Is Chris Eubank actually a world champion since he held the WBO belt before it was recognised by all the big governing bodies. I’ve seen some people claim that klitscko wasn’t a champion when he held the WBO belt early in his career so I don’t know what to think are you a champion if its before the belt was fully recognised?
Like his, up his own arse son, he dodged the best ,contenting himself with a spurious lightly regarded strap.
At the time it was considered bogus by many — the UK jumped on the WBO bandwagon early to get title fights for their guys that they could promote on home soil. As I recall it, people began to look at it a little less skeptically when Benn and Eubank fought and showed they belonged on the bigger stage, but mostly people looked down upon the WBO as a less-than-serious ‘world’ belt for quite a while. Nobody thought Ray Mercer was a world champ when he held it, for instance.
I don't consider the WBO any better or worse than the WBA or the IBF, but Eubank was never a real champion, no. He hardly troubled the rankings at 160lbs, I guess Nunn would have been the man for his supposed reign? He for sure made more of a mark at 168, but Nunn again, Toney, Jones? Might even have been Hearns and Cordoba when he first moved up.
One difference between Eubank and Bowe+Mercer is that he fought in a new division that had no history. Every 168 lineage had started not long before Eubank showed up.
