This is not an attempt to suggest the rating system is more accurate than gambling odds. Gamblers can analyze each fight individually, while the rating system uses a variety of mathematical routines to supply a primary fighter rating that is focused on ranking recent achievement, with a secondary priority of gauging future expectation.
With that said, there are some caveats to using the rating vs. odds comparison straight-up — the “Gotcha” list:
- System inability to project the exact effects of a recent divisional change.
- System inability to project the exact effects of recent inactivity.
- Poor matchmaking / limited careers / “changing of the guard”.
- Notable home advantage.
- System inability to project style differences.
- System inability to factor in bad judging decisions.
But this stuff (especially #5) is pretty much common sense. We try to partially factor in #1-#3 when we compute the ratings, but #5 and #6 is something that the human can factor in, that the system can’t. For the sake of these articles, we’ll attempt to factor in #4 when relevant. Home advantage can have a slight effect, but likely not enough to sway the “I’d bet on” decision.
Experienced gamblers know that it’s not about being right the most, it’s about making the most money. So in the usual table, I’ll add the “I’d bet on” column and analyze the rating/odds gap plus points #1-4 that I listed above. I’ll leave #5 and #6 to the fully subjective analyses — of which I’m sure there will be plenty.
The gotchas aren’t necessarily comprehensive, but I have noted them as I come across them and when they are considered in the decision.
Having said all that, let’s get started:
Ratings vs. Odds
| Fight | Odds Favorite | Rating Favorite | I’d bet on | “Gotchas” |
| Elliott vs. Papazian | Elliott (-158 / Small) | Papazian (1.09x / Pick ‘Em) | PASS | #1 |
| Cofer vs. Rio | Rio (-162 / Small) | Rio (1.12x / Pick ‘Em) | Cofer | |
| Duran vs. Viana | Duran (-125 / Very Small) | Viana (1.53x / Moderate) | PASS | #1, #3 |
| Waldburger vs. Catone | Waldburger (-133 / Very Small) | Waldburger (2.16x / Large) | Waldburger | #1 |
| Khabilov vs. Pichel | Khabilov (-246 / Moderate) | Khabilov (1.95x / Large) | PASS | #3, #4 |
| Vinicius vs. Bedford | Bedford (-228 / Moderate) | Bedford (1.17x / Pick ‘Em) | PASS | #1, #3 |
| Pyle vs. Head | Pyle (-217 / Moderate) | Pyle (1.08x / Pick ‘Em) | Head | |
| Poirier vs. Brookins | Poirier (-258 / Moderate) | Poirier (1.58x / Moderate) | PASS | |
| Guillard vs. Varner | Guillard (-124 / Pick ‘Em) | Guillard (1.32x / Small) | PASS | |
| Barry vs. del Rosario | del Rosario (-226 / Moderate) | Barry (1.24x / Very Small) | Barry | |
| Nelson vs. Mitrione | Nelson (-254 / Moderate) | Nelson (1.76x / Moderate) | PASS |
Now, to the results — given the odds above:
The PASS suggests that the odds and ratings difference are nearly identical, so neither fighter is a good bet or there are too many gotchas.
There is just one favorite worth backing:
The Waldburger bet is marked because the ratings difference agrees with the odds, but to a larger degree. The odds appear way off on this one, unless Catone is a completely different fighter at the new weight.
This leaves three underdogs worth considering:
Cofer vs. Rio – Definitely the weakest play of the three. If Rio drops below -155 or so, this one becomes a PASS. Very small play here.
Head vs. Pyle – The system loves Head for his split over Ebersole and while Pyle is justifiably the favorite, at -217, he seems to be too strong of a favorite.
Barry vs. del Rosario – The strongest of the three underdogs worth a play.