Jets ride the rollercoaster

I backed the NY jets last week against the Bengals as I thought they should have been favourites and I was surprised to see them getting start against a club they had beaten 37-0 the week before. I know that was against a weakened team but it doesn't half build momentum and I expected another win, and the Jets prevailed 24-14.

I must admit I wasn't expecting the Pats to get blown away at home by the Ravens but New England has looked a team in decline this season. I did expect them to progress here though before going out in a road game as their home form had been very good.

I am at a bit of a crossroads in my poker career as I have cashed out a good chunk and am looking for a new site where I can find soft limit games running. Over on the Merge network it seems that after two years of good games the sharks have cleaned the waters of fish. I have played a few games against some of the regulars and ending up playing a heads up match with a regular winning player. Not a +EV decision but I was hoping it would get a game going with some weaker players arriving but they never showed and I dropped a couple of hundred. I ran my opponent through a search engine and discovered he has the highest number of VIP points on the skin, and is a pro who has played at the WSOP. Food for thought.

It is interesting to speculate over opponents you see playing several tables every day but here it was spelt out in black and white that the guy is a full time professional and I am a recreational player trying to get the better of him. I didn't feel out of my depth - in fact I think his style is probably better suited to shorthanded rather than heads up as his aggression is quite low, but he never puts a lot of bets in without strong hands. That is irrelevant though. I am a person with a million family related tasks on the go playing poker as a sideline taking on a kid who eats, sleeps and breathes the game. I don't think it is hubris that means I expect to hold my own with 99% of limit poker players. I have the confidence in my ability and solid results, but even though when it is spelt out in black and white like that what you are up against then I think it may be worthwhile looking for a site where there are other players who are playing recreationally. Alternatively if the game has gone downhill across the board, perhaps it is time to take a break and look for something else to do?

After all, I've had a great run, and I'm not going to leave it all on the table.

Anyone who has been following the Isildur saga must be saddened to see this kid come from nowhere to win $5m over a couple of months and then blow it all in one night playing at the nosebleed stakes. Maybe I haven't got the gamble in me but that's not going to happen to me. Not that I have $5m but I mean I'm not going to surrender my bankroll like that.

On friday I greened out on the boxing on the Hatton promotions bill last Friday when I backed challenger David Dolan at 2.7 before the fight, then again at 2.98 at the mid point when according to the commentators he wasn't doing that well. I disagreed, and went in again. Dolan then went on a good run, sweeping the next three rounds on my card, and the exchange players seemed to agree as Dolan was backed in to 1.33 at which point I had him 3 up with 3 rounds left & I laid off to lock in a profit.

I must admit a few rounds were hard to score, and at the end I had the card 117-113 for Dolan but the judges were divided. One had it 115-114 Dolan, another 114-114, and the third judge, old duffer Terry O'Connor had it 116-113 for defending champ Rob Norton. This is the same Terry O'Connor who was the sole arbiter in the English title fight between Tyson Fury and John McDermott but managed to score a very close contest 8 rounds to 2 to Fury when most observers had McDermott winning.

Although I had locked in a profit I was saddened to see Dolan not get the decision here. Of course with a draw being the outcome then Norton retains his title which was a real sickener for Dolan who had been the aggressor throughout the contest. Ironically if he had toned down the aggression just a notch and concentrated more on his boxing he may have got the decision as he got clipped quite a few times while throwing power punches which may have contributed to him losing the majority of the opening rounds on O'Connor's card.

It was good to get back into the swing of things with trading in-play and I am now looking forward to doing a bit more on future broadcasts.

stay in action

Slacker

With little in the way of competitive boxing action during December I made a small loss attempting a trade on the Haskins Broadhurst fight. I thought the judges might prefer Broadhurst's more direct style in a stinker of a bout and had a few quid on him at long odds against with a third of the fight to go.

As it was, I expected Haskins to tire over the later rounds but Broadhurst was completely devoid of any idea of how to make an impression on the elusive Haskins. It was an appalling effort from The Don who was exposed as being very one-dimensional in this bout. This contest was definitely too much too soon, despite the Midlands man being heavily favoured in the odds before the contest he will have to improve a lot to justify his reputation as a 'prospect'.

I also missed the boat on Amir Khan who was heavily backed to win inside the distance against Salita. I left it alone after I missed the value, but this was easy pickings asthe Bolton man decked his opponent three times in the opening round before the referee waved it off.

In another mismatch Vitali Klitschko was well backed to see off Kevin Johnson before the final bell. the bets were not landed however as Vitali boxed to a shutout victory but Johnson's defensive outlook enabled him to hear the final bell.

I struck out at Cheltenham's december meeting but hopefully that will prove to be a setback rather than a precedent for the big meeting in March.

Away from betting I have enjoyed reading Kevin Mitchell's boxing blog on the guardian's website and I've added a link to that in my favs section. Kevin still thinks the Pac.Mayweather fight will be made. i hope he's right.

The Guardian has some of the best sports writers. Racing correspondent Greg Wood is the best racing journo from the dailies in my opinion.

Also I enjoyed this ESPN article about a guy who spent six years searching for one of Ali's opponents.

I will try and give a bit more feedback on results for the year when I have a bit more time.

I cashed out a couple of grand for Xmas expenses the other day. The poker site kept me waiting for a week for my cash but it finally arrived.

The reason for the cashout was twofold. Firstly, the action at my level had dried up quite a bit and secondly I wanted to move some of my poker bankroll away from the Merge network for security reasons. I don’t like to have too much exposure in any one site, particularly not one of the minor rooms.

I hadn’t really felt like I was doing that well in the past few months but the net result of the up and down swings has been a gradual rise in the balance. I certainly hadn’t had any problems finding a game but almost overnight several of the regulars seemed to disappear.

Of course, as soon as I cashed out the action started to pick up again, but at least I have enough still left over there to cover me at my level.

After that I played a little poker and soon slipped into the groove but the session wasn’t particularly interesting.

While I was browsing the net I did broaden my horizons and take in a few betfair trading blogs which was a bit of an eye-opener into how naïve some people can be when it comes to betting, and how quickly a redundancy cheque can go south. It really did remind me of the old adage, how do you make a small fortune from gambling? Start with a big one.


Stay in action

Hennessy Cognac Gold Cup preview

what a friend - can win a big one this season

This week sees one of my favourite races, the Hennessy Cognac Gold Cup at Newbury. I am hoping that Denman can become the first horse to win it twice since Arkle in 1964-65.
If that doesn’t happen perhaps What a Friend can start to fulfil his potential. He certainly looks very well handicapped and I expect him to win a decent handicap this season.

You're only as good as your last game

Kessler was confident before the bout, working out in Roseville, CA

Not many fighters fall from grace as quickly as Mikkel Kessler.

As favourite for Showtime’s super six tournament before the commencement of hostilities, Mikkel Kessler was expected to see off an overmatched Andre Ward with ease on Saturday night.

It never looked that easy to me though, as winning in the USA, particularly on the other guys home turf is no sure thing.

I took the view that the unbeaten Ward, an Olympic Gold medallist, looked worth a small interest at +225.

The general consensus was that Ward was pitched in way too deep against the #1 ranked super middleweight.

I tend to dispel perceived wisdom – it’s in my betting DNA & I don’t mind getting it badly wrong though, when I am getting decent odds. (Yes, I admit I backed Sam Peter to beat Vitali Klitschko) I can look an idiot quite a few times when I’m getting substantial odds against, but the guy who back the sure things has to get it right nearly every time.

Most experts also figured Kessler to be too strong, and too powerful but there was always a possibility that Kessler was over-rated.

In reality, it appears that Ward was better than expected, and Kessler much worse.

I haven’t seen the bout yet, but Kessler’s career slate is having a re-examination, with tags like ‘one dimensional’, ‘slow’, and ‘robotic’ being trotted out.

Based on the reports, perhaps Kessler has slipped a little, and equally, perhaps he wasn’t as good as was thought.

No doubt Carl Froch will be very pleased with the outcome of the bout, as Kessler looks very beatable right now. I’m sure the Danish fighter will find the pace of a fight with Carl Froch more to his liking, and could bounce back, but there is no doubt Froch will be approaching the bout with increased confidence after watching his opponent get badly outboxed.

On the previous weekend I made a novice mistake. I backed Matthew Hatton to beat Lovemore N’dou. Again this was the type of fight where I could have looked foolish as the Manchester man looked out of his depth on the balance of the two men’s records. But Matthew has seemed on the way up, and N’dou, at 39, looked to be slowing down, so it could have been another bout like Ben Tackie v Hatton, where I expected class would tell and Tackie to stop the game but limited younger Hatton.

However Tackie was going downhill so fast that he was well beaten, and I thought N’dou, who was in the world’s top ten a few years ago, could be going the same way.

This time, on a home promotion, I figured the Hatton team may have got their sums right and caught N’dou on the way down, and at the odds of +300 it was worth a bet. The UK judges have not been kind to away fighters either.

I had a decent bet on, and topped up some more around halfway at +600 when Hatton drifted after a bad round. I still figured there was only a point in it, and if he could rally in the last third of the fight, he could still do it.

He actually managed a strong finish, sweeping the last three rounds on my card. That put him a two point winner on my card. I also figured the normal home bias might see Hatton judged a clear winner.

This was where I made my mistake. Going into the final round, Hatton had taken over as favourite and I needed to protect my investment. But in the excitement, instead of laying Hatton to ‘green up’, I backed N’dou, just to cover my stakes on Hatton. I then realised the draw needed to be covered, and backed that to cover the combined stake.

Of course I then realised I had the draw to consider, and again I backed that, so I had a breakeven situation on Ndou, and the draw, and a massive win on a Hatton success.

The result was 1 judge for Hatton, 1 for N’dou and the third one scored it a draw, meaning the outcome was a draw.

What a pain. I should have ensured a profit by laying Hatton as he came into odds-on but for some reason I had a brainstorm and made a mess of it.

Well, it could have been a lot worse of course.

Haye Valuev post script

As previously posted, I backed David Haye to win inside the distance at 3/1.
I thought Haye would be too good, and in the end he was – in the opinion of the two of the three judges. I think he would have won by knockout if his right hand had not been damaged in round two.
But given the actual events, rather than hypothetical ones, was Haye fortunate?

It is very much a ‘pay your money take your choice’ issue, but given some of the debatable decisions in Germany, the fact that Haye demonstrated so little offence in a dire contest must surely make him fortunate to be given the decision.
One man was plodding forward showing aggressive intent, but missing with the majority of blows. The other was firmly in a defensive mindset, often spending 2m 45s of each round dancing around the ropes, before unloading with two or three clean power shots.
To my eye there were many similarities with the Froch v Dirrell, and Taylor v Spinks contest. In each of the those contests, the aggressor was given a decision despite not landing any punch of note. Indeed, both those victors plodded forward like Boris Karloff, hitting thin air for the vast majority of the contest.
In the last two mentioned bouts, the judges decided that however little Froch and Taylor were doing, it was more to their liking than the negative tactics of the opponents, and the intent alone was enough for them to be awarded rounds.
This time Valuev got a draw on one card but was an 8 rounds to 4 loser on the other two.
Respected Sky Sports commentator Jim Watt had it by 2 to Valuev, and in the studio, the pundits, who would be naturally biased to Haye on a UK Sky Box office presentation, while not explicitly airing their views, clearly hinted thoughts that the Englishman had been gifted a decision.
On the other side of the coin, Guardian writer Kevin Mitchell bizarrely gave Haye every round if fightwriter is quoting correctly.

That there was little dissent is probably due to the stoic nature of Valuev (who deserved better than his verbal assault) and also the probability that his promotional team have options on Haye as a condition for offering him the chance to challenge for the title.

I had it 114-114, and thought I was being generous to Haye, but let me make myself clear. I’m delighted that Haye got the nod.
David Haye is a credit to boxing and throughout his career he has taken on the top opponents in his fast track to glory. He has now won two major championship fights on away promotions, on mainland Europe where things are notoriously difficult.
A proper fighter, he deserves the millions that will now be coming his way.
He’s come a long way from the Sunday afternoon debut at the York hall in front of a handful of fans. I remember him posting on the forums under the name ‘davidhayewivsumthingtosay’
I hope there are many more great nights ahead for the Hayemaker.

stay in action

No Nark in the Park

Just a small profit eked out this weekend.

I was reading before the British Super Middleweight title fight on Friday that Paul Smith is the hardest hitter that Billy Graham has ever worked with.

I found this hard to believe, and I think it was Chris Sanigar who questioned how he could say that after training Carl Thompson.

Billy had replied, ‘I was the one holding the pads’.

Well, it seems that Billy must be feeling the effects of the years because there was little evidence that Smith’s punches were having any effect on Tony Quigley in the bout.

Until the champion tired in the last two rounds, Quigley seemed in control and despite being out on his feet, Quigley never really looked like getting stopped even in the last round.

To be fair to Smith he was never hurt either, and in addition, power punches are not too easy to land on Quigley, as his style makes it difficult to land anything of note. It was worrying for Smith supporters that their man didn’t seem to impose himself on the contest, and seemed to be the one back-pedalling for most of what was in truth, a very scrappy affair.

I had seen Paul Smith box in pedestrian fashion before & I figured that Quigley’s win over Dodson might have been under-rated. I took a bit of the 3.55 about the champion and little I saw in the first 2/3 rds of the contest convinced me I was wrong.

The market makers on betfair clearly agreed and I was able to lay off Quigley at 1.36 in running after the 8th round.

On my card I thought that Smith needed a stoppage after 10 but I was relieved to have ‘greened out’ after the champion tired and Smith won the last two rounds clearly.

I still thought that Quigley had edged it but Smith was the house fighter, and also seemed to have more vocal support in the arena.

The result was a split decision in favour of Smith, which seemed a little tough on Quigley, but I was right to sacrifice some of my potential profits and secure a profit whichever of the three outcomes were decided.

Immediately after this contest Fran Warren told the MC to announce ‘there will be a rematch’, but I cannot say that there would be many looking forward to watching that again. After such all-Liverpool classics as ‘the Nark in the Park’ with Andy Holligan and Shea Neary, and the Quigley v Dodson thriller earlier this year, this one was pretty disappointing it has to be said.

The late Autumn season finally gets in full swing over the next few weeks with Sexton v Rogan II, David Haye challenging Nikolai Valuev on Saturday, and Miguel Cotto challenging Filipino sensation Manny Pacquaio.

Regarding the Haye v Valuev bout this weekend, i expect a big performance from Haye.

The bigger they come, the harder they fall is one adgage. of course you may also say 'a good big'un beats a good little 'un.
My take on this is that class is the over-riding factor rather than natural weight or size. Roy Jones Jr hammered John Ruiz by just being too good, and it really wouldn't surprise me if this was like Haye v Arthur Williams, where the younger guy jumps on the older, slower man from the bell and basically punishes him into submission.
Unless stamina becomes an issue, Valuev doesn't seem to have the power to KO anyone these days, instead relying on labouring to points decisions, several of which have been very generous.
let's face it, however you read it, a life and death struggle with faded former champ Evander Holyfield is pretty awful form, and Haye should be approaching this bout with confidence.
haye to win inside the distance at 3/1 is the recommendation.

still in action...

but very busy with lots of domestic tuff, so I have had to sacrifice the blog updates, and this may continue for a while, but I have had to scale my bets back quite a bit.

This has been due to a few factors but primarily due to getting collared at a few of my books.

I even spotted two middles on the NFL, got my bets on and had my action cancelled without even getting an email to explain why.

I had some exposure there but one won and one lost so no damage was done.

Over the last two seasons I have done well from arbing and middling the NFL but 5 weeks in and it has been pretty poor this time round.

Now that I have cashed out my remaining balance with sporting I will look to a couple of other European books to see if they are out of line on their prices, and hopefully I will have a little more joy there.

In boxing, we have seen some recent action, not much of which has excited me very much.

I lost a little on the Prizefighter tournament which was ridiculous really as I tipped a 20/1 outsider who got to the final, winning his first two bouts. The only bout I backed him in though was the final when he had a great first round against Audley Harrison, but was knocked out in the 2nd.

Audley finally displayed some of the grit that has been lacking throughout his low profile career. Whether this heralds an upturn in his fortunes must be questionable though. To be fighting 8 fight novices nearly 10 years after his Olympic Gold is pretty poor, and it remains to be seen whether Audley will ever make into the top ten rankings of any of the world organisations. He is currently ranked #55 in the world by independent authority www.boxrec.com, but that is behind fellow Brit Tyson Fury who only turned professional last year.

I expect he will continue for a couple of years, fighting, and probably losing to fringe contenders like Derek Chisora or Fury, before disappearing off the radar completely.

Apart from Prizefighter, Sky’s output of Friday night fights has been lacking in decent contests, so much so that I couldn’t even be bothered to watch them.

Last weekend saw the start of Showtime’s Super Middleweight ‘Super Six’ tournament, and this tournament has really caught the imagination and put a much needed spring in the step for boxing.

It started with Jermain Taylor travelling to Germany to fight Arthur Abraham, and Andre Dirrell coming to England to face Carl Froch.

One of the rules of boxing betting is never to back against the home fighter on a German promotion. Of course I wrote the rule, and ignored it with my selection of Samuel Peter vs Vitali Klitschko.

Now, I am a fan of Abraham but I still thought he looked very small against the others in this tournament, moving up from middleweight and I gave Taylor a good chance of outboxing him. I envisaged him getting a decision after keeping Abraham on the end of his jab for the duration. At the odds, I had a small wager on Taylor, who was the underdog at 3.55.

Of course the judges were not needed as Abraham proved to be the puncher in the fight. Long before the knockout in rd12, Abraham had shown that a well organised style was too much for Taylor who had no plan B once his own punches were making no impression. From round 5 it was pretty much all Abraham who was easing to a wide points win until Taylor was caught flush with 20 seconds left.

This fight had me wondering

a) why I had broken my golden rule again, and

b) how Taylor had managed to defeat Bernard Hopkins twice

As likeable as he is, quite frankly Taylor is finished as far as elite level boxing goes. The Taylor who ground it out against Hopkins now seems a distant memory.

It will be interesting how Abraham gets on in his bouts outside Germany .

With his peek-a-boo style, gloves glued to the side of his head, and shorts pulled up to his armpits he has been protected from body shots by referees penalising clean blows as ‘below the belt’. He will not get the same kind of official assistance in the USA .

It would be a mistake to write-off King Arthur though. He is very tough, carries his power throughout a bout, and has a real fighting heart. Anyone who saw him boxing on for half the fight against Edison Miranda with a broken jaw will understand that.

Because he starts slowly and doesn’t seem very quick you always expect that a decent boxer could out-point him comfortably but he won’t be easy pickings for anyone.

In the other contest I figured the books had it about right, and was about to give this one a miss, when I notice the odds on Froch were dropping close to fight time.

Of course Dirrell had struggled to make weight the day before, and the line moved a little after that.

I wondered what was causing the line shift, and I spoke to a friend who was at the bout. He said that the word at the venue was that the occasion was getting to the American and that he was a nervous wreck, leading many to think he would freeze in the ring.

Of course I should have treated this info with a pinch of salt but instead I had a few bets on an early KO in rounds 2, 3 & 4, and a pretty lumpy bet on Froch to win over at Matchbook who hadn’t moved the line like the others.

For those who haven’t see it [link to fight writer] the contest (I hesitate to use the word fight) was absolutely awful, and there has been a lot of controversy about the judges scoring of the ‘fight’.

A couple of facts about the bout

Carl Froch was trying to engage his opponent in a battle of fisticuffs.

Andre Dirrell was attempting to stay out of punching range, and occasionally counter after his opponent had missed.

On my card, the score was 115-113 in favour of Dirrell.

Froch was plodding forward like Frankenstein’s monster but he wasn’t landing many punches, whereas Dirrell’s occasional counters were sharper and more accurate.

Indeed Froch appeared to be getting very frustrated as he couldn’t impose his type of fight on his opponent.

Froch has fought awkward opponents before, Matthew Barney perhaps the most unorthodox, but none as quick as his American adversary here who really was very sharp.

Now, two judges scored for Froch and one for Dirrell whilst most online pundits watching at home had the American a clear winner.

I likened the contest to Taylor v Spinks from last year when Taylor was the aggressor but plodded forward landing virtually nothing while Spinks fulfilled the Dirrell role of the bullfighter ‘now you see me, now you don’t’.

In the end, the judges preferred the aggressive intentions to the tactics of Dirrell and Spinks who were perceived as too negative.

Nevertheless, how can a fighter be awarded rounds for swinging at thin air?

The ironic thing is that Dirrell did finally take the centre of the ring in rounds 11 & 12, and reeled off a few punches that showed Froch he did have the power to compete at this level. The Englishman was even back pedalling at one stage, so if Dirrell had just been a little more ambitious, this is a fight he could have won.

I could have added to my stake in the closing stages with Froch trading at 2/1 on Betfair, even as we were waiting for the decision, but I missed out on this - I must admit I was pretty sure the decision would go the other way, but

Still, I'm not complaining with the bet putting me back in the black for the day.
Sometimes you get the decisions and sometimes you don't.