> > >I think all the pundits who've been shooting off their mouths about how
> > >DLH is going to beat Hopkins should back up their baloney by signing on
> > >here
> > Are you retarded? about 80 percent of the predicitons ive seen have been for
> > hopkins. I know you dont really read articles or actually read the posts on
> > this newsgroup, but please do before posting yourself.
> No kidding, Christ, all these supposed "pundits" should have alerted
> the sportsbooks who were practically beggin people to take DLH. I
> can't think of a single legitimate pundit anywhere who was predicting
> a win from DLH. Damn, even I figured DLH was going down somewhere
> between 4-9 (my original guess was 4-6), I mean it doesn't take a
Bert Sugar and Ron Borges both picked DLH, and they're legitimate
pundits. A few writers always pick the underdog in major fights.
perhaps not Rahman-Lewis, but when the odds are less than 5-1, someone's
going to take a chance and pick the underdog. And why not, if you're
wrong, people won't remember it, but if you pick an underdog, you can
bring that up for years.
a week ago, the line was about 2-1 for Hopkins, which isn't exactly the
sportsbook begging people to bet on DLH. Hopkins was a 3-1 underdog
against trinidad, and Hamed had about the same edge over Barrera. At
fight time, according to HBO, the odds were more like 8-5 for Hopkins.
The DLH fans got to vegas and laid down their money.
Sometimes the odds just seem crazy, and you can't always expect the
pundits' opinions to go along with the odds. Writers seemed split about
evenly with both the Hopkins-Trinidad fights and Barrera-Hamed. If
FWIW, Hopkins has been my favorite fighter since Echols I. I both
picked him and rooted for him. But I can see how one could talk
themselves into picking oscar.