|
|
||||||||
|
| View Poll Results: Joe Calzaghe vs Chris Eubank Better Resume | |||
| Calzaghe |
|
17 | 51.52% |
| Eubank |
|
16 | 48.48% |
| Voters: 33. You may not vote on this poll | |||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
|
#2 |
|
Belt holder
ESB Addict
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,967
vCash: 1000 |
Eubank by some distance.
The likes of Watson at his aggressive best, Benn at his best twice - far more dangerous than Reid or Woodhall or Brewer or Mitchell, an overhyped Lacy, onedimensional Kessler, old Hopkins or old Jones. Then there's Malinga at his best, still better than Reid, Woodhall, Brewer or Mitchell or Lacy. Rocchigiani at his best - better than Kessler. Lindell Holmes - more dangerous than Hopkins and Jones. Tony Thornton for me was a slight slice over Mitchell or Brewer, and Watson at his technical best was streets ahead of Woodhall. |
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Contender
ESB Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,446
vCash: 500 |
Calzaghe has the better resume lengthwise. In fact noone beats his resume for that, its the BEST EVER at SMW in that respect.
but sure Eubank's best fights reached higher and were more often than Calzaghe's last fights 'Kessler and Lacy' peak ie Eubank had the better 'batting average'. But then LOADS of SMWs had better batting averages than Calzaghe, Calzaghe is famous for having a less than average batting average. Calzaghe deliberately picked low/oldie quality opposition to maintani a long unbeaten record. Last edited by HerolGee; 06-19-2012 at 11:47 AM. |
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Journeyman
ESB Jr Member
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 142
vCash: 500 |
I think Eubank had to dig deeper for his big wins than Calzaghe. In overall quality of opponent they are quite even if you count Calzaghe's wins over Jones and Hopkins as meaning anything (which I don't really).
However I feel Eubank was never the same after Watson II. If this had not happened I think he probably would have gone onto bigger and better things and acquitted himself well, if not beaten, some of the top Americans. If he had pulled the trigger a bit more I think he would also have beaten Benn again which would put his legacy in a different light as a unified champion. OK I have wondered off topic so in my mind I would say Calzaghe if we are looking at just the names on his record. But in my heart I say Eubank as he beat a peak Benn and a peak Watson rather than faded legends. |
|
|
|
#5 |
|
So I can die easy ...
East Side VIP
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 21,759
vCash: 1337 |
Eubank has the better Top5, perhaps even 10. Afterwards itīs more even, perhaps in Joe Cīs favour.
Calzaghe compensates with him unifying and his lengthy reign as a WBO beltholder though. |
|
|
|
#6 | |
|
Journeyman
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 95
vCash: 500 |
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Belt holder
ESB Addict
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 3,224
vCash: 1000 |
I HATE Eubank, but would say he had the better overall resume as atberry has so eloquently pointed out. I like JC, used to believe in him 6 yrs or so BEFORE BHop and Co, but in typical modern day boxing it NEVER happened...
but JC would have to fight hard against the same company and no doubt suffer a few defeats - Lacy was NOTHING overhpyed by the machine, likewise so is Pavlik to BHop, great fight for Hop though it was. it's the same sort of arguement I have for modern greats vs past great, sure their all great fighters, but would the modern ones have remained on top fighting the comp of the 30s, 40s & 50s? Not without suffering some significant losses, losses that in many cases would have religated them to Fringe Contention & Journeyman status. same sort of squaring off, opponents to opponents - Eubank wins it me thinks! |
|
|
|
#11 |
|
East Side Rape (CEO)
ESB Addict
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 4,329
vCash: 75 |
Bernard Hopkins
Mikkel Kessler Robin Reid Richie Woodhall Jeff Lacy Chris Eubank Byron Mitchell Graciano Rochiggiani Lindell Holmes Tony Thornton Nigel Benn Michael Watson x2 Henry Wharton Thulani Malinga I'll go with Eubank, easily. |
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Fighting Zapata
East Side Guru
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,453
vCash: 500 |
Not much in it, but at least most of the so-so guys during Eubank's run were just that...B or C level but with competent basic tools... Jarvis, Close Gimenez, esset etc...
except Storey, Amaral and Shommer the last two of which were inronically probably his worst two efforts. Calzaghe on the other hand fought some real trash at times.Tocker Pudwill Another difference though is calzaghe did eventually step up and fight who was highest regarded around his weight.Took him ages and some like Lacy might actually have been just B\C level hypejobs, but he did it and eubank didn't. Incidentally Tony Thornton, though a bit of a joke with his punching postman nickname or whatever it was, actually was a solid legit top 10 fighter with decent talent imo, at least for a few years circa 88-92 gainst Dewitt, Sosa, Collins, Eubank and ending against Toney.A 2nd-tier Briscoe clone, but a solid one nonetheless. |
|
|
|
#14 | |
|
Journeyman
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 95
vCash: 500 |
Quote:
Last edited by Mod-Mania; 02-19-2013 at 02:22 PM. |
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|