How Indepth Are Your Predictions and How ACCURATE Are They?

I find Hopkins fights fairly easy to predict. You know he's going to be very competitive if not win outright if his opponent is'nt particularly quick and fast.
Power punchers who have average speed Hopkins takes to school.

The last time I picked a power guy to beat Hopkins was the Trinidad fight.

Bank on even a 50 year old Hopkins to compete vs all but fighters who are significantly faster than he is.

 

Good time to reflect on some good/bad picks:

The good:

Lara over Williams
Cotto over Foreman
Prescott over McCloskey (close decision lost but most consider it a W for him)
Bradley over Alexander
Khan over Judah
Judah over Paris
Broner over DeMarco
Pacquiao over Bradley (robbery)
Martinez over Chavez Jr.
Ward over Froch and Dawson
Marquez over Katsidis and Pacquiao (4th fight)
Floyd over Cotto in a 12 round competitive decision
Rios over Alvarado (1)
Hopkins over Pascal (2) and Cloud


The bad:

Donaire over Rigondeaux
Berto over Guerrero
Rios over Alvarado (2)
Khan over Garcia
Maidana over Alexander
Salido over Garcia
Cotto over Trout
Angulo over Kirkland
Bute over Froch

 

This is a good one.

I think I had Paris breaking Judah down late. Was pleasantly surprised to see Judah make him gunshy and win every round until the stoppage.

It's a shame he hasn't fought since then. It's been over a year already.

 

Yeah, it was cool to watch, if he has any shot against Garcia, it's boxing just like that (made a thread on it). I thought Paris was just far too basic and unimpressive for Judah's speed and movement.

Another one I got wrong was Hopkins-Dawson. He can't come forward like he used to.

 

if u watch fighters usually u can predict the outcome. sometimes u think somene is gonna win and when they dont, u are like wtf. those odd wins are the ones which have question marks behind them. too good to be true

 

I'll do what Bog did.




My best picks:

Hopkins over Tarver, Pavlik, and Pascal (and Cloud, though a lot were picking him there)

Mosley over Margarito

Moreno over Darchinyan

Judah over Paris

Thompson over Price

Salido over Juanma both times

Lopez over Ortiz

Bradley over Alexander

Kirkland over Angulo






My worst:

Mijares over Darchinyan (by one-sided schooling that would see him force a stoppage in the 9th or 10th being the exact pick...FFS)

Donaire over Rigo

Moreno over Mares

Salido over Garcia

Pacquiao over Marquez last time out

Hopkins over Dawson

Cotto over Margarito the first time

Berto over Guerrero

Taylor over Froch (so close though)

 

I'm probably more big picture. I doesn't always make picks as much as talk about my take on the odds & who should be the favorite. Although sometimes when I'm confident I do make picks. I really ****ed up Abraham-Foch for instance. That was probably the worse.

 

Heres mine

The good:

Mares over Agbeko I and II
Mares over Moreno
Cotto over Foreman
Bradley over Alexander
Alexander over Maidana
Khan over Judah
Peterson over Khan
Garcia over Khan
Judah over Paris
Broner over DeMarco
Bradley over Pacquiao(could care less if it was a robbery or not)
Ward over Froch and Dawson
Marquez over Pacquiao IV
Floyd over Cotto in a 12 round competitive decision
Rios over Alvarado I
Hopkins over Cloud


The bad:

Donaire over Rigondeaux
Berto over Guerrero
Berto over Ortiz
Ortiz over Lopez
Rios over Alvarado II
Lopez over Salido I and II
Cotto over Trout
Chavez over Martinez

 

I try not to think too hard about who to pick. Usually I factor in who's just naturally more talented,the style match-up, who has more sound defense, and also more experience.

Even though I don't put much into my own predictions I respect when guys like Bogo,Bball,and Genaro post in depth breakdowns of a fight,even though I may not always agree its usually a good read.

 

Don't be cheap.

 

If two fighters are fighting on relatively equal terms, I think you have to look at styles and habits and go in depth as much as possible. It's the little things that make the difference. But there's an area of gray you cant always predict -- fighters have the ability to change it up, but in general if they do something the same way most of the time, they'll keep doing it. It's all about putting those factors against eachother and figure out who has the advantage.

If I graded it like a pyramid in terms of importance it would be


styles / habits
intagibles (heart/chin/willpower, etc)
other factors (age, focus, etc)

 

This content is protected

 

Yes, i think you can over analyze. Sometimes when you get so detailed about every nuance you fail to see the basic, simple factors that are more important.

 

Hopkins-Dawson was one of the easiest fight to call in years. Dawson was all wrong for Hopkins and that was very obvious. What were the factors that made you think Hopkins would win?

 

Agreed. I think Hopkins fights are the easiest to call personally. Straight ahead, plodders with slow hands are guys Hopkins eats up because he controls them with his footwork. It's the guys with fast hands and/or footwork to quickly close the gap that give him trouble. So i still think he can beat a guy like Froch even right now but would lose to Bute.