The Ten Greatest Heavyweight Championship Clashes

[wmute]

becuase louis had lost to schemling
because schemling was german
because of the world war

historically it was one of the biggest even if schemling was little challenge

frasier and alis first fight was their best!

really?

thank you for letting me know

i did not know that
AND
i cant read
AND
we did not already argue over that for pages

[wmute]

Yogi, K-Dogg

I see the glorious past of Norton being the deciding factor in how the fight was perceived.

Based on the immediate past performances (Shavers and Young) and Norton being like 35, I would have probably bet my money on Holmes at the time and felt reasonably good about it.

However I see that Bobick, those "close" fights with Ali, were better credentials than being "Ali's sparring partner".

do you guys have somehow access to the odds for Holy-Bowe?

[K-DOGG]

Yogi, K-Dogg

I see the glorious past of Norton being the deciding factor in how the fight was perceived.

Based on the immediate past performances (Shavers and Young) and Norton being like 35, I would have probably bet my money on Holmes at the time and felt reasonably good about it.

However I see that Bobick, those "close" fights with Ali, were better credentials than being "Ali's sparring partner".

do you guys have somehow access to the odds for Holy-Bowe?

lol!!! Odds going into a fight are about perception at the time, wmute. In retrospect, we know how good Holyfield was and how good Holmes turned out to be; that wasnt' the case at the time.

Norton had built up a reputation as a top fighter by beating Muhammad Ali, possiblly twice; and Ali was considered one of the best of all time. Bobick was a promising young chanllenger, until it was proven that he was limited by Norton and later Tate.

Holmes had one real quality fight, Shavers, where he showed some promise.

Holyfield had struggled with two old men and a journeyman, who took the fight on a week's notice, nearly knocked him out. George proved he was for real againt Holyfield; but Evander caught much criticism at the time for not putting him away, or Holmes, who had been stopped by Tyson.....and everybody had beaten Cooper. Bowe had stopped him in 2; but it took Holyfield 7 rounds.

Bowe, as it turned out, didn't live up to his potential; but, at the time, was supposed to be the "Future of the Division".


It's all about perspective.

[wmute]

lol!!! Odds going into a fight are about perception at the time, wmute. In retrospect, we know how good Holyfield was and how good Holmes turned out to be; that wasnt' the case at the time.

Norton had built up a reputation as a top fighter by beating Muhammad Ali, possiblly twice; and Ali was considered one of the best of all time. Bobick was a promising young chanllenger, until it was proven that he was limited by Norton and later Tate.

Holmes had one real quality fight, Shavers, where he showed some promise.

Holyfield had struggled with two old men and a journeyman, who took the fight on a week's notice, nearly knocked him out. George proved he was for real againt Holyfield; but Evander caught much criticism at the time for not putting him away, or Holmes, who had been stopped by Tyson.....and everybody had beaten Cooper. Bowe had stopped him in 2; but it took Holyfield 7 rounds.

Bowe, as it turned out, didn't live up to his potential; but, at the time, was supposed to be the "Future of the Division".


It's all about perspective.

I am well aware betting odds are about perception (they can be seen as an aggregate of the subjective probability individuals attach to the possible outcomes of the fight).

In general when it comes to boxing the public seem to put too much weight on performances, which are too distant in the past. This is why, although I would not have bet on norton, I am not surprised plenty of ppl would have.

As for Holyfield-Bowe, I was already aware of what you wrote, I am curious about the actual odds.

[K-DOGG]

I am well aware betting odds are about perception (they can be seen as an aggregate of the subjective probability individuals attach to the possible outcomes of the fight).

In general when it comes to boxing the public seem to put too much weight on performances, which are too distant in the past. This is why, although I would not have bet on norton, I am not surprised plenty of ppl would have.

As for Holyfield-Bowe, I was already aware of what you wrote, I am curious about the actual odds.

I am looking as we speak.....Bowe-Holy I odds.

[Yogi]

Wmute;

"Heavyweight champ Evander Holyfield may have felt slighted by the even-money odds for his Nov 13 bout against Rid**** Bowe, but the legalized betting shops of Las Vegas are elated." - Atlanta Journal

That's one source that claims the fight was a pick'em going into it, but I'll have a look around to see if I could find something that differs much from that.

[wmute]

I am looking as we speak.....Bowe-Holy I odds.

i tried to fish around with google, and all i could find is espn saying holyfield was favoured, if that was the case, he was favored by a little, because I dont remember that. I also dont remember bowe being a big favorite either. I remember ppl in the know foreseeing bowe winning, but with holyfield being the champ, casual fans had a slightly different view.

[K-DOGG]

Wmute;

"Heavyweight champ Evander Holyfield may have felt slighted by the even-money odds for his Nov 13 bout against Rid**** Bowe, but the legalized betting shops of Las Vegas are elated." - Atlanta Journal

That's one source that claims the fight was a pick'em going into it, but I'll have a look around to see if I could find something that differs much from that.

Props, Yogi. I knew the odds were close; but coulda swore they leaned more towards Bowe. I'm gonna keep looking.

[K-DOGG]

Most of the time, when I cite "odds", I generally mean the majority pick of the experts, btw....but I still thought the official odds were in favour of Bowe. However, what you say, wmute, about the experts vs the casual fans makes sense.

[THE REAL NINJA]

bowe was the fav