders beat him (on points); then Saunders can box - David can’t.



            Hell, Eubank Jr. may have just beaten Lemieux last weekend too; if he stayed away from all the telegraphed power-punches David threw.

            Now look at the last 2 lefties that Lemieux has fought; Rios and Guerrero.


            What there that tells you that Lemieux can fight Saunders competently?


            Guerrero; if you take into account the various weight thresholds of the minor belts he previously owned and also his actual stature/size you can see - even though he is reasonably well skilled and not entirely slow - he was not a fully blown middleweight (the way Lemieux is and was) when he fought Lemieux.

            Furthermore, Guerrero was knocked out by Quillan and then had a pretty easy fight after that; before meeting David.

            Once again; more information screaming that Lemieux was out of his depth with Saunders.



            Rios; well, he had recently lost to someone far less experienced (Langford) than Lemieux 2 fights before fighting David.

            The fight directly before Lemieux Rios fought someone with almost 40% loss ratio.



            The best stoppage wins Lemieux has recently was with Stevens, Rosado, and Tapia.

            Rosado and Tapia can't box at championship level and probably can't spell defence.

            Curtis, even in his best form (which was not what David beat) possessed a skill set that was - across the entire spectrum of boxing, from footwork to punches and defence - a far, far, cry from that which Saunders has; even though Billy’s is not complete.



            So . . . .

            Given all that, and also what we know about how hard fast lefties are to fight for even those whom can box well, there was nothing aside from the hometown advantage (and the other odds making sites out there that pitched the odds almost identical you yours) that said Lemieux would win.

            And that’s because Lemieux has been stopped before - he’d been exposed before - he can't box at the top level (even with capable orthodox fighters) - and he has absolutely no defence and/or understanding of how to effectively fight a guy that moves a lot and has fast hands.

            With Saunders, the greatest negative was probably that not too many people could get a decent read on what his performance would be like.

            That’s the case almost all the time with Lemieux since Triple; unless he is matched with guys that have compromised skill sets and/or he can easily hit



            But, even if you took a compromised version of Billy’s best abilities it still was more capable/reliable and proven than Lemieux.

            Furthermore, Saunders is a big middleweight; so David wouldn’t be bullying him around.



            So, what analysis took place here?



            Surely - with the new fancy smancy forum and all its bells and whistles - I don’t have to come back and give a lesson in how fights/odds are analysed?

            I mean what analysis went into this?



            Surely . . . .

            No it can't be.

            Surely I don’t have to come back and starting kicking more azz?





            I mean . . . . .

            I don’t want to.

            I don’t like doing it.

            But, if I really have to . . .

            I will.





            Anyway, at least you had a go.

            I made a (very) small profit backing Saunders; as I know Lemieux can't compete at the top level without an advantage.



            Storm(Eternal)Centre.

            Hey Storm, I called it from the get go. A traveler southpaw with an Olympic pedigree, when in shape is hard for anyone to beat.

            Comment


            • #8
              Originally posted by DeepWater3

              Storm, score my amatuer fight from last month please. Thanks in advance.

              Sure - can't promise the timescale will be real fast over Xmas.

              But send it through to stormcentre@outlook.com

              Cheers,

              Storm.

              Comment


              • #9
                Originally posted by OB

                Storm, great to hear from you. I missed going back and forth with you analyzing fights.

                As for Lemieux-Saunders, I did see a scenario in which Saunders out boxed Lemieux. I also saw the possibility of Lemieux bringing into question the chin of Saunders. There is no question too Saunders has not looked great in some other fights. To me, it was a tough fight to call and I mostly laid off with just a small wager in Lemieux to make things interesting.

                In hindsight, Saunders proved to be the classier fighter. Let's see him now step up and fight someone else. I'd like to see how his boxing ability matches up with Jacobs, Canelo, Golovkin and others at 160.
                Yep - we had fun (back then) eh?

                But - to borrow a phrase from Jimi Hendrix - there's still a lot of groovy times left though.


                Agree; some of Saunder's recent performance were cause for thought and reflection.

                But tempering that is the fact that he started training seriously with one of the best gyms in the world.

                And of course, the fact that Lemieux has proven to be . . . well, not be proven.



                Still, hundreds of other bookies found the match-up to be the way you predicted; so there is that.

                Have a great Xmas.


                Storm.







                 

                Comment


                • oubobcat
                  oubobcat commented
                  Editing a comment
                  Have a great Xmas as well Storm. Looking forward to some quality discussions/debates from you in 2018.

              • #10
                Originally posted by DeepWater3

                Hey Storm, I called it from the get go. A traveler southpaw with an Olympic pedigree, when in shape is hard for anyone to beat.

                Wicked.

                Agree; a traveler southpaw with an Olympic pedigree, when in shape is hard for anyone to beat.

                Pride is one of the most important attributes those Gypsies have; and Saunders has heaps of it.


                Usually (especially at a pub when surrounded by fellow revelers/travelers) the Gypsies care very little about risk; and are full of confidence.

                They're a rowdy lot.


                Years ago I actually had a southpaw Gypsy welterweight (lunatic) friend that I used to train with.

                He hated to lose anything.

                Anything.

                He just couldn't bare to psychologically process embarrassment and or defeat.

                You couldn't safely go out at night with him; as he was a combination of trouble and good stories to tell after the fact, most of the time.


                This is how we became mates; when I first met/sparred him he was full of bravado and it didn't quite go as planned for him as he stepped up the, so called, "friendly spar". During the first few rounds I had come to realize that he had primed up the audience before I arrived that I was going to be a showcase for him.

                This was years ago now.

                Anyway after the 4th round had finished and as I turned my back to go to the corner and get a drink, he hit me in the back of the head and called me a name; as he was frustrated that he couldn't clown me.

                I thought his frustration and uncontained behavior that led to him breaking the unwritten rule of never hitting in-between rounds and when your opponent's back was turned, was so outrageous, that I turned to face him and erupted in genuine laughter at it all.

                As crazy as it sounds, we became friends like that.


                Anyway, have a greast Xmas if I don't hear from you beforehand.


                Cheers,

                Storm.


                Comment


                • #11
                  Storm it's right here:

                  https://youtu.be/8GuDf4woodo

                  Comment


                  • #12
                    Which one were you?

                    The Irish boxing club rep; whom won?

                    I thought the guy that won, won.


                    Cheers,

                    Storm.

                    Comment


                    • DEEPWATER3
                      DEEPWATER3 commented
                      Editing a comment
                      Nope I was in Blue.
                      I Moved too much. I should have stood my ground more.

                  • #13
                    You're a better boxer than him; but you could not maintain the correct style for the entire duration of the fight.

                    So, you gassed out a bit.

                    And, when you did have energy sometimes you were unaware of the in/effectiveness of what punches you were throwing.

                    Economy of motion my friend - you know I have written about that extensively in the old forum.




                    Being unaware of the in/effectiveness of the punches you're throwing is a common oversight.

                    But if you're not sure they're landing hard/accurately, then you need to re-calibrate power and/or change strategy.

                    Unless, of course, you are confident in your stamina.



                    In one of the rounds, round 2 I think, you were throwing punches that kind of positioned him where you wanted.

                    But they were not all landing flush and/or debilitating him as much as it appeared you wanted.

                    But, you wanted to keep him vulnerable and there for a big shot - so you just kept punching; even though (it appears) you knew you (and therefore the foundation of your ability to compete) were tiring.

                    What may have served better . . . .
                    Silly test editor
                    A slight step back at that point, with guard up, and perhaps a gentle ELA (remember them?) that conserves energy/balance to milk out his right (or left), then;
                    Silly test editor
                    A) If it is his left that’s milked; send the counter right over the top as it retracts or before.

                    B) If it is his right that’s milked; send the counter right through as he commits to his right, keeping your left hand up.


                    Followed by a (50% - 70% power) left hook that preserves energy/balance and sets you up for the next move.

                    That would have probably changed the course of the fight because - since he was so close to exhaustion throughout most of it, but had no real style or game-plan to maintain - it would have been felt as if it were a full power shot when he was fresh.

                    But, at the time, you were too excited/anxious to think of it; so setting it up eluded you.


                    I think his lower output in the early rounds and lack of defined style also meant he burnt less gas than you; whether or not he had less of it to burn overall.

                    All the above, plus the goofy punches his sheer desperation generated meant you could not anticipate/avoid them easily (as you tired).

                    Which probably contributed to the last round being scored against you.



                    These are easily remedied issues.

                    You need more stamina.

                    From that you will become more relaxed and less anxious about your stamina reserves; allowing you to calmly watch the fight (as you participate in it), see opportunities, and decide how to ustilise them.


                    Perhaps, some (really hard) stamina work would assist.

                    Run steps/stairs; double steps at a time, with sprints.

                    No less than 600 (steps) each time; and work up to 1200; all double steps.

                    (Consult a doctor and) make sure you are exhausted at least 3 times per session, and do not or allow yourself to re-start when you have recovered.

                    In other words, always re-start before you have recovered.

                    Make working and thinking whilst being exhausted, more familiar.



                    The rest will come.


                    Cheers,

                    Storm.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X