Team Wilder is taking cherry-picking to a whole new level. Source for Odds: Ladbrokes 100:1 VegasInsider 70:1 Maddux 100:1
Racking up those title defenses over world class opposition. Anybody that says otherwise are just 'HATAS'
Are these most-one sided odds ever? I remember there was a time when some Tyson fights would only be posting odds for over/under. Because a win for Mike was a given.
Buster Douglas opened as a 42-1 underdog against Mike Tyson. Evander Holyfield opened as a 25-1 underdog against Tyson in 1996. What were the odds when Alexander Povetkin defended against him?
I read Vaccuro was the only broker posting odds for that fight for a win. No other bookie dared to. I tried to find McNeelys odds for Tyson and that's how I found that for many of Tysons fights the bookies stopped taking bets for a straight W as there was no way to balance the books.
Most of Tyson's fights were over-under bets. That's why a huge roar would come from fans at ringside if a fight lasted a few rounds.
Pick a sport, any sport and put the world number - let's be conservative here - 9 against the world number 100. If the number 100 isn't someone about to rapidly rise through the ranks due to being up and coming or back from an injury then the number 9 is incredibly likely to beat them easily hence the odds being as they are for Wilder to beat the latest horizontal heavyweight they've lined up for him.
Wilder is rated #2 by boxrec. Wawrzyk is rated #30. And in his 34 fights he's only lost to Povetkin (who is rated #5 by boxrec). The odds shouldn't be 100-1.
And yet they are. Shows you how Wilder's perceived despite being unproven in comparison to the latest eurobum they've lined up for him to knock over. Our Polish friend is awful which is exactly why he got the call.