Herol Graham v Eubank Sr both in their prime who would win?

You don't believe Benn and Eubank were top MW's ?? Even if you don't believe those two were top MW's Benn and Watson for Eubank are better wins than anything on Graham's resume and you can throw Rocchigani and Wharton in there for as well. In the big fights when the pressure was on Eubank managed to win, Graham while usually giving a good account of himself did not.

 

Benn was knocked out by Watson.
Watson was dismantled by McCallum.

Graham actually lost a very very narrow decision against McCallum, and also did better against Kalambay than McCallum did.
Graham was much closer to McCallum's level than the likes of Eubank, Benn, Watson, who were a clear level below.

 

i said u sounded like a little boy, claiming someone who faced atg was bottling it.

u have effected no counterargument to your failure yet, except to continue to hide behind "i triggered u" fail.

 

Graham didn't go for that WBO crappy title.

 

So your evidence that Graham was better than Benn, Eubank and Watson is that he did well in losing efforts rather than any actual wins on his resume compared to the other three ?? Yes, Benn was knocked out by Watson, Eubank had a number of losses but they also both have numerous good wins against top fighters unlike Graham.

And your argument regarding McCallum/Kalambay - So Herol did better against Kalambay than McCallum, using that logic then wouldn't Graham have beaten McCallum when they fought ?? Oh that's right he came up short again at the final hurdle as he always did.

 

Well, you're accusing me of being immature but in fairness it's you who is resorting to personal insults and getting upset over posts on a discussion forum.

 

hes not claiming triangle theory. u are.

 

actually, I'm not saying you are personally anything. I used a simile everytime.

I am saying that using the term "bottling it" to describe someone being millimeters from beating an ATG is LIKE what a little boy would say. I've not said u are categorically anything -please prove that I am right to not do so.

 

No, I was just pointing out that Graham was close to Kalambay/McCallum's level.
Yes, running McCallum close to a split decision counts for something. The judges could easily have given it to Graham, with little fuss.

Herol Graham had wins over Lindell Holmes, Ayub Kalule, Mark Kaylor.
He ended the career of the promising Rod Douglas, who would have given Eubank hell too.

 

I agree Graham was close to that level and just on talent he was probably was but he never decisively proved he was with actual wins, nor did he ever prove he was on Benn or Eubank's level with any actual wins against top fighters. Holmes, Kalule, Kaylor - I'll admit I don't know much about those three fighters but I'll take your word for it that they were good wins.

 

Just answered your own question there.

 

If you lose a SPLIT DECISION to MCcallum that pretty much means your on his level.
And lets remember without that point deduction Graham gets a DRAW vs Mike.
And the second Kalambay bout was a horrible decision-Graham won .