Beating The Spread.

I have this theory about boxing. In American Football the bookmakers will have a 'spread'. They'll say Team A will beat Team B by 11 points or so. In boxing it's not as clear cut. I think that often when the underdog performs better than expected people will be OUTRAGED & call ROBBERY just because the underdog beat 'the spread'. I had the Burns Beltran fight as a 50/50 match. I had Beltran win by a round or so. A draw isn't a HUGE robbery. I've seen many worse & I think a lot of people are over reacting because of Beltrans losses & the fact that many North American based fans diss European boxing & vice versa (sad on both parts). I was at the Lennox Lewis Vitali Klitschko fight in LA & I told a load of people before than Vitali was very tough & would give Lewis a tussle. Which he did. People thought otherwise because of the Byrd bout. I knew better. But that uppercut from Lewis changed things in my opinion & he was on his way to a win - but Vitali won 'the spread' by performing better than expected. Same with Devon Alexander vs Andriy Kotelnik. I had Devon winning a close fight but because he was a big favourite & it was a close fight people screamed robbery. I'm not saying the Burns result was fair. This post isn't just about tonights bout. But I do think people over-react when an underdog performs better than expected. p.s. It did show how weak the Lightweight division is & maybe Gamboa can clean up....