Froch vs. Dawson @ 175.

[UglyPug]

I think Dawson gets way too much credit. . . He beat Johnson about the same as Froch beat him the second time, but the first time he arguably GOT BEAT by him.

Against a common opponent, pascal, Froch won a clear, but somewhat close decision, whereas he took dawson for a nice ride on DAI'ELLO BUSS. . . He made Dawson look slow, unathletic, uncoordinated, and just downright bad. . . He showed he couldn't deal with a fighter who makes adjustments, and who moves around. . . He has only beat fighters who come in straight lines. . .

Dirrell is light years faster than Dawson. . . Just look at how slow Pascal made him look? And look how Froch matched Pascal's speed. . .

Froch is a natural born fighter, whereas Dawson has been molded into one. . . Dawson cannot make adjustments, whereas Froch has only been getting better and better at making adjustments. . . Froch can "read and react" - Dawson cannot. . .

EIther way this fight is not a one sided fight. . . But I definitely favor Froch around a 116-112 decision. . .

[UglyPug]

Objectively Tarver, Johnson (at that time) and Adamek are better than anyone on Froch's resume.

Johnson was no better then, than he is now. .. he looks pretty much the same. . . If anything, he was better against Froch coming off two KO wins with full confidence. . And half boxing analysts feel he BEAT Dawson the first time.

Tarver was struggling to make the weight and completely unmotivated. .. And Dawson only won like 8 rounds to 4. . . Adamek was cutting mad weight. . .

and I think you mean subjectively. . . Essentially, NOTHING in boxing is objective, especially when comparing and contrasting fighters.

[Jack Napier]

Dawson takes Froch to school
just like Ward is going to

[Alx.]

rooting for froch but dawson wins 7 rounds to 5

[Joe2608]

Dawson would box Froch's ears off, and i'm a fan of Froch!

Unless Froch pulls off a boxing masterclass against Ward then i don't see him beating someone as fast and skilled as Dawson.

[Rome-By-Ko]

Froch is athletic. . . He is just as athletic as Dawson . . not as fast, but has better reflexes and better, more coordinated feet. . . Also a lot more intelligent in the ring and able to adapt.

I thought Dawson looked very unathletic compared to Pascal, who is athletic. . .

I guess I think Froch's style is one that can beat a "one plan" type of fighter like Dawson who can't make adjustments. . .

Footwork I agree,but I don't think he is as athletic as Dawson tho..Froch is a well rounded fighter with a great chin..Dawson is a talented fighter who has not put it all together yet..I don't know if he every will either,Pascal also was more athletic then Froch..But he does not take a shot as well as Froch which is a big reason why he lost to him(imo)..It's not that I doubt Froch could win,I'm a fan I always side with Froch..But if he could beat Ward(and I do think he is going to beat Ward)I would be way more confident he beats Dawson...

[UglyPug]

I can live with somebody having an opinion of Dawson beating Froch 7 rounds to 5, or maybe 8 to 4. . . but "schooling him" and "shutting him out" I just gotta LOL at. . . Especially based on their performances against a common opponent.

[Scary]

Dawson is on my prospect list for money betting. I usually call them overhyped gentlemen pretty easily.

Dawson is definitely one of them.

wait for it.

Froch takes it too. He's too smart and Dawson seems more or less ****** inside the ring, even lazy at some points.

[SUPREME.]

LOL ts is a clown.

Froch who struggled with Taylor, Johnson, Dirrell and Kessler and who will be schooled by Ward is going to beat the best 175 pounder?

He must be in some kind of denial.

[-Kev-]

Froch already went life and death and lost against the only technical fighter he fought, Mikkel Kessler. I had him clearly losing the Dirrell fight, who's a very good boxer, but Dawson is better than both. Dawson is a more technical boxer than Kessler, and a better boxer than Dirrell. IMO.

Dawson has an easy night with Froch at 175.