5 90s vs 2010s

Just for a bit of fun, here are some mythical matchups to ponder from the 1990s vs today:

Lennox Lewis vs Wladimir Klitschko (Heavyweight);
Oscar De La Hoya (1995) vs Brandon Rios (Lightweight);
James Toney (Circa 1992) vs Sergio Martinez (Middleweight);
Chris Eubank vs Carl Froch (Super-Middleweight);
Ike Quartey vs Andre Berto (Welterweight.)

Interested to see who you think wins and why; as I say, just a bit of fun!

Lewis knocks him out.
Oscar is far too quick and classy.
Toney to wear him down to take him out down the stretch.
Only guy I see with a chance is Froch, I think he has a chance close on points if he can stick to a game plan.
I think Quartey could stop Berto, too powerful and too good for someone so easy to hit.

Lewis is a fairly comfortable victor against Wladimir, I reckon. There's nothing that Klitschko can do that Lewis can't do better, and Wladimir wouldn't be looking for a one punch knockout. Lewis to win the battle of the jabs, wear Klitschko down and stop him in the mid-rounds.

De la Hoya simply outclasses Rios, for me. I haven't seen anything yet to suggest that Rios could handle De la Hoya's speed and power at 135 lb, where, even though he wasn't there all that long, De la Hoya looked masterful.

Toney is far too complete an all-round package for Martinez, I think. Looking for the big single shot against a counter-punching genius like Toney is a risky strategy and, as good as his recent form has been, I've seen nothing from Martinez to convince me that he has enough in his arsenal to outbox 'Lights Out.' Toney on points.

Eubank against Froch is a much tougher one to call. My gut feeling, though, is that Eubank would recover from a tough start and grow in to the fight more and more in the latter stages, eventually edging Froch on points.

Quartey stops Berto for me. Berto may be getting touted as the next big thing by some, but while he can punch and has strong potential, as it stands he's nowhere near elusive enough to stand for twelve rounds with a Welterweight who hits as hard as Quartey did. I think Quartey takes him out in the early rounds to be honest.

Good analysis, Chris.

And I see you are a fellow Forest fan!

I agree with all of your points; except I think Froch would outhustle Eubank down the stretch to take a very close points decision; due to his activity level. Although I acknowledge this one is incredibly close.

I agree that Berto is massively overhyped. I think Quartey is under-rated by some. I think he would beat a great many of the top fighters around now. He was huge for a Welterweight, with a superb jab. I think he takes Berto out in the middle rounds, after dominating him all the way.

I'd say that the '90s fighter sweep the board with the exception of Eubank v Froch.

I always loved Eubank, who was one of those for whom we had to throw away the text book in order to assess his gifts. The big problem, though, was that he was infuriatingly inconsistent, and we never knew which Eubank was going to show up for work. Froch, by comparison, strikes me as being an ultimate blue collar fighter - steady and reliable - and he might very well turn the trick for a points win. I'd see this as a pick 'em.

Good to see I'm not the only 'Tricky Tree' on v2, samevans1!

Looks like we're all pretty much agreed of four of the five, although while it's incredibly close it seems that I'm going slightly against the grain by picking Eubank (by the smallest of margins) over Froch.

While people are quite right to point to Eubank's inconsistency, the same accusation can probably be levelled at Froch, even if it is a bit harsh considering the opposition he's been facing in the last couple of years or so. In those fights he's looked a combination of brilliant (Pascal, Abraham), to limited at times and unable to up the pace when needed (Taylor, Kessler) and, in one instance, simply very average against Dirrell.

Both of them have been known to be slow starters now and then, which is why I think Eubank's stamina might be a key factor, as might his ability to take heavy shots and keep swinging back. When I look at the Eubank who out-gamed Benn and Watson in their first and second fights respectively, I'm not sure that Froch's solid but unspectacular punching and, at times, problems with stamina are going to deny him, and I also don't see Froch out-boxing Eubank from the outside.

As I said, there's a fair amount of gut feeling in it and the case for Froch is just as strong. But something tells me that Eubank might just have had a bit too much for 'The Cobra.' It's definitely the most interesting match up of the five though, and the hardest one to call.

Lewis beats Wladimir every time IMO. Could be a battle of the jabs, but wladimir is too cautious to take advantage of any of Lennox weaknesses ie dropping the left after throwing the jab. Lewis straight right and uppercut too much for wlad, Lewis stops him IMO - totally different class to anyone wlad has fought.

Oscar beats Rios. Only seen a little bit of Rios, looks like he can fight but can he box? Oscar could do both and was a big powerful lw. Oscar by stoppage.

Toney at his best is too fast and skilful for Martinez. Sergio may have taken Williams out but he's not a natural puncher and Toney was a class above in his prime. Toney UD.

Froch v Eubank is the hardest to call. Both very tough fighting men, both have good boxibg skills although froch hasn't always employed his as much as he should. Very hard to call but if eubank was at the top of his game - as he was when faced with his biggest challenges - I think he'd have enough to get a decision.

Berto remains unproven. Needs to step up his level of opposition. Not sure how fighting a guy who's been struggling to establish himself at 140 in Ortiz does anything to enhance Bertos WW pedigree. Berto looks a decent boxer puncher to me but nothing more. Quartey along with tito and Oscar was a top ww of a quality era, he good box and bang and I'd back him to take berto out - depending on bertos ability to take a shot, something that we've not yet seen. Just think bertos still too green for an operator like quartey.

"in one instance, simply very average against Dirrell."

Harsh. Tell me a guy who has looked good against such an efficient display of spoiling.

Nobody would have looked good against Dirrell; he reminds of a less talented version of Pernell Whitaker. Very difficult to fight.

Scott and Sam, in fairness I did say that pointing to Froch's inconsistency was probably a tad harsh, considering who he's been fighting. I wasn't impressed with Dirrell's performance, but even when he was 'running' rather than spoiling Froch looked utterly toothless, unable to close off ring space, and had no plan B. As I said, maybe a bit harsh and the Dirrell fight, in all honesty, probably has little relevance to a hypothetical match up with Eubank, but I can't pretend that Froch didn't struggle of look limited simply because I didn't like his opponent's style.

Dirrell's 'style' was blatant cheating, I wish referee's would punish holding more harshly.

The 90s fighters win them all and with comparitive ease. Eubank vs Froch would have been interesting. Are we referring to the pre Watson Eubank? If so, then easy win for Chris. Post watson then it would have been a pick em fight.

Morning Same

Lewis v Wlad: Can only see it going one way that's to Lennox, does that every thing a bit better than Wlad, with a bit extra pop.

De La Hoya v Rios: As the other mentioned can only see this as a demolition job for Oscar, Rios would have to absorb a frantically high amount of punches, to even come close to forcing his gameplan, Oscar TKO for me.

Froch v Eubank: Intruiging battle but I think Froch wins this by a good 4 rounds. Eubank will stick with him and will give him trouble but I pick Froch, just that bit more reliable for me.

Toney v Martinez: I'd pick Toney but a little uneasy at doing this as James could turn in some awful performances especially when he was troubled by making weight at Middle, I'll base the predictions as both having there best night so in that case I take Toney down the stretch.

Quartey v Berto: Quartey was a big strong Welter, Berto is yet to convince me, so I'll go with the other lads and say Quartey takes Berto out 8-10 rounds.

Cheers

Rodders

. Are we referring to the pre Watson Eubank? If so, then easy win for Chris.
__________________________________

Think many get carried away with Chris if I'm honest, bar the first Benn fight cant say Eubank beat any fighters then calibre Carl has beaten.

I think Froch would have to have an awful night for Eubank to beat him I really do.

Cheers

Rodders

Eubank had problems with pressure fighters who had speed. Froch, whilst being no slouch, was not that fast either. I see Eubank picking him apart as he came in. Dont forget that Eubank had an excellent jab and when fighters moved in towards him was at his best.

azania wrote:Eubank had problems with pressure fighters who had speed. Froch, whilst being no slouch, was not that fast either. I see Eubank picking him apart as he came in. Dont forget that Eubank had an excellent jab and when fighters moved in towards him was at his best.

Azania

Although he had a good jab, he was far too lazy to completely neutralize Froch with this, I think Froch would have a field day down the stretch with Eubank I really do. Fail to see what Chris does better than Froch, difference between the two is Froch's intensity and better boxing brain IMO.

Cheers Rodders

Rodney wrote:

azania wrote:Eubank had problems with pressure fighters who had speed. Froch, whilst being no slouch, was not that fast either. I see Eubank picking him apart as he came in. Dont forget that Eubank had an excellent jab and when fighters moved in towards him was at his best.

Azania

Although he had a good jab, he was far too lazy to completely neutralize Froch with this, I think Froch would have a field day down the stretch with Eubank I really do. Fail to see what Chris does better than Froch, difference between the two is Froch's intensity and better boxing brain IMO.

Cheers Rodders

Eubank was the type of fighter who was "up" when the challenge was greater. Often he stooped to the level of his opponent who he knew he could beat. Look at his fight with the German guy in Germany (Rocchiaginni or something like that). Totally outclassed him. Also the two Benn fights and the Watson fights. He would view Froch as a challenge and up his game accordingly.

Understand what you saying Azania, but considering Watson should've got the nod in the first fight, Benn in the second. I dont feel Eubank's bes t is enough to beat Froch, it would be close and interesting, but just feel Froch all wrong for Chris.

Cheers

Rodders

Rodney wrote:Understand what you saying Azania, but considering Watson should've got the nod in the first fight, Benn in the second. I dont feel Eubank's bes t is enough to beat Froch, it would be close and interesting, but just feel Froch all wrong for Chris.

Cheers

Rodders

I wouldn't put Froch in the same class as Benn and Watson.

Froch is clearly in the same class as Benn, Watson, Collins and Eubank. Whether he'd beat them or not is another matter. I think Benn and Eubank both had an 'x factor' that would have been too much for Froch

I don't see who Benn or Watson beat to rank higher than Froch

Benn- Mclellan, De Witt, Barkley and Malinga
Watson- Benn
Froch- Magee, Reid, Pascal, Taylor, Dirrell and Abraham

Froch is miles ahead for me now

Lennox Lewis vs Wladimir Klitschko (Heavyweight); - Lennox on points / cuts - but very competitive even with Lewis in his prime.

Oscar De La Hoya (1995) vs Brandon Rios (Lightweight); - ODLH wins by KO
James Toney (Circa 1992) vs Sergio Martinez (Middleweight); - Toney to quick and skilled, wins wide UD
Chris Eubank vs Carl Froch (Super-Middleweight); - Froch on close points win, maybe SD
Ike Quartey vs Andre Berto (Welterweight.) - Berto is untested / unproven so far so would lean toward Quartey winning on points.


Boxing Challenges

imperialghosty wrote:I don't see who Benn or Watson beat to rank higher than Froch

Benn- Mclellan, De Witt, Barkley and Malinga
Watson- Benn
Froch- Magee, Reid, Pascal, Taylor, Dirrell and Abraham

Froch is miles ahead for me now

Do you think Malellan would be beaten by Froch? I reckon he would have blown Froch away. Discount Malinga as I believed he beat Benn twice. He was all wrong for Benn.

Watson beat a very good Don Lee.

Both Benn and Watson would have taken apart all the names Froch beat. Benn would have struggled more as he had issues with boxers but would have prevailed nevertheless. Watson would have had a field day on all the names.

Benn and Watson to easily beat Pascal, Taylor, etc?

I'm not so sure.

Also not sure about McLellan blowing away Froch. He was a murderous puncher. But Froch is the naturally bigger man and has displayed an excellent chin throughout his career. Think I'd back him to outlast McLellan and stop him late.

Yeah ok, I saw nothing in Watson to garner such high praise, if he was that good he wouldn't have lost so decisively to a 34 year old McCallum, your putting him on a pedastal he's not worthy of. A great man i'll admit who's overcome adversity but a great fighter? No

Benn had a chance to beat those guys of course especially after outlasting Mclellan but he was never great against technical boxers so would have to give the edge to Taylor and Dirrell

And yes I do think Froch would beat Mclellan for the simple reason he has a superb chin and can take a better punch than Benn could

imperialghosty wrote:Yeah ok, I saw nothing in Watson to garner such high praise, if he was that good he wouldn't have lost so decisively to a 34 year old McCallum, your putting him on a pedastal he's not worthy of. A great man i'll admit who's overcome adversity but a great fighter? No

Benn had a chance to beat those guys of course especially after outlasting Mclellan but he was never great against technical boxers so would have to give the edge to Taylor and Dirrell

And yes I do think Froch would beat Mclellan for the simple reason he has a superb chin and can take a better punch than Benn could

Maybe I do have a bias towards Watson. He is a friend of mine from school days. But a 34year old McCullum would have beaten any active middleweight when he beat Watson. And lets not forget that Mike was coming off a 12 month lay off due to a contractual dispute with Duff. Having said that I reckon Watson would have beaten all those Froch has beaten and he wouldn't have allowed Taylor such a lead going into the final round.

Should point out that Taylor was a former undisputed Middleweight champion, neither Watson or Benn have beaten anyone with that sort of accolade on their record.

How does Watson beat all of those mentioned?

Dont agree Watson beats Pascal or Taylor; probably also disagree with him beating Abraham too.

imperialghosty wrote:Should point out that Taylor was a former undisputed Middleweight champion, neither Watson or Benn have beaten anyone with that sort of accolade on their record.

How does Watson beat all of those mentioned?

Come on ghosty. You know as well as I do that being a former champ means nothing. The fact that he was a former champ means he lost the title. In fact I'd go as far as to say that the fights with Abraham and the two he lost to the middleweight champ sapped his confidence as well as his boxing abilities.

McLellan would hae destroyed Taylow imo.

Watson was a very intelligent boxer imo. He could brawl and box at a distance. His chin was made of iron taking fearsome punches from Benn and Eubank. Froch is also clever but lacks the power of Benn and the speed of punch of both Benn and Eubank. A peak Calzaghe would have slapped his way to a UD over both Benn and Watson, but not froch who would have lost to both.

samevans1 wrote:Dont agree Watson beats Pascal or Taylor; probably also disagree with him beating Abraham too.

I dont see anything special about Taylor (who lost to Pavlik, Abraham) and Pascal or Abraham. AA thrives on his punching power and is small for a SM anyway. Ward would have given Watson fits and probably scored a UD over him.

You keep saying destroyed, what does that even mean?

Taylor beat an ATG twice to win the middleweight crown so him being a champion is quite a big deal and he did lose to Froch before Abraham so thats a null point.

What things would Watson do to beat Froch, you still haven't answered that yet. Calzaghe is an irrelevance in this because talent wise he was so far ahead of any other british Super Middleweight.

Abraham may be small for a Super Middleweight but Watson himself was only a Middleweight

imperialghosty wrote:Abraham may be small for a Super Middleweight but Watson himself was only a Middleweight

To make weight for most of his fights he literally had to go without food for 2 days and certainly no liquid the day of weigh in. He boiled down and the extra 8 pounds for the SM division was a god send for him. He probably would have been a decent sized LHW. In short Watson was a huge SMW.

But at the same he wasn't used to fighting people with the added 8 pounds so it's hard to tell how he'd have done against them

1. Lewis wins a clear UD in the 'Battle of the Jabs'.
2. De la Hoya is raging that i picked up his book in the pound shop and stops Rios late.
3. Toney schools Martinez on route to a clear UD.
4. Eubank nicks it in a all out war.
5. Quartey destroys the Berto.

Why do people think wlad has much of a chance? He has a glass jaw and one bomb from lewis and its lights out! Lewis does everything klitchsko does far better its a mismatch.

imperialghosty wrote:But at the same he wasn't used to fighting people with the added 8 pounds so it's hard to tell how he'd have done against them

True. But he was very weak at the division (MW) so the added 8lbs made him stronger as shown in Eubank 2 fight where he fought like a man possessed. During their first fight he was gassed after 6 rounds (his words) thru the problems making weight. Similarly with the McCallum fight he was gassed at a similar round. It didn't help that MM was a murderous body puncher which sapped more of his energies. Having said that I doubt very much if Watson could have beaten MM at any weight. MM was that good. Its no suprise that the 4 (SRL. Hagler et al) all stayed clear of MM.

MM was a great fighter. Probably the best LMW of all time.

Your opinion is valid Azania as you clearly know what you are talking about re Watson; but I think Froch is also a big SMW. He hits harder, has faced better opposition and is more durable than Watson. I see Froch by late stoppage of decision in a fairly close fight if both men were at their best.

samevans1 wrote:MM was a great fighter. Probably the best LMW of all time.

Your opinion is valid Azania as you clearly know what you are talking about re Watson; but I think Froch is also a big SMW. He hits harder, has faced better opposition and is more durable than Watson. I see Froch by late stoppage of decision in a fairly close fight if both men were at their best.

Froch has a very leaky defence. His reflexes are not good enough for a boxer like Watson who would have been all over him like a rash. Watson had a very good defence and changed tactics to suit every fighter he faced (nothing would have helped him against MM). I cant see Froch beating him over anything. Froch is good but as Kessler and Taylor fights proved he can be beaten if you employ the right tactic. I would also say that Watson beats Kessler 9 out of 10 times.

McCallum, Eubank and Cook all prove that Watson was very beatable

Have to give the edge to Froch who has beaten better opposition than any of the early 90's lot. Taylor at the time would have been a nightmare for anyone with his hand speed and sound technical ability, your not telling me that someone capable of beating Hopkins twice gets beaten by Watson, Benn or Eubank

Bad picks for the 2010s.

imperialghosty wrote:McCallum, Eubank and Cook all prove that Watson was very beatable

Have to give the edge to Froch who has beaten better opposition than any of the early 90's lot. Taylor at the time would have been a nightmare for anyone with his hand speed and sound technical ability, your not telling me that someone capable of beating Hopkins twice gets beaten by Watson, Benn or Eubank

MM and Eubank are far better than anyone Froch has fought. Cook was a bad loss for Watson in his 8th fight where he didn't train much but never made any excuses. Lost to a better man on the day and was the best thing that cood have happened (obviously before that uppercut). As for the 1st Eubank fight, most impartial observers had Mike winning. Was winning the 2nd before a ref error and a huge uppercut turned everything around.

Taylor was also comming to straight ko losses to a very average Pavlik and a horrendous KO loss to AA, so using him as a benchmark is pointless.

Who would you pick Green Giant?

But simply put Froch has beaten better people than Watson did

Think your being far too harsh on Frochs opponents here and over rating Eubank and Watson ridiculously

We all have favourite fighters; let's agree to disagree.

Good debate though lads.

imperialghosty wrote:But simply put Froch has beaten better people than Watson did

Think your being far too harsh on Frochs opponents here and over rating Eubank and Watson ridiculously

I dont think Froch has beaten anyone near as good as Benn was. Also imo Watson beat Eubank in their first fight. Who has Carl fought who matches those two? Pascal was good, but I reckon Benn would have Ko him. Kessler...no comment. Direll? Close but doubtful if he would have troubled Benn, Eubank or Watson. AA I never really rated. Schooled by both Dirrell and Froch whilst relying on landing one ko punch.

Pascal, Taylor and Abraham are all top fighters.

Froch has beaten most of the top fighters he has faced. Watson lost to most of them.

I think Dirrell would outbox Benn relatively easily if i'm honest, beyond his antics he's a very talented boxer who would make Benn miss over and over again, while punishing him at the same time.
Kessler I think proved in his loss against Calzaghe that he's an elite Super Middleweight so losing to him in a close fight isn't a huge deal.
Benn, Eubank and Watson were all good domestic champions but never proved themselves at world level like the others mentioned have, they made their names fighting eachother.

samevans1 wrote:Pascal, Taylor and Abraham are all top fighters.

Froch has beaten most of the top fighters he has faced. Watson lost to most of them.

the top fighters Watson lost to (Cook exception) would have beaten the best of today. Taylor was ko'd 3 times before Froch finished him. And KO'd very badly also. Pascal was a good win but Eubank takes Pascal and Benn KO's him as he leaves his chin hanging out to be hit. AA is an average boxer and not strong enough for SMW.

You are wrong, Azania; Taylor had only been stopped once, by Pavlik; prior to Froch beating him.