The reason why I was intrigued by the match is because, over the weekend, I noticed something in the betting on the 'Method of Decision' market that hinted that the finish would end in something other than a pinfall or submission.
Upon realising the odds had plummeted for 'Any Other Method' of decision when I browsed through a specials market for the match on Saturday, I published a post titled 'Natalya .vs. Charlotte Not Ending In A Pinfall Or Submission At HIAC 2017?' where I pointed out what I had noticed.
At the time, 'Any Other Method' had fallen from 4/1 into 1/2. This struck me as peculiar because - going by Smackdown, which saw Natalya submit Charlotte in a tag match - I had jumped to the conclusion that Sunday's bout would end with Flair forcing Natalya to tap out.
Another thing that stood out to me was the fact that both wrestlers use submission moves as their finishers, so it caused me to question why the bettors had opted to go for a different method of victory rather than what should have been the punters' favourite - 'Submission'.
The price drop didn't end there. 'Any Other Method' continued its decline all the way through the weekend. You can see in the table below that the selection went as low as 1/8 before the market was closed shortly before the bell rang to start the match.
During the bout, Natalya struck her opponent with a steel chair. This forced the referee to call for the bell and award Charlotte Flair the decision by disqualification.
With hindsight now in our favour, it's clear that the betting was on the money.
It could be argued that the late betting was people following the moving line. However, the early bettors certainly had an idea what was going to happen in the match.