Michael Watson vs Mikkel Kessler

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by SJS19, Feb 16, 2013.


  1. SJS19

    SJS19 Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    22,479
    14
    Jun 13, 2011
    @ 168 obviously.


    Who would you go with?
     
  2. sportofkings

    sportofkings Boxing Junkie banned

    12,368
    23
    Jul 21, 2010
    Great fight, id go for Kessler via close decision, Watson would give him serious trouble though.
     
  3. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    113,073
    48,246
    Mar 21, 2007
    Watson was something of a prisoner at 160lbs. When he moved up to 168lbs he was so good he was able to totally outfight Eubank. For a few rounds. Then he got Ko'd. Making sense of this? Good luck. I pick Watson, but who knows?
     
  4. SJS19

    SJS19 Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    22,479
    14
    Jun 13, 2011
    I watched the documentary 'Michael Watson - Fighting Back' earlier. Then a few of his fights. It was before my time, but shamefully I had no idea how good he was.

    The flip side of that is that I think a peak Kessler is under-rated these days.
     
  5. atberry

    atberry Boxing Junkie banned Full Member

    9,548
    20
    Sep 30, 2009
    Watson did far better against a fresh, strong Eubank than Kessler did against a faded, weak Calzaghe.

    Two different leagues.

    Watson all day, in 7-8 rounds most likely.
     
  6. atberry

    atberry Boxing Junkie banned Full Member

    9,548
    20
    Sep 30, 2009
    McCallum was four leagues above Mundine and that was a 60-40 fight after 10, despite Watson carrying 11 months of ring rust. Don Lee was streets more dangerous than a Marcus Beyer.

    Kessler is steady and tidy, but he ain't living with Watson at his best.
     
  7. SJS19

    SJS19 Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    22,479
    14
    Jun 13, 2011
    That's a stupid way of looking at it, in my eyes atleast.
     
  8. PowerPuncher

    PowerPuncher Loyal Member Full Member

    42,723
    269
    Jul 22, 2004
    Watson wins, just better all round
     
  9. Vysotsky

    Vysotsky Boxing Junkie banned

    12,797
    11
    Oct 14, 2009
    2007 Calzaghe faded and weak. Care to try and even remotely justify that claim.
     
  10. Boxed Ears

    Boxed Ears this my daddy's account (RIP daddy) Full Member

    56,206
    10,654
    Jul 28, 2009
    Atberry, what was that thing you just said about Eubank, again?
     
  11. PowerPuncher

    PowerPuncher Loyal Member Full Member

    42,723
    269
    Jul 22, 2004
    Calzaghe was physically past prime in '07, what was he 36?
     
  12. Vysotsky

    Vysotsky Boxing Junkie banned

    12,797
    11
    Oct 14, 2009
    35 but age alone doesnt prove anything. While he may not have been at his absolute physical peak its not like he was faded, his Bika and Lacy performances from the year before along with the Kessler fight itself are evidence of that. Granted i would have loved to see Calzaghe at that stage of his career without the hand problems.
     
  13. MAG1965

    MAG1965 Loyal Member banned

    34,796
    65
    Dec 1, 2008
    Very good fight. I go back and forth on this thinking about it. I suppose Watson by split decision.
     
  14. PowerPuncher

    PowerPuncher Loyal Member Full Member

    42,723
    269
    Jul 22, 2004
    Physically he wasn't as good anymore imo. I think in some ways he was sloppier too seeming to get hit more and yes the power wasn't there. He didn't look too good against Bika from my recollection
     
  15. Vysotsky

    Vysotsky Boxing Junkie banned

    12,797
    11
    Oct 14, 2009
    It was pretty sloppy and ugly for at least half of it (not quite as much as the Ward fight) but in the second half of the fight, may have only been the last 4 rounds or so i remember Joe really started to work Bika over on the inside and i found it very impressive. Slipping and rolling under shots at mid range and countering him with hard shots while roughing him up, somewhat like Ward vs Froch actually.