BoxRec

his commentating during the barrios-guzman fight was terrible. he was so biased towards guzman and never acknowledged any of the left hooks barrioswas catching guzman with on the ropes. the fight was much closer than he was making it out to be. He just mentioned how good guzman was the whole way through, very frustrating.

To an extent I agree with you. It was as if Watt gave rounds just based on Guzman's class. Fact was Guzman got lazy and ate lots of left hooks. He took the sting out of them, and he did the better overall work. & i didn't have it as close as the judges. But Guzman let the judges think it was a draw or a loss without the point.

boxerrob2005 wrote:his commentating during the barrios-guzman fight was terrible. he was so biased towards guzman and never acknowledged any of the left hooks barrioswas catching guzman with on the ropes. the fight was much closer than he was making it out to be. He just mentioned how good guzman was the whole way through, very frustrating.

Yeah, I do agree. Guzman was excellent against a very good champion but his defense wasn't as good as what Watt made out it to be. It was still a better commentary than how two of the judges saw it.

Watt was good for the other fights IMO, but didn't give Barrios the credit.

yeah it just seemed no matter what guzman did watt was going to praise it but the right man won. yeh and his commenating was good in the other fights, he just just already had it in his head that guzman was the better man before the first bell.

I thought the same. He ignored a hell of a lot of what Barrios was doing. Okay, Guzman was winning the fight and boxing beautifully at times, but he was just blatantly ignoring Barrios' successes at times. Very annoying.

Mybe I watched another fight but Barrios had very little success... he mainly hit Guzman when Guzman allowed him too... Guzman tired a little in the late rounds but the scoring was outrageous... Watt is the best Comentator around now, he may not always be 100% right but who is?...

Disagree.Though i feel his commentating at times can be biased.In this particular fight i thought he was on point in his judgement.Though i acknowledge Barrios did take 2 maybe 3 rounds on pure grit and will,all the class and accuracy came from Guzman.For those who are saying he got lazy, do you really expect him to maintain the ferocious pace he set from the first.Personally i thought he looked a class act.He showed speed, power, accuracy, footwork, defence, aggression, balance and stamina.A new star!
The Judges should be shown the door.

The judging last night was frightening... they even made the Barrera fight close!...

At least Jim actualy knows what he's watching, whereas ol' Adam Smith hasn't a clue half the time - "Barrera is thinking more in this fight...good tactics Jim?"

And when Vasquez got floored first time round, and looked clear eyed and right as rain, Smith says he looks badly hurt....which he clearly wasn't and almost took of Jhonny's head a few seconds later.

I think Jim Watt is an outstanding commontator.

He isn't perfect but who is? all in all he usually does a great job.

I watched Guzman-Barrios again. & I scored it this time. Before, I had a feeling that Guzman was letting Barrios into it mid fight. But on 2nd review, I had Guzman winning at least 9-3 in rounds.

However, it goes to show that apparent laziness doesn't go down well with judges.

You were right, Jim

jim's a top commentator

definitely the best out there just now!

I thought Jim had it pretty right to be honest. Guzman finished nearly all the exchanges with authority. He was clearly the man in charge. I gave Barrios a bit more than Jim (4 rounds in total) but the Guzman win was pretty emphatic to me.

I was staggered that one judge gave it to Barrios.

Yeah Guzman lost 3 or 4 rounds through laziness but it's not unfair to say he was in charge throughout the fight, coming off stronger after every exchange, rolling with most of Barrios' shots and taking the ones he landed flush very well. Though Watt did ignore some good work by Barrios he was correct in Guzman being in control throughout. Would love to know the rounds the 90 year old gave to Barrios

Normally I like what but his inanae confuised ramblings during the MAB fight got on my tits.

"You cant blame the crowd for booing Marco, then 2 rounds later can you blame Marco for stayign clear"

make your fornicating mind up will you and stick to it instead of fence sitting and contradicting yourself every other round. Either that or or just shut up.

"eeeerrrrrrmmmmm punches".

Love it.

I normally quite like Watt and often agree with his scoring but in this bout I thought he was overly bias towards Guzman. Both him and Smith were blatantly ignoring cleanly landed punches from Barrios and refused to commentate upon them. I thought the fight was closer than they made out and had Guzman winning 115-112.

Jim Watt's ok - though he is sometimes slow to change his analysis when a fight changes course.

Adam Smith is obviously the problem here. His commentary over the weekend was again woeful. It sounds like he has written all his excitable babble in advance - any connnection to actual events in the ring is merely coincidental.

He always does something like "And so now this ring legend yet again proves his class, circling round the ring like a python, how impressive is this Jim?" meanwhile both fighters will have engaged in a burst of close range action on the ropes with not even one of those punches picked up by Smith.

For godsakes Sky if you must keep him on give Smith the Dempsey job and lets have a proper commentator in for the fights that Darke can't do.

Well said Adam Smith is woeful and always is.

Agree with that, can't stand Smith and HIS. ONE. WORD. SENTANCES.

Although he did say in round 12 of the Guzman fight to let the action speak for itself which was great and doesn't happen enough...then Watt decided to talk crap all the way through it. They just feel that they have to be talking constantly.

Lenny Albert wrote:Agree with that, can't stand Smith and HIS. ONE. WORD. SENTANCES.
Although he did say in round 12 of the Guzman fight to let the action speak for itself which was great and doesn't happen enough...then Watt decided to talk crap all the way through it. They just feel that they have to be talking constantly.

I think he's toned it down now. Unless. I've. just. got. used. to. it.
At any rate, I think the ideal broadcast team is Darke & Watt. They're usually a class above.

Still, give me any members of the Sky team over the HBO or Showtime crews, as they're a bit OTT & condescending. I don't mind Kellerman & Lennox, however.

Adam Smith is embarrassing.

I hope he has re-watched tapes of Naz/Sanchez & Williams/Potter and realised how much his screeching ruined those fights.

I thought Watt was shit during that fight. He was definitely in love Guzman and didn't give Barrios any credit for his workrate. He was even praising Guzman when Guzman went to sleep and took rounds off. I had Guzman winning by three or four points, not eight.

Terence wrote:It is a shock when you watch old fights. Minutes of silence then the announcer actually describes a decent blow and then shuts up.

That Colonel guy is the biggest pain. Does he get paid by the word or what?

He's a real pain in the neck. I think he had a heart attack during a broadcast & can see why. What peeves me is he does all the international feeds, for fights that don't get shown on US TV. So when you find someone who has a copy of, say, Briggs-Adamek or whatever rarity, you just know you're going to get a load of insidious babble.

Lay off the Red Bull & Vodka, 'Colonel'