I also explained that as a rubuttal to the Tiberi comment....And NO YOU have not given a real reason even once!
LOL...You wound me up and I took you serious???? You have 35 total posts, and your last 16 have all been focused on discrediting Chris Eubank in 5 seperate threads, and 28 of your 35 are focused on this as well.....Look Nigel you got whooped in the first fight, deal with it! Your anti Chris agenda lessens the impact of your pick....Your lack of explanation and reasoning further does so...Uhhhhh he is better at most things......and 3rdly your v-cash does not inspire confidence in your prediction skills.
Prime Eubank was well beaten by Michael Watson. The second fight, Watson committed nearly the exact same mistake Pac did vs Marquez and got caught going for the kill after he had given Chris his first real knockdown. Technical fighters gave Chris plenty of problems. More often than not Chris was able to overcame this thanks to his power and chin. That wouldn't help him vs Toney.
Toney, a better technician making far fewer mistakes and much more fluid Eubank hardly worked at a high pace himself. Eubanks reflexs are also not worthy of comparisons to RJJ neither is his speed and boxing generally. Actually I'm not his speed It should also be noted Eubank was operating at a much lower level than Toney. His biggest career test was probably Watson, who he got gift decision in the first fight and come from behind KO in the rematch. The same Watson who was completely dominated by McCallum.
Kind of like Toney got a come from behind KO over Nunn???? Do we punish or disregard the work that goes into setting up an opponent for a late round KO? I don't ascribe to lucky punch theories, but rather well set up and executed ones for the most part.... It is clear that we won't change each others minds and I know that I regard Eubank much higher than many....Likewise many regard Toney more than I do! On another note, since I respect your opinion and analysis on a good many matters on this forum...I am a big appreciator of both Mccallum and watson.....I have always felt that Watson fought the wrong fight against McCallum...That his corner urged him to be a little more aggresive than I though would be his best approach....Not sure that I would pick him to win anyway, but i don't feel like he or his team put him in the best position to the win the fight....What are your thoughts on Watson's approach in that fight?
WTF, Dude ? Have you seen the second Watson fight ? Eubank didn't set up ****; Watson was intelligently pressuring Chris from the get go. Chris got tired in the later stages ( like he always does, since he's so muscular) and got dropped from a body shot. Watson thought he had him and forgot for a split second to watch for Chris' right. It was a desperate hail mary, nothing more and nothing less. He would have been stopped himself if it didn't land because he couldn't match Watson's pace and was stumbling around the ring completely spent. Watch Toney conserving his energy and kaoying Charles Williams in the later stages; that's what would have hapened.
Incidentally i thought Watson had improved as a fighter by the Eubank fights.He was stiffer, more straight up and down Winky Wright(without a similar busy jab or dedicated defence) and displayed an inexperienced very tense big fight mentality there.He'd only really beat a washed up Don Lee in an early cuts stoppage non-fight and a similarly inexperienced Benn going into that bout.The latter of which was a very specific gameplan oriented bout for him against an entirely predictable one-dimensional(albeit very dangerous)opponent. McCallum's skills and a year long layoff for Watson played their part obviously, but all in all Eubank got a better, more primed boxer-puncher to face.One who had got better at slipping and countering, punch picking and remaining relaxed while setting a high pace. A rematch\ fight a year or two later with McCallum slowing, would have been a fair bit more competitive i've always thought.
Wow! I am going to change my pick immediately! I am not sure what convinced me more, the implied expletive (You must feel strongly about this!) or the brilliant in depth analysis. Chris in setting up a punch discovers an opponent who has let his guard down and it is a lucky punch and not a well executed one! Alrighty then... Castro stopped Jackson in a similar (although he was dominated, not sure I would use that word here unless you scored the fight like Parris..although I did have watson ahead).....history is full of what you might call lucky shots....I prefer well timed and executed....I don't believe in luck....rather you make your own. And yes I have watched nearly all of Eubank, Watson & Toney fights.....most in this forumn have....I see no reason why we can't disagree, respectfully! I see Toney taking off periods of fights, you see him conserving energy! We obviously see it different that is part of what makes this forum fun!
Each fighter's weakness deserves to be analysed objectively, and it seems to me you're trying to rewrite history. Are you seriously claiming Chris' wasn't a lucky shot ? It had desperation written allover it. Toney certainly was behind on points when he Kod Nunn, but he wasn't on the verge of being stopped himself; he was actually getting stronger. And he certainly wasn't huffin' and puffin' like Chris used to in nearly each ending of his fights. Add the bodyshots of Toney and Chris fragile body... It doesn't mean necessarly Toney defeats Eubank; they were both great fighters; but Eubank's weaknesses seem to play into Toney's strenghts.
Now this post is one that I respect while still disgreeing with it! Thanks for the clarification.... I don't see much of a difference between the 2 comeback stoppages, with the exception that i do think that Eubank was the more fatigued (although i think just because watson was not visably fatigued as Eubank that he was not in fact moreso)....Watson KD is followed by 2 punches both Eubank.....the following round Eubank starts an all out assault where Watson does not answer back....Again I don't see Luck involved....Both were behind on the cards and had to look strategically for more than winning a round or 2. [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3PtLoMP04w[/ame] I love watson, so am not really wanting to discuss this alot more in detail due to the outcome.... LOL....not sure I agree w/ Chris's fragile body statement, but that is cool....I see Chris out working him. I like Chris's movement, speed, timing, reflexes to out point Toney's energy conservation, more fundamentally sound defensive skills.... Chris 115-113 for me!
LOL....been debating this for half the day, and never correctly read the title.... I was making my prediction @ 160 not 168....I don't like Eubank quite as much at 168 (The opposite of Benn who I prefer 168 over 160)... I still think I will stick w/ my pick, but I wouldn't wager any money including V-cash upon it.
I think Chris takes the early rds, but starting midpoint, Toney's skills take over and he possibly stops Eubank based on bodyshots. Eubank, for all his claims of being a boxer, relied much of his career on his punch and chin; these type of fighters don't age well. There's a chance Chris might win a disputed 12 rds decision, but he gets stopped almost certainly in a 15 rds fight.
I don't believe either guy fought in the 15 rd era??? That makes one their conditioning suspect, and I am not sure what philosophy their teams would employ to prepare for a 15 rounder, they would certainly condition, train and fight differently based upon that....I would say those 3 rounds increase the chance of a stoppage 1 way or the other, but the unknown makes me hesitant to make a judgement either way based upon that.
The cards had Nunn up by 4,6,8 by the judges...I had it around 4 if memory holds....Either way he sealed the deal...I don't think he had much of a chance at this stage of their respective careers of out pointing him...I believe he fought the smart fight and waited his time, and it worked perfectly.