Boxers are the worst analysts in the world, and can't pick a winner for ****.

[Stickman]

Title says it all. Over the years, I've heard hundreds (maybe thousands) of boxers make calls on upcoming fights, and they rarely hit. Yet I hit over 90%, and I've only stepped into the ring a couple of times for fun, though I've followed the sport since childhood.

Anyone else notice this? And if so, do you have any theories about why? Hell, these guys live the sport, you'd think they'd be the ones who never miss instead of me. Is it because they tend to get emotional about their picks?

I read just a few minutes ago on another thread where 3 well known fighters are picking Hopkins by UD, or maybe even stoppage (I was stunned), over Kelly Pavlik. Sure, the kid's largely unproven, and still inexperienced, but he appears to be far more capable than those guys are predicting.

Though I think Calzaghe picked Hopkins just because he's being a **** and doesn't want to acknowledge that Pavlik is even on the radar.

[ZomBie Jesus!!]

often the best player isn't the best teacher.. they know how to do, they don't know how to analyze and teach it. it's two different skills.. one is the art and science of the game.. the other is putting it into play. if fighters where the best analysts and teachers then they wouldn't need a trainer in their corner. just my thoughts on this..

[ZomBie Jesus!!]

also.. often times fighters look at fights in what is in their best interest.
if there is a potential fighter he wants to fight in a fight.. more then likely he will chose him to win since it makes better business sense if he does. it makes your fight bigger!
when a fighter doesn't want to fight another fighter it is in his best interest for that fighter to lose. many times they are just picking who would make them look good.
it's like when Mayweather picked Judah and Mosley against Cotto..

[Terry A]

I don't know, stickman. I think Roy Jones, George Foreman, Sean O'Grady do a great job. I'd rather have a pro fighter in the booth than professional announcers who've never been pounded on. In fact, i would love to have a fight card where only ex-boxers did all the commenting. It might not be as smooth or as polished if lamps and larry merchant were there, but it would be kind of cool listening to a few ex-fighters talking about the fights.

As far as predicting, I never noticed them being too far off. Nobody bats a thousand in picking fights.

[warp1432]

Calzaghe didn't pick Hopkins. He said Hopkins could win, but Pavlik would likely pull out a decision. Unless you are talking about Enzo Calzaghe.

[Stickman]

I don't know, stickman. I think Roy Jones, George Foreman, Sean O'Grady do a great job. I'd rather have a pro fighter in the booth than professional announcers who've never been pounded on. In fact, i would love to have a fight card where only ex-boxers did all the commenting. It might not be as smooth or as polished if lamps and larry merchant were there, but it would be kind of cool listening to a few ex-fighters talking about the fights.

As far as predicting, I never noticed them being too far off. Nobody bats a thousand in picking fights.

Hey, I'd rather have fighters as commentators, too, they're much more interesting than the pros, but I just can't take any picks seriously anymore. Some are better (or less bad) than others, but most are just horrible.

Merchant drives me bat****farkingcrazy.

[Scott9945]

Good thread. Boxers usually are terrible at picking fights, just like jockeys are bad at picking horse races. As far as being analysts, knowing something and communicating it well are two entirely different things.

[TheGreatA]

[Stickman]

Yeah, I remember that discussion, and it's as funny now as it was then.

[Terry A]

Machine,
Man, you got me! I forgot about that and tend to remember other RJ moments, but yea, that was funny.
Good one!