Comments Thread For: Calzaghe: I Bet Money on Rees, He Will Stop Broner

[DARKSEID]

did he really just compare broner to lacy?


Posted from krikya360.com App for Android

[Levity]

Poor analysis, as Enzo focuses only on Rees's supposed strengths--which he is inflating--rather than each fighter's relative strengths and weaknesses. I guess that's expected given his association with Rees.

On a slight aside, the Lacy-Calzaghe analogy is greatly overused in it's application to bouts involving Broner and British fighters, namely Burns.

I've seen the analogy used ad nauseum to support arguments that Burns would defeat Broner, but the similarities between Burns-Broner and Lacy-Calzaghe are superficial (e.g. skin color, nationality, the American being hyped and favored), and not relevant to the boxers' skills and abilities.

Broner has more dimensions than Lacy, he's much faster than Lacy, his defense is much better than Lacy's, he's more accurate than Lacy, and so on. Burns is slower than Calzaghe , he lacks Calzaghe's tremendous work rate and stamina, and he doesn't punch as hard as Calzaghe. So, while there are superficial similarities between the two bouts, there are fewer similarities regarding factors that are much more important in determining bout outcomes.

[mathed]

Don't be upset when you lose your money Enzo.

[Hitman932]

More like 100/1. Enzo stated that he has put money on certain rounds that Gavin might win by ko in and currently every round outright is 100/1.

That doesn't change the facts of what I said.

Also, if he bet on individual rounds winning one means all the other bets are lost so in the end he wouldn't make out with a 100/1 payday because of the losses.

Either way - I would never lay 25 or 30-1 on a guy like Broner who is relatively unproven for the amount of hype he gets.

[Levity]

did he really just compare broner to lacy?


Posted from krikya360.com App for Android

Many people have made such a comparison, and as I noted above, it's based on superficial similarities rather than similarities that are relevant to what occurs in the ring.

[mathed]

Enzo must have left his brain in the gym before making those bets. Even his son wouldn't make that bet & hurried up and retired before he had to face the likes Chad Dawson & Andre Ward....

Joe could come out of retirement, coked up and still beat both those guys. I think Joe retired because he was almost 40 years old....

[Hitman932]

Poor analysis, as Enzo focuses only on Rees's supposed strengths--which he is inflating--rather than each fighter's relative strengths and weaknesses. I guess that's expected given his association with Rees.

On a slight aside, the Lacy-Calzaghe analogy is greatly overused in it's application to bouts involving Broner and British fighters, namely Burns.

I've seen the analogy used ad nauseum to support arguments that Burns would defeat Broner, but the similarities between Burns-Broner and Lacy-Calzaghe are superficial (e.g. skin color, nationality, the American being hyped and favored), and not relevant to the boxers' skills and abilities.

Broner has more dimensions than Lacy, he's much faster than Lacy, his defense is much better than Lacy's, he's more accurate than Lacy, and so on. Burns is slower than Calzaghe , he lacks Calzaghe's tremendous work rate and stamina, and he doesn't punch as hard as Calzaghe. So, while there are superficial similarities between the two bouts, there are fewer similarities regarding factors that are much more important in determining bout outcomes.

He also lies when he says his sons was a huge underdog in his own country against Lacy.

It was a 50-50 fight on almost every sportsbook and most of the ones based in the UK (I used bet365 at the time) actually had Calzaghe slightly favored.

The fightwriters odds were pretty close to matching most sportsbooks and can be viewed here along with the fight preview

[richardt]

The worse way to bet is with bias. If someone likes two fighters equally, he has the best chance of picking the winner. If someone does not care for either fighter, they have the best chance of picking a winner but when someone is following their heart and pick who they like, or against who they don't like, they often pick wrong. Never pick entirely on favorites and dislikes.

[The Nephilim]

That doesn't change the facts of what I said.

Also, if he bet on individual rounds winning one means all the other bets are lost so in the end he wouldn't make out with a 100/1 payday because of the losses.

Either way - I would never lay 25 or 30-1 on a guy like Broner who is relatively unproven for the amount of hype he gets.

The Amerikan hype for Broner is out of control at this point.

[sdcluser]

******* is one helluva drug....