Very good or great? Volume 4: Chris Eubank

great. i've had him in my top 100 list. watching him in his prime and i could not pick 100 better fighters than him

 

A good champion, who is probably the most overrated fighter of the past 20 years, loads of close calls and more dodgy verdicts than Sven Ottke ever had. Still, his countering skills, power and mighty chin would see him come through against some very good opposition, like Jackson and McClellen, but his clumsiness in coming forward effectively would see him easily picked off by fighters with and excellent defence and/or elusiveness like: McCallum, Nunn and Herol Graham, three fighters he wouldn't beat while he had a hole in his arse. Well, two, Graham's tendency to throw it away could go against him in the 'championship' rounds (even then he'd have given Eubank a boxing lesson before his usual bottle job).

 

He doesn't have the necessary skill. Calling him a poor man's Kalambay isn't wrong really.

 

McCallum himself said 'The only way to beat Eubanks is to jump all over him and not give him time to relax and pose'..

If he did that, he'd be playing into Chris' hands.

McCallum was a small middle and Eubank a massive one - Eubank would look so much more dense and thick than Mike that I could easily see him rocking him at the least if he put punches together.

Eubank stated he wouldn't beat Herol Graham, whom he considered the best middleweight in the world, and probably wouldn't beat Michael Nunn. He felt he'd beat Jackson and McCallum. It's interesting.

 

Eubank had such a unique style you can't really compare him to anyone.

He had a better lead right and offensive jab than Kalambay and a more awkward stance, but Kalambay was probably the best at slipping and countering I've seen.

 

I don't think Eubank really did anything better and there's a large difference in footwork. Eubank was too often unbalanced and overstretched, something you very rarely saw in Kalambay.

Don't think Watson brought anything in the rematch that Mike wouldn't bring + quite a bit in terms of skill and accuracy obviously. Can't see McCallum getting caught by that upppercut either.

 

In terms of intestinal fortitude Chris Eubank was perhaps the greatest of the last quarter century of years.The punches he took from Nigel Benn and Michael Watson in those 4 fights and remain the last man standing and smiling.The punches he took from a pre handbreak Joe Calzaghe and 200+pound Carl Thompson in those 3 fights and carry on fighting and punching to the end.Immeasurable heart,iron like jawline.

At his best against Benn,Watson,Rocchigiani,Wharton and Thompson-brilliantly skilled.Watch R10-R11 of the Eubank v Collins 1 fight.He was such the superior fighter to the man who finally beat him.

My vote? GREAT

 

How about strength - the ability to walk right through Eubank's right hands without even blinking and be by far the stronger man at close-quarters. Or keeping up the pace of a lightweight?

 

It was part of Eubank's style, and you can't say it wasn't effective. Sure Kalambay was the better textbook technician.

 

If it was that effective who was the great fighters he beat? Life and death battles against Watson and Benn, which of he should have lost at least one?

That's a different calibre of opponent than McCallum, who schooled said Watson.

 

An absolutely dangerously tight at the weight Eubank schooled Watson, too. McCallum schooled a totally ring-rusted Watson.

 

McCallum's strength held up very well at MW, which he showed against Watson for example. He also kept a high pace, but perhaps not the pace Watson kept in that fight. His higher level of skill and experience would certainly make up for that, though.

I see him pressing Eubank behind that constant jab and engaging Chris at every opportunity. Countering the **** out of him whenever he leaves himself exposed. No way would Eubank be allowed to set the pace of the fight, and that alone would throw him off.

 

Watson's strength and stamina in that second Eubank fight was off the scale! He trained like a madman by all accounts.

 

When did Eubank ever school Watson? Surely not in their first fight, where Watson should have been given the decision?

 

Eubank easily won the first five rounds, and made Watson miss so much in the seventh - by barely moving! He landed great shots in the 9th, was very smart in the 10th when his legs went and came out and took the 11th. Watson only really won one round clearly, the 8th with his countering, and probably edged the 6th and 12th but that's it, and that's being kind to Michael.

It was very very odd to see 2-3-4 clean power head shots on the spin getting through Watson's tucked, crab-like defense. McCallum by contrast could only really get in at the body in the first five.