If ever a fighter benefitted from the proliferation of world titles, it's Eubank. If not for the creation of the WBO, would Eubank have even become a world champion?
I don't know, do you favor him over Galvano, Van Horn, Barkley, Cordoba, Little, Liles...? Any of those?
Eubanks was skilled and had some very nice defensive moves. MW was quite stacked with technicians back then. Hagler pretty recently retired, McCallum and Kalambay still around, and Jones and Hopkins just around the corner. Eubanks is not up with them skillwise, I'd say, but makes up a very respectable second tier of slicksters of the era.
So Benn landed a fair minus amount of clean punches you mean? McCallum landed far more accurate and hurtful punches on Watson. It's not even comparable. He took Watson apart while Eubank just rocked him a bit on a couple of occassions, in a fight I think Watson won.
Eubank was very good but he had way too many moments where he stood back and admired his work, rather than finish the job. Too much gloating.
McCallum landed a lot of body shots and threw a lot upstairs landing one often, but Eubank was was landing 3-4 on the spin regularly.
Eubank could be beautiful to watch at times and some of the defensive maneuvers he would pull off were very impressive. but those moments of technical brilliance would be followed by sloppiness and other baffling moves. he sometimes looked like he slacked with his punching technique as well. would half-ass his combinations sometimes. very good fighter but definitely not great.
When he threw his punches tightly he looked really really good - terrific stiff jab, terrific sneak right, terrific short uppercut, the flashiest of flurries But yes there was no consistency - seemed to produce something impressive but then admire his work and not follow-up with near the same quality. The exception when he didn't seem to lose focus once was the first fight with Benn
That would be because he threw many more. But the main thing here is that he landed far more telling blows.