Boxing 8/13 - 8/16

[Ghost Kid]

appreciate it bro

i've done well lately so i can't complain

part of the game

but that was some bs

a harsh lesson for me...no reason to add a -1200 favorite into a parlay...that was greedy of me and i paid for it

but thompson fought with NO urgency....geez finish a guy when you have him down twice!

 

[weepaul]

humberto soto deja vu

wow unbelievable corrupt behavior

disgusting

glad i didn't go big on thompson

did have him in a few parlays but i'll survive

that was ridiculous

These Fukers are God Awful. How can you look at the replay multiple times and then Fuk the fighter over because the ref made an ADMITTED mistake.:nono:
They were basically saying "Yep, we can all see it's a butt including the ref but as the ref did not call it at the time, we will throw out this hard evidence and Fuk this deserving winner over and watch his beaten opponent act like a knob, jumping around screaming, like he actually accomplished something".:mj07:

Garden is 100% correct. These same Fuks will overturn the decision in a few day's but it will be too late for guys like Ghostkid.:shrug:

I actually thought these Wankers were about to do the right thing for the first time in their miserable lifes.
Boy am I dumb.:s2:

 

[Zerwas]

Alatorre lost by contraversial split decision, one judge had it 97-93 for the +400 underdog

Hey frankie, you said one or two of us were reaching on this one. Just wondering who you thought was reaching b/c the rest of us were backing a very live dog at +400 :shrug:


gl bl

Too bad!

That would have been a nice winner.

A draw would have been ok with me too. ;-)


Box, did you watch the fight?

 

[Zerwas]

Hmmm, I dont get it honestly.

Were they paid to make Arshavin the winner?

It certainly sounds like it.

Sorry for your loss ghost kid.

 

[punchmaster]

These Fukers are God Awful. How can you look at the replay multiple times and then Fuk the fighter over because the ref made an ADMITTED mistake.:nono:
They were basically saying "Yep, we can all see it's a butt including the ref but as the ref did not call it at the time, we will throw out this hard evidence and Fuk this deserving winner over and watch his beaten opponent act like a knob, jumping around screaming, like he actually accomplished something".:mj07:

Garden is 100% correct. These same Fuks will overturn the decision in a few day's but it will be too late for guys like Ghostkid.:shrug:

I actually thought these Wankers were about to do the right thing for the first time in their miserable lifes.
Boy am I dumb.:s2:

Hey Wee,

I think the issue is the fact that presently there is no instant replay in boxing (I'm starting to think there should be) and if the DC boxing commission and the ref overturned the refs decision because the ESPN guys showed them the replay, that sets a precedent for anyone to do that. The ref said a few times he didn't see the butt during the fight, so the commission leader there felt he had to go with that... What do you guys think- should boxing have instant replay, because if they did, Clottey would have gotten his deserved TKO over Judah, and Thompson would have come out on top with the technical decision.
I will say Arvin was really making a fight of it after what looked like a lost cause when he had no legs in the 2nd or 3rd round. The referee was strongly considering stopping it then.

 

[Ghost Kid]

thanks guys for the support

this really was a travesty...despicable behavior from the d.c. commission. a total joke.

i appreciate the community here. everyone here keeps me sane when a decision like this occurs. can we even call it a decision? it was a blatant robbery really. slightly behind the humberto soto travesty, but very similar.

i played it right and got screwed....what can you do but come back swinging next week !

good luck guys. worst part about it is hernandez and barker came through, so the parlay would have hit big. ugh. what a disaster.

 

[frank s.]

Regardng "reaching"-to box and others

Regardng "reaching"-to box and others

I don't personally know any of you guys, yet I feel almost a certain "kinship", as it were to the crew here. Comes after years of exchanging ideas, etc. Also, no offense to anyone. It's been said that the best play in all of sports is an underdog that has a good chance of winning. Professional bettors, in the absence of an informed, well thought out, investigated opinion DO NOT wager on anything. S&G's do not exist for them. As far as the +400 dog play, perhaps incorrectly, I got the impression guys were looking to have some "action" and really did'nt have solid knowledge of the participants involved. As hurricnane pointed out, a strictly boxrec play can be dangerous. I don't have to mention names. Guys know if they were "guessing" or had a strong opinion on the fight in question. Going foward, I won't speak on this again. It's your all money, so lay it down as you all see fit. Peace out.

 

[gardenweasel]

Hey Wee,

I think the issue is the fact that presently there is no instant replay in boxing (I'm starting to think there should be) and if the DC boxing commission and the ref overturned the refs decision because the ESPN guys showed them the replay, that sets a precedent for anyone to do that. The ref said a few times he didn't see the butt during the fight, so the commission leader there felt he had to go with that... What do you guys think- should boxing have instant replay, because if they did, Clottey would have gotten his deserved TKO over Judah, and Thompson would have come out on top with the technical decision.
I will say Arvin was really making a fight of it after what looked like a lost cause when he had no legs in the 2nd or 3rd round. The referee was strongly considering stopping it then.

but you have to ask yourself,punchy,"what evidence are they using to overturn other bouts after the fact",as we`ve seen done several times before?......

in humberto soto`s case,they basically couldn`t overturn the decision because soto,althugh jobbed,did actually punch lotenxzo while he was on the floor....

yet the wbc "chose" not to award lorenzo the title because it was "controversial".........


in rahman/ toney,they overturned the verdict after "reviewing the evidence".....

in this case,the evidence was right in there faces and they could have gotten it right in a timely fashion for a change...

the lesson to be learned is that the boxing powers that be will do whatever they damned well please,regardless of whether it`s technically right or wrong...


and i guess we all know that before the fact...:yup

stiill,doesn`t salve the wound if you`ve made a winning play and still got schtupped....

btw...i think that nasty cut had everything to do with arvin getting back into that fight...

 

[punchmaster]

I don't personally know any of you guys, yet I feel almost a certain "kinship", as it were to the crew here. Comes after years of exchanging ideas, etc. Also, no offense to anyone. It's been said that the best play in all of sports is an underdog that has a good chance of winning. Professional bettors, in the absence of an informed, well thought out, investigated opinion DO NOT wager on anything. S&G's do not exist for them. As far as the +400 dog play, perhaps incorrectly, I got the impression guys were looking to have some "action" and really did'nt have solid knowledge of the participants involved. As hurricnane pointed out, a strictly boxrec play can be dangerous. I don't have to mention names. Guys know if they were "guessing" or had a strong opinion on the fight in question. Going foward, I won't speak on this again. It's your all money, so lay it down as you all see fit. Peace out.

Are you a professional bettor , Frankie?

 

[punchmaster]

but you have to ask yourself,punchy,"what evidence are they using to overturn other bouts after the fact",as we`ve seen done several times before?......

in humberto soto`s case,they basically couldn`t overturn the decision because soto,althugh jobbed,did actually punch lotenxzo while he was on the floor....

yet the wbc "chose" not to award lorenzo the title because it was "controversial".........


in rahman/ toney,they overturned the verdict after "reviewing the evidence".....

in this case,the evidence was right in there faces and they could have gotten it right in a timely fashion for a change...

the lesson to be learned is that the boxing powers that be will do whatever they damned well please,regardless of whether it`s technically right or wrong...


and i guess we all know that before the fact...:yup

stiill,doesn`t salve the wound if you`ve made a winning play and still got schtupped....

btw...i think that nasty cut had everything to do with arvin getting back into that fight...

Have you ever seen them overturn something Weasy, right there on the spot after reviewing some video? They might as well if they're going to do it a few days later after an official protest. That would be official instant replay and bettors would get paid correctly.

 

[gardenweasel]

Have you ever seen them overturn something Weasy, right there on the spot after reviewing some video? They might as well if they're going to do it a few days later after an official protest. That would be official instant replay and bettors would get paid correctly.

i agree with that...

i wonder why the commission rep and the ref bothered reviewing the tape right there at ringside if it was a moot point?....i read on the d.c. boxing website that was reporting on this bout that replays can`t be used to overturn a decision......but,d.c. boxing`s so corrupt,i`d have to see the rulebook to believe that...these s.o.b.`s will say anything they want...

if the commission`s right there at ringside,willing to review the tape and it`s a slam dunk(as this one was),then what`s the problem?....

the problem appeared to be that arvin was gonna lose...they`d rather go behind closed doors and scheme their way into rationalizing the mistake...and keeping the "w" in arvin`s pocket...

which would be amazing...

it was as though the powers that be were saying,"if we want your opinion,we`ll give it to you"...

i actually wonder if the decision would have been overturned on the spot if the tables were turned and it benefitted arvin?....

of course,thats conjecture....:shrug:

an amazing rule given that for a commission to review such a decision,they`d have to look at the tape.....:idea: :lol:

no matter how you slice it,romi and ghost get bent over...and thats sad...

 

[frank s.]

I think anyone that's wagers regularly and consistently; who handicaps sporting events on just about a daily basis, displays characteristics of a "pro" gambler in some form to whatever degree/level they want to take it to. I doubt there is anyone here that doesn't want to win every time they bet their money, which of course is unrealistic. Some guys bet strictly for monetary gain; some for the adrenalin/rush; or a combination of both or even other factors. Guess it's up to the individual to determine where he/she stands. For me, my first priority is the MONEY!