The biggest upset since Tyson-Douglas?

I have to say, I make the best threads ever

 

this implication is highly insulting and irritating and this is the second time you've said it

regardless of whatever anyone thinks of me here, the idea that I don't know my shit is unfounded... I am well aware of the upset and what a big deal it was at the time... I'm not 20, I was an avid follower back then

As for the masses thing, that plays a role in how a fight is remembered, like it or not... the more well known the participants, the more "monumental" the event...

 

I may have a way to get something similar to that. The Flash/Boxing Updates put Herb Lambeck's odds on the back page for upcoming or possible matches. I could probably dig up a bunch of those and scan them for you.

1. If you happen to organize them in some way, I want a copy or a link. It would be cool info to incorporate in a database some day.

2. I'll probably forget about doing this so you'll want to remind me if you want me to do it, haha.

3. Lambeck's odds might not be exactly what the real odds were, but I think he was in charge of one of the casinos. I know that he was superb at analyzing matchups.

 

Fair enough - then you should know that the upset deserves to be included in this thread and not let some vendetta you have with the poster get in the way of that. it was a legitimately huge upset.

your last paragraph only makes me repeat myself - is this thread for boxing fans or for the masses?? Douglas-Tyson was a legitimate 42-1 underdog, Sanders-Wlad 30-1, where do you think Salazar-Romero was? I'd reckon 25-1 or longer. Tarver by KO? Probably 20-1. If Lucian Bute had lost his last fight that would have been 30-1, and despite them not being very "popular" or "known by the masses" i would have to include that upset in this kind of a thread.

 

danny williams vs tyson was a bit of a shocker, even though tyson was well past it, still expected him to win with ease.

 

There is so much damn info that I should have been keeping track of all these years. I will look it up tho - see what I can find. It would be fabulous to keep track of these things.

Completely unrelated to this thread (so cdogg this is NOT directed at you) I can't stand the revisonist history that goes on sometimes. A couple examples being Lennox v Ruddock, and Hopkins v Tito. People talk nowadays as if these fights were no-brainers going in. The odds were not reflective of that, and I tell ya if these people were so damn smart then they were idiots for not betting on Lennox and Hopkins being such sure things.

 

in fairness, a lot of people picked Bernard, myself included

 

and that's fine. Can you believe it that I don't really remember who I picked? I think i might have picked Tito by close decision. Really did think it would be close either way. But the amount of people that picked Bernard tripled after the fight happened and seems to grow every passing year

 

:giggle:undeniably true

 

The biggest upset for me has to be Jones/Tarver I. I was in complete shock when RJ was flattened. At his very best he always looked invincible.

 

romero vs. salazar was a huge upset, but it's not like romero got dominated and KOed. salazar did pummel his face badly in the first few rounds and by the time romero was coming back, his one eye was swollen shut completely.

 

I picked both Ruddock and Tito in those fights.

Odds-wise it doesn't count, but if you want to go the other way with biggest meaning biggest impact on the masses, then Foreman over Moorer makes the list. As I remember, the odds were only 2-1 in Moorer's favor, but I think that had much more to do with people wanting to root for Foreman than thinking it was a 2-1 fight.