Matches with really odd favourites.

Gary Mason was the bookies favourite vs Lennox Lewis.

 

Ruddock was the favorite against Lewis.

 

Vegas (or other betting) odds are geared toward getting the most action on a contest without putting the house at a disadvantage (to lose money). They’re based on perceptions rather than cold analysis by experts of who they think would actually win.

In college football, Alabama and Notre Dame and some other programs with big fan bases are always going to have at least slightly inflated lines because more people are inclined to bet on them than against them, so oddsmakers nudge the line upward to account for that.

Extreme example: The reason Buster Douglas was 38-1 or whatever it was is simple — NOBODY was going to bet on him, period, without that kind of massive number. If Vegas makes that 10-1 and everybody bets on Tyson (they would have because he was perceived as invincible) and the fight went as everyone thought it would (Tyson early KO), Vegas loses all the bets and takes in nothing because nobody was going to put money on Douglas.

Ideally, Vegas (my term for the book or house wherever it is) would rather every bet have 50% of the money on one side and 50% on the other and they collect 10% on top of the losing side (vigorish) as profit and the winning bets pay off the losing bets. No risk, guaranteed steady income.

 

It's not that surprising Canelo had stopped Kovalev and Bivol wasn't that well known at that time with not many notable fights.

Tito was the favourite against Hopkins probably due to the way he destroyed William Joppy that was a very impressive performance at that time.

 

Blimey so he was, yep I remember that.
Lewis was seen as maybe too inexperienced or something at the time.

 

He was, it was obviously the two Tyson fight s that helped those odds.

 

I think it was Foreman who said something like, "Never bet on a man who got publicity through losses."