Michael Watson v Carl Froch

zfc · 04-26-2010, 04:46 PM

Obviously prime for prime.

I see Watson schooling Froch and probably knocking him out but then again I think Watson was technically the best of our golden generation of middle /super middles.

NO MAS · 04-26-2010, 05:35 PM

I think Watson could have taken Froch whenever he wanted too...

Watson would have been far to technical for Froch and had power that could and would have sunk Froch...

robpalmer135 · 04-26-2010, 05:39 PM

all respect to Watson but Froch was WBC world champion. Watson lost every time he stepped up to that level.

NO MAS · 04-26-2010, 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by robpalmer135

all respect to Watson but Froch was WBC world champion. Watson lost every time he stepped up to that level.

Good point Rob but he went up against far better opponents than what Froch has...

What about Froch v Wharton, that would have been on the cobbles...

kosaros · 04-26-2010, 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by robpalmer135

all respect to Watson but Froch was WBC world champion. Watson lost every time he stepped up to that level.

So....?

Watson beat Benn, gave McCallum a good fight, lost a debatable decision to Eubank and at Super Middleweight was just over a round away from decisively beating Eubank. Froch would be beat by this kind of opposition without doubt in my opinion.

It's like saying Herol Graham couldn't beat Richie Woodhall because Woodhall was WBC champion...

stake501 · 04-26-2010, 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by robpalmer135

all respect to Watson but Froch was WBC world champion. Watson lost every time he stepped up to that level.

atberry · 04-26-2010, 06:24 PM

Watson was damn damn good against Don Lee, Errol Christie and Eubank the 2nd time. Offensively slipping inside jabs and doing damage with tight accurate shots, and either changing angle of his attack inside to let go more or tucking up beautifully to block anything. Just immense. Stiff and awkward, but tremendous timing too.

That Watson beats Froch up.

sugarsean · 04-26-2010, 06:35 PM

Michael Watson was a great fighter watch his fight with McCallum, who was a top ten Pd 4 Pd fighter at the time, and is an all time great ring technican, even though Watson lost that fight, he gave McCallum a lot of problem's, it did'nt become onesided till the late rounds of the fight. Watson had a lot of skill.

Anyway Watson would school Froch easy, Froch is way to open for a fighter as technical good as Watson.

p.Townend · 04-27-2010, 03:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by robpalmer135

all respect to Watson but Froch was WBC world champion. Watson lost every time he stepped up to that level.

Froch has never boxed anyone like Mccallum or Eubank.The first time he went in with a proven world class fighter anywhere near his prime he was beaten.I think Watson would have had too much for Froch but would have won on points and not by KO.

Flea Man · 04-27-2010, 04:17 AM

wATSON WOULD COMPREHENSIVELY BEAT fROCHY, AND PROBABLY STOP HIM. (oops caps)

Probably Kessler too, though I'd favour Kesslers fundementals to save him being stopped.

Watson continues to be underrated.

icemax · 04-27-2010, 04:34 AM

I'm sorry, and I know i'm going to get a lot of hate here but I think that you lads are in serious danger of completely overrating Watson. He was a decent fighter with good skills but his two best wins don't really justify some of the accolades that he is getting. Benn did his usual early career whirlwind routine, blew himself out and was put down by a lame jab he was so tired, and Errol Christie was at the end of his rope career wise...every other time he stepped up he got beat.

Grahams performance against McCallum was significantly better than Watsons.

Flea Man · 04-27-2010, 05:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by icemax

I'm sorry, and I know i'm going to get a lot of hate here but I think that you lads are in serious danger of completely overrating Watson. He was a decent fighter with good skills but his two best wins don't really justify some of the accolades that he is getting. Benn did his usual early career whirlwind routine, blew himself out and was put down by a lame jab he was so tired, and Errol Christie was at the end of his rope career wise...every other time he stepped up he got beat.

Grahams performance against McCallum was significantly better than Watsons.

Agreed but Graham was a nightmare.

I had him winning the first Eubank fight.

jdawg · 04-27-2010, 10:43 AM

Wouldnt say Watson's being overrated he was a very skilled figher. Even Eubank says he was beaten twice by Watson (bad decision and tragedy of course) and was out of the ring for over a year prior to the McCallum right and he was always a busy fighter. He takes the best of Benn's shots he can take Froch's and outpoint him comfortably for me

Little Tyson · 04-27-2010, 10:46 AM

Froch

TFFP · 04-27-2010, 10:50 AM

Watson does get overrated at times but he was a lot better than Froch.

04-26-2010, 04:46 PM	#1
zfc Contender ESB Senior Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Bristol England Posts: 1,377 vCash: 2415	Michael Watson v Carl Froch Obviously prime for prime. I see Watson schooling Froch and probably knocking him out but then again I think Watson was technically the best of our golden generation of middle /super middles.
Top

04-26-2010, 05:35 PM	#2
NO MAS Champion East Side Guru Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: In The Blue Corner... Posts: 7,266 vCash: 75	Re: Michael Watson v Carl Froch I think Watson could have taken Froch whenever he wanted too... Watson would have been far to technical for Froch and had power that could and would have sunk Froch...
Top

04-26-2010, 05:39 PM	#3
robpalmer135 Rage Rage East Side VIP Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: North London Posts: 14,383 vCash: 75	Re: Michael Watson v Carl Froch all respect to Watson but Froch was WBC world champion. Watson lost every time he stepped up to that level.
Top

04-26-2010, 06:24 PM	#7
atberry Belt holder ESB Addict Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 3,962 vCash: 1000	Re: Michael Watson v Carl Froch Watson was damn damn good against Don Lee, Errol Christie and Eubank the 2nd time. Offensively slipping inside jabs and doing damage with tight accurate shots, and either changing angle of his attack inside to let go more or tucking up beautifully to block anything. Just immense. Stiff and awkward, but tremendous timing too. That Watson beats Froch up.
Top

04-26-2010, 06:35 PM	#8
sugarsean Belt holder ESB Addict Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: England Posts: 2,381 vCash: 1057	Re: Michael Watson v Carl Froch Michael Watson was a great fighter watch his fight with McCallum, who was a top ten Pd 4 Pd fighter at the time, and is an all time great ring technican, even though Watson lost that fight, he gave McCallum a lot of problem's, it did'nt become onesided till the late rounds of the fight. Watson had a lot of skill. Anyway Watson would school Froch easy, Froch is way to open for a fighter as technical good as Watson.
Top

04-27-2010, 04:17 AM	#10
Flea Man มวยสากล East Side VIP Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: @ferociousflea Posts: 44,045 vCash: 75	Re: Michael Watson v Carl Froch wATSON WOULD COMPREHENSIVELY BEAT fROCHY, AND PROBABLY STOP HIM. (oops caps) Probably Kessler too, though I'd favour Kesslers fundementals to save him being stopped. Watson continues to be underrated.
Top

04-27-2010, 04:34 AM	#11
icemax Indian Red East Side VIP Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Yorkshire Posts: 18,274 vCash: 664	Re: Michael Watson v Carl Froch I'm sorry, and I know i'm going to get a lot of hate here but I think that you lads are in serious danger of completely overrating Watson. He was a decent fighter with good skills but his two best wins don't really justify some of the accolades that he is getting. Benn did his usual early career whirlwind routine, blew himself out and was put down by a lame jab he was so tired, and Errol Christie was at the end of his rope career wise...every other time he stepped up he got beat. Grahams performance against McCallum was significantly better than Watsons.
Top

04-27-2010, 10:43 AM	#13
jdawg Contender ESB Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: London Posts: 887 vCash: 500	Re: Michael Watson v Carl Froch Wouldnt say Watson's being overrated he was a very skilled figher. Even Eubank says he was beaten twice by Watson (bad decision and tragedy of course) and was out of the ring for over a year prior to the McCallum right and he was always a busy fighter. He takes the best of Benn's shots he can take Froch's and outpoint him comfortably for me
Top

04-27-2010, 10:46 AM	#14
Little Tyson Belt holder ESB Addict Join Date: Nov 2008 Posts: 2,857 vCash: 1284	Re: Michael Watson v Carl Froch Froch
Top

04-27-2010, 10:50 AM	#15
TFFP The Eskimo East Side VIP Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Reykjavík Posts: 30,371 vCash: 2500	Re: Michael Watson v Carl Froch Watson does get overrated at times but he was a lot better than Froch.
Top