To be clear, I didn't say that Tyson would "Throw the fight" in my post this morning.
I don't understand then:
To lose a match in a combat sport, especially boxing, intentionally. Usually done in order to take advantage of the bets placed on one's odds of winning.
I shouldn't have agreed that Tyson was going to
throw the fight. As I followed up, throwing a fight is what Bruce Willis was supposed to do in Pulp Fiction, but didn't. Not sure if you've seen that movie, but that's the best example I can come up with. Bettors are attempting to fix an outcome for their financial gain.
In THIS 'fight' between Tyson and Paul, I don't think Tyson is working in conjunction with organized crime so that they can profit. I just think Tyson is getting paid a lot of money to engage in theater with Paul and that this thing is more akin to an exhibition like in Rocky III when Rocky took on Hulk Hogan. And, if you haven't seen THAT movie, then I should probably try to avoid movies altogether when attempting to clarify what I mean.
Does that help?
Sorry but not really. And yes, I understand those movies.
You said Tyson was a big underdog because the fight was staged.
I assume you meant staged for Tyson to lose.
That's how most people define throwing a fight: "To lose a match in a combat sport, especially boxing, intentionally."
I asked, "To be clear, are you saying the answer to why he's a heavy underdog is because Las Vegas knows it's staged and they know Tyson will throw the fight?"
You answered, "Yes, that's what I'm suggesting".
That's fine if you think that. I was just surprised.
And also a little surprised to see that some people were surprised some people think an underdog could win. That happens all the time in the NFL.
But I'm a noob on boxing so I don't really know anything.