Carl Froch vs the best of British part 1: Chris Eubank

How would Froch have fared vs a prime Eubank?

Poll ended at 08 Jun 2013, 08:33

Froch Points
27
38%
Froch KO/TKO
2
3%
Eubank Points
35
49%
Eubank KO/TKO
7
10%
 
Total votes: 71

black panther
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 4098
Joined: 11 Dec 2003, 07:06

Carl Froch vs the best of British part 1: Chris Eubank

Post by black panther »

Carl Froch has recently claimed to be one of the best British fighters ever. I agree he is one of our greats but I feel he's got some way to go before being called the best British fighter ever (still got, amongst others, Ted Lewis, Jimmy Wilde, Lennox Lewis ahead). I thought it would be interesting to see people's opinion on how Froch would have fared against the best super middleweights we've produced starting with Christopher Livingstone Eubank:

http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_id=804&cat=boxer


They actually have many similarities; a cast iron chin, the ability to box on the back foot as well as brawl and physical strength. For me Eubank was the slightly bigger puncher: his overhand right put quite a few fellows to sleep where as Froch usually gets the job done with a barrage of punches.

I could see Froch taking a tight decision based on workrate. However, I'd imagine he'd have some hairy moments and might have had to get up of the canvas to win. How do you see it?
polecateddy
Heavyweight
Heavyweight

Re: Carl Froch vs the best of British part 1: Chris Eubank

Post by polecateddy »

Eubank at his peak, well before the Calzaghe and Collins fights would have been relatively even. An overly aggressive approach by Froch may have even played into Eubanks counter-punching hands. Most pundits would probably play safe and say Froch by a close UD. Maybe, maybe not!
daviddee
Super Middleweight
Posts: 1574
Joined: 01 Feb 2012, 14:32

Re: Carl Froch vs the best of British part 1: Chris Eubank

Post by daviddee »

Eubank would have won by Unanimous points decision prob 3-4 rounds
NazNaci1
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 4533
Joined: 26 Mar 2009, 00:58

Re: Carl Froch vs the best of British part 1: Chris Eubank

Post by NazNaci1 »

Eubank was a hard, hard man. No one KO's him. He really would put dents in Froch. Eubank had great power, just lacked a bit of technique. This would be a tough fight for both, just not sure if Froch has enough about him to hold off what Eubank could put on him. As i said, Eubank put dents in people.
jessi
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 3008
Joined: 11 Jul 2010, 11:59

Re: Carl Froch vs the best of British part 1: Chris Eubank

Post by jessi »

bengulnaci1 wrote:Eubank was a hard, hard man. No one KO's him. He really would put dents in Froch. Eubank had great power, just lacked a bit of technique. This would be a tough fight for both, just not sure if Froch has enough about him to hold off what Eubank could put on him. As i said, Eubank put dents in people.
Yes but calzaghe put him on his arse, has froch ever been put down ?
NazNaci1
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 4533
Joined: 26 Mar 2009, 00:58

Re: Carl Froch vs the best of British part 1: Chris Eubank

Post by NazNaci1 »

jessi wrote:
bengulnaci1 wrote:Eubank was a hard, hard man. No one KO's him. He really would put dents in Froch. Eubank had great power, just lacked a bit of technique. This would be a tough fight for both, just not sure if Froch has enough about him to hold off what Eubank could put on him. As i said, Eubank put dents in people.
Yes but calzaghe put him on his arse, has froch ever been put down ?
So did Watson, so what? Eubank was never hurt. Never. He hurt Calzaghe in those last 15 second more than Calzaghe has even been hurt.

Taylor dropped Froch but none of this is really relevant. I still stand by what I said.
mickey1975
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 23181
Joined: 02 Mar 2009, 12:54

Re: Carl Froch vs the best of British part 1: Chris Eubank

Post by mickey1975 »

jessi wrote:
bengulnaci1 wrote:Eubank was a hard, hard man. No one KO's him. He really would put dents in Froch. Eubank had great power, just lacked a bit of technique. This would be a tough fight for both, just not sure if Froch has enough about him to hold off what Eubank could put on him. As i said, Eubank put dents in people.
Yes but calzaghe put him on his arse, has froch ever been put down ?
Taylor floored Carl a hell of a lot heavier than Joe did Chris.
tonyevs
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5845
Joined: 08 Feb 2004, 18:13

Re: Carl Froch vs the best of British part 1: Chris Eubank

Post by tonyevs »

Froch`s aggression plays into Eubanks hands. Sooner or later, Froch walks onto one of those looping right handers .. the low left hand of Froch practically guarantees it.

Eubank gets a stoppage.
banjo
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 26472
Joined: 20 Nov 2007, 03:17

Re: Carl Froch vs the best of British part 1: Chris Eubank

Post by banjo »

jessi wrote:
bengulnaci1 wrote:Eubank was a hard, hard man. No one KO's him. He really would put dents in Froch. Eubank had great power, just lacked a bit of technique. This would be a tough fight for both, just not sure if Froch has enough about him to hold off what Eubank could put on him. As i said, Eubank put dents in people.
Yes but calzaghe put him on his arse, has froch ever been put down ?
Jermain Taylor who isn't noted for his punching power had Carl down and hurt.
lillywhite14
Heavyweight
Heavyweight

Re: Carl Froch vs the best of British part 1: Chris Eubank

Post by lillywhite14 »

There isn't a KO in this one that's for sure.

Would be a cracker. Prime for prime? Eubank, but then again prime for prime I think Eubank actually beats Calzaghe.
NazNaci1
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 4533
Joined: 26 Mar 2009, 00:58

Re: Carl Froch vs the best of British part 1: Chris Eubank

Post by NazNaci1 »

lillywhite14 wrote:There isn't a KO in this one that's for sure.

Would be a cracker. Prime for prime? Eubank, but then again prime for prime I think Eubank actually beats Calzaghe.
I concur.
Trojans44
Cruiserweight
Posts: 352
Joined: 23 Sep 2010, 14:05

Re: Carl Froch vs the best of British part 1: Chris Eubank

Post by Trojans44 »

Can anyone direct me to a top level victory Froch has where his opponent didn't walk straight forward? I think Eubank would win fairly handily.
n1ebf
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 4267
Joined: 20 Sep 2007, 10:33

Re: Carl Froch vs the best of British part 1: Chris Eubank

Post by n1ebf »

bengulnaci1 wrote:
lillywhite14 wrote:There isn't a KO in this one that's for sure.

Would be a cracker. Prime for prime? Eubank, but then again prime for prime I think Eubank actually beats Calzaghe.
I concur.
:lol: :lol: :lol:
NazNaci1
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 4533
Joined: 26 Mar 2009, 00:58

Re: Carl Froch vs the best of British part 1: Chris Eubank

Post by NazNaci1 »

NorthEastBoxingFan wrote:
bengulnaci1 wrote:
lillywhite14 wrote:There isn't a KO in this one that's for sure.

Would be a cracker. Prime for prime? Eubank, but then again prime for prime I think Eubank actually beats Calzaghe.
I concur.
:lol: :lol: :lol:
???
stevieb_8006
Heavyweight
Heavyweight

Re: Carl Froch vs the best of British part 1: Chris Eubank

Post by stevieb_8006 »

I think chris would make it boring. people tend to forget the snoozers he served up during his title reign, and the dodgy decisions. Carl takes it on points, outworking chris similar to the second Collins fight.
the truth
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 759
Joined: 12 Dec 2009, 11:54

Re: Carl Froch vs the best of British part 1: Chris Eubank

Post by the truth »

bengulnaci1 wrote:
jessi wrote:
bengulnaci1 wrote:Eubank was a hard, hard man. No one KO's him. He really would put dents in Froch. Eubank had great power, just lacked a bit of technique. This would be a tough fight for both, just not sure if Froch has enough about him to hold off what Eubank could put on him. As i said, Eubank put dents in people.
Yes but calzaghe put him on his arse, has froch ever been put down ?
So did Watson, so what? Eubank was never hurt. Never. He hurt Calzaghe in those last 15 second more than Calzaghe has even been hurt.

Taylor dropped Froch but none of this is really relevant. I still stand by what I said.

Never hurt? Your an idiot
NazNaci1
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 4533
Joined: 26 Mar 2009, 00:58

Re: Carl Froch vs the best of British part 1: Chris Eubank

Post by NazNaci1 »

the truth wrote:
bengulnaci1 wrote:So did Watson, so what? Eubank was never hurt. Never. He hurt Calzaghe in those last 15 second more than Calzaghe has even been hurt.

Taylor dropped Froch but none of this is really relevant. I still stand by what I said.
Never hurt? Your an idiot
Clever, witty and honest.....I like this guy.
fasteddie
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 812
Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 21:40

Re: Carl Froch vs the best of British part 1: Chris Eubank

Post by fasteddie »

eubank was one of the best of our time,he was a good mover could box and probably had the best chin in the world of boxing in the early 90's only james toney had a chin as good as eubank,i think he would out smart froch
fasteddie
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 812
Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 21:40

Re: Carl Froch vs the best of British part 1: Chris Eubank

Post by fasteddie »

banjo wrote:
jessi wrote:
bengulnaci1 wrote:Eubank was a hard, hard man. No one KO's him. He really would put dents in Froch. Eubank had great power, just lacked a bit of technique. This would be a tough fight for both, just not sure if Froch has enough about him to hold off what Eubank could put on him. As i said, Eubank put dents in people.
Yes but calzaghe put him on his arse, has froch ever been put down ?
Jermain Taylor who isn't noted for his punching power had Carl down and hurt.
isnt kessler,abraham,johnson,reid known as power punchers??? taylor just caught froch in the right place. this was the first time EVER froch had touched the canvas and guess what??? froch showed the heart of a champion and got up to k.o taylor
banjo
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 26472
Joined: 20 Nov 2007, 03:17

Re: Carl Froch vs the best of British part 1: Chris Eubank

Post by banjo »

fasteddie wrote:
banjo wrote: Jermain Taylor who isn't noted for his punching power had Carl down and hurt.
isnt kessler,abraham,johnson,reid known as power punchers??? taylor just caught froch in the right place. this was the first time EVER froch had touched the canvas and guess what??? froch showed the heart of a champion and got up to k.o taylor
Sorry, the way I've worded it is wrong, you've kind of made my point, it doesn't matter how hard you hit them it's where you hit them that matters take Julian Jackson as an example some of his most spectacular KO's came from ordinary looking punches but they were landing in the right place, big punchers Nigel Benn and Carl Thompson couldn't knock Eubank down in over 40 rounds of boxing(the slip in the first Benn fight doesn't count) whereas Calzaghe who isn't noted as a big hitter decked him with pretty much the first punch he landed.
Mimmy
Heavyweight
Heavyweight

Re: Carl Froch vs the best of British part 1: Chris Eubank

Post by Mimmy »

I think a lot of people do not appreciate how hard Eubank was. You have to put Chris in the top 5 all time super middleweights. Froch well top 20.
Bard of Boxrec
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 13114
Joined: 22 Feb 2002, 20:00

Re: Carl Froch vs the best of British part 1: Chris Eubank

Post by Bard of Boxrec »

Eubank would obviously have been very game but Froch is too busy for him.
polecateddy
Heavyweight
Heavyweight

Re: Carl Froch vs the best of British part 1: Chris Eubank

Post by polecateddy »

mimmy123 wrote:I think a lot of people do not appreciate how hard Eubank was. You have to put Chris in the top 5 all time super middleweights. Froch well top 20.
No credible boxing mag or pundit would rate Carl and Chris anything like that. Towards to end of Joe Calzaghe's career I recall Boxing Monthly did a big article on the top ten. From memory Roy Jones was number one, and Joe number two. I suspect that may now be reversed, Ward is poised around 3 ready to potentially move up, and Froch prob 5th or 6th behind perhaps James Toney. Eubank wouldn't be top ten, prob top 15.
expe
Super Middleweight
Posts: 6871
Joined: 07 Oct 2012, 10:10

Re: Carl Froch vs the best of British part 1: Chris Eubank

Post by expe »

bengulnaci1 wrote:
the truth wrote:
bengulnaci1 wrote:So did Watson, so what? Eubank was never hurt. Never. He hurt Calzaghe in those last 15 second more than Calzaghe has even been hurt.

Taylor dropped Froch but none of this is really relevant. I still stand by what I said.
Never hurt? Your an idiot
Clever, witty and honest.....I like this guy.
I think he knows a little bit more about boxing than you.
lillywhite14
Heavyweight
Heavyweight

Re: Carl Froch vs the best of British part 1: Chris Eubank

Post by lillywhite14 »

It's amusing reading that people think one of these elite guys would ' school ' or ' destroy ' one of the others ( bar Jones of course he would have schooled them all, Calzaghe included )
We are talking fine margins at this level.
Post Reply