Which was worse!!

[The_Italian]

For me i'd have to say hopkins beating pavlik...

that one seemed damn near improbable to me...

and the way pavlik lost...a prime pavlik gets absolutely DEMOLISHED by a VERY old hopkins...

that seemed way more unlikely to me than pacman beating oscar...granted i expected oscar to win a decision and he lost...but when a young gun beats an old vet its not as bad as when the old vet (a 43 year old one at THAT) beats THEE prime middleweight champion of the world.

oscar has basically been half-ass retired for the last couple of years and pacman is p4p the best in the world...

pavlik has been a force; crushing and ripping through opponents and he ends up looking like an amatuer against a prime pro.

[Unbiased]

Pac DLH was worse.

Think about it this way.

When the fight was first announced, most people thought Pac had no business being in the same ring with DLH.

At least Pavlik was just a slight favorite over Bhop.

[Silencers]

Officially, Hopkins was more of an underdog, odds were as high as 5-1 whereas Pacquiao's were at most 3-1.

[MakeDamnSure]

Officially, Hopkins was more of an underdog, odds were as high as 5-1 whereas Pacquiao's were at most 3-1.

I agree but for DLH just accepting the fight was already an embarrasment for him fighting a midget... Pavlik and Hopkins were the same size.. media, fans and everyone bashed Oscar because of the height and reach difference

[Silencers]

It's true that DLH-Pacquiao was much more widely condemned as a mismatch and there were many people calling it a mismatch, myself included, I was just stating the official odds for the fights.