When did the experts get it most wrong?

One fight that sprang to mind immediately (because I watched it earlier) was Tyson vs Holyfield I.

There are that many reasons why he won, I won't bother going into them.

In hindsight it is easy to say that Evander would win 99 times of 100, but at the time he was cherrypicked by Tyson rather than fighting Lewis.

Instead he was beaten up and knocked out. Sensational performance by Holyfield, that.

 

Surely no one picked fat Danny to beat Vitali?

Anyway 'experts' are wrong all the time, otherwise they'd make a living from better on fights

 

I don't know anyone that picked Danny to beat Klitschko.

 

Obvious answer is Tyson-Douglas. But nobody could have forseen that one...

What about Louis-Schmeling 1?

Robinson-Turpin?

 

Ali-Liston
Tyson-Douglas
Pacquiao-De La Hoya

 

Ali-Liston sprang to mind because Ali was a young hotshot but the experts were really giving him no chance. Most thought Liston does him in 1-3 rounds. They had obvious reasons to think so, but they under-estimated Ali clearly and just didn't put much stylistic thought into it (Because Liston was a killer).

 

There's a youtube video of the build up to Ruiz/Jones and the "experts" were giving Jones little to no chance.

 

Holmes - Cooney is a great example.

 

Recently Joe Calzaghe vs Jeff Lacy. Lacy looked terrible against Sheika and some other fighters yet most "experts" were picking him to overpower Calzaghe.

 

Yeah, Lacy was odds on favourite with the bookmakers too. It makes you laugh when you look back with hindsight at all those pre-fight predictions as Calzaghe is twice the boxer Lacy ever was. I guess "hype" can blind even the best experts and there must be a bit of a sheep mentality too with these experts!

 

Pacquiao-De La Hoya surely. It wasn't as though the experts were picking against Pacquiao, they were actually ruling him out completely, saying it was a size mismatch.

Also, I know it is difficult to believe now considering the way the fight went and the trajectory that either man's career took afterwards, but I recall from the tv commentary of Toney v Barkley that JT was a severe underdog. Pretty spectacularly wrong!

Duran v Barkley is another good example. Hopkins-Pavlik too in many quarters.

 

Yes, it was a weird one that. Calzaghe had dominated and stopped Sheika in one of his most convincing performances, whereas Lacy had struggled woefully with him and could have lost the fight with different judges. Yet Lacy was the favourite. It just shows how the media can be influenced by a good physique and a good punch.

 

i would say at least half of the pundits picked peter over klitschko on vitali's return fight. a LOT of 'experts' got it horribly wrong that night

lots of people picked hatton to beat mayweather, and also to beat pacquaio