Eubank wasn’t old, but he was never the same after the Watson tragedy. He was also extremely lucky to have gone into the Collins fight unbeaten. Both Collins and Eubank were operating at the same level. You can rate Collins higher based on his wins over Eubank, but they were razor thin. Collins beating Benn twice doesn’t mean much. They only had a rematch because Benn was injured in the first fight, and Benn was done at that point. So he’s basically got one win over a shot Benn. Eubank had a better career. He beat peak versions of Benn and Watson.
No sh1t genius, but ability can look amazing with certain fighters with certain opposition. I recall how some rated Degale at SMW after he looked very impressive against P Smith. Then he lost a fight to Groves. Now Degale was a good SMW, but its the opponent that can often make the ability look good in certain fights. Look how Dirrell looked at times against Abraham but lost to Degale. This is why ABILITY can be misleading and you have to look further at what they did, and Collins at SMW has far better wins. Ward may not have looked impressive against boxer movers? He didnt seem interested in facing many overall. Collins at SMW has the greater resume and definitely the greater win
Simple Carl was an undefeated fighter when Kessler beat him and hadnt experienced defeat at that time. Also Froch wasnt as worn out at that time as compared to the end of a long S6 run where he had said he feels like an old man and had at that time been away for the 4th time in a row
Benn was shot because he lost a debated SD to a fighter who would go on to be champ again later in his career. Yeah OK loudon. Read that and try not to forget your agenda
We have the luxury of looking back at their overall careers so we can make an honest evaluation. Roy Jones, Andre Ward and James Toney had more ability than Steve Collins. Whilst resume is obviously important, you can absolutely rank a guy on a H2H basis in terms of ability. There is nothing wrong with that. No, Collins doesn’t have far better SMW wins than what they do. You just want to rank Collins higher because he beat 2 of your favourite fighters from your favourite era. You spin the stats in your favour, whilst you pick and choose whether on not to include any circumstances or context. You’ve been doing it years.
Carl lost to Kessler in a close fight. Andre beat him with ease with a fractured hand. Was he an old man when he crushed Bute and knocked out Groves?
You’re a joker. Benn had a shadow on his brain after the Gerald fight. He retired after he lost to Malinga. He then came out of retirement for one last hurrah, but only half heartedly. For the only time in his career, he had to bet a huge sum of money on himself in order to give himself a lift. It wasn’t the Benn who’d fought Eubank. It wasn’t the Benn who’d fought Gerald. It was a version of Benn who was at the end of the road and not fully committed. A version of Benn that literally said “I knew I was kinda gone for Collins” Beating that specific version of Benn was no great feat. We can’t just turn a blind eye to the circumstances and give Collins a pass just on name recognition, just because it was Nigel Benn who’d thrilled us all for years. It doesn’t work like that. You even celebrate the fact that Collins has 2 wins over him. Why would you celebrate the first win when it was stopped because of Benn’s injury? It’s the same with Eubank. You think Collins beating him was also a great win. And you think that because it was a guy who had a great overall SMW resume, and who’d also thrilled us all for a decade. But you don’t take into account that he was tired, faded and extremely lucky not to have had 3 losses on his resume by the time Collins got to him. Neither do you take into account the manner of victory. Collins beat a faded Eubank by a razor thin decision. Was it a good win? Sure. But it’s not this great win that you claim it to be. Roy has a better SMW resume than Collins, but you can’t see it because you’re blinded by stats.
Andre Ward is one of the best SMW’s we’ve seen. He won the S6 with ease despite having a fractured hand. He’s a better fighter than a guy like Collins. His wins over Kessler and Froch are also better than Collins’ wins over Benn and Eubank. We can’t rate Collins’ wins higher, just because Benn and Eubank were once great fighters. You have to rate wins based on circumstances. Where the fighters were at the time etc. Collins had a razor thin decision over a faded Eubank who’d already lost to Schommer. Ward easily beat Kessler. Collins beat a shot version of Benn who’d just retired after losing to Malinga. Ward beat Froch with absolute ease despite having a double fractured hand. Benn retired, while Froch went on to crush Bute. Ward beat Kovalev at LHW, which is another example of his ability, which can be used on a H2H basis. You can’t ignore this, whilst hyping Collins’ win over a guy like Frederic Seilier. You have to rate on both resume and ability. Andre Ward ranks very highly. He should certainly rank higher than Collins. A prime version of Roy Jones is the best fighter we’ve ever seen at the weight.
Ra's Al-Ghul, The division wasn’t strong for periods of Calzaghe’s reign. It was the same when Collins fought Benn. Joe also had a tough time with Bika. How was he more faded than Eubank? How can Collins’ 2 wins over Benn be better? Based on what? The first fight was stopped due to an injury, which means it can’t even be celebrated as a win. He then beat him clearly in the rematch. Beating Kessler has to be held in higher regard than beating a shot version of Benn who had nothing left and who retired afterwards. You can use what they did at other weights to rate them on ability. We can look back over Ward’s career and see that he was a better fighter than a guy like Steve Collins. He didn’t cheat in both Kovalev fights. Who had him losing to Barrera? You always mention him as a good win for Collins on these type of threads. Yes, but that isn’t relevant here. It doesn’t matter if Benn achieved more in his career than what Froch did. You don’t rate wins like that. You rate wins in where they were at the time, and you look at all/any circumstances and the manner of the victory etc. For example, Ward’s win over Froch is better than Collins’ win over Benn. Because again, Benn was finished and he retired afterwards. Whereas Ward beat Froch easily despite him having a double fractured hand. And afterwards, Froch went on and destroyed Bute and knocked out Groves. I’d also rate Ward’s easy win over Kessler, higher than Collins’ razor close wins over Eubank. Due to the circumstances, both of Ward’s wins were more impressive. That’s your opinion. But he was a better fighter than Steve Collins, and he had better overall wins than what Collins had. So you can’t rate Collins in the top 5, and have Ward outside of the top 10. That’s silly. You should rate on both resume and H2H ability. If you do that, Andre Ward has to be ranked very highly.
