Chris Eubank- "It isn't for Froch to say how good he is"

What a massive pile of **** that (^) is.

 

WBO is the losers belt in the 90s, you cant argue with that.

Its the intercontinental belt, if you like, for a top tenner, not for a true champ, although its starting to gain credit now.

Eubank did a good job of defending it though and was a tough SOB too, he was certainly no walkover but he had limited skills.

 

its obvious that once Calzaghe got older he did a runner to LH and to facing only people much older and more depleted than him, in order to preserve his nil defeat record. There is noone fresh he fought after Kessler at that point when Zaghes became postprime, this is a fact and you know it.

You of all people must know this, but that wont stop you from very probably changing the ages of fortysomethings to make them out to be primes. This is your nature, failey. Go ahead, but no one will read it.

 

Heres an old post where odd bits have changed but it shows how little you know because the WBO is no different to any other world title at SMW as they are all of a similar age

Where you have written for the WBO vs limited competition.
I just wanted to highlight some details to you.
The SMW divisions first world champs were WBC 1988, WBA 1987, IBF 1984 & WBO 1988.
Now for a start it is a new division so no belt has any more prestige than the other as they were all started at a similar time. So the WBO SMW title has no less prestige than the others.
Consider also that the WBO at SMW has been involved in 4 unification bouts.
The IBF has been involved in 2
The WBA in 3
WBC in 4 also
This shows that the WBO has been as willing to make top fights at SMW as much as any other governing body.

Now look at the list of champs in each and who they defended against and you can see that the WBO SMW title has produced the best defences overall better than all of the other govening bodies in this particular weight division so far.
Consider how much critism Bute gets now for his IBF defences.
Consider M Beyer defending his WBC title against 26-14-5 fighter who was coming off of a win against a 0-2-0 fighter
Or that Mundine when defending the WBA title against a 24-13-5 fighter who was the same fighter that WBC champ Beyer was defending against above.

People bring up Eubank who helped mould the belt that was good enough to give T Hearns a slice of history making. Out of Eubanks 18 WBO SMW title fights 14 of those fights were against fighters who were, had been or became top 10 SMWs. One was a unification and another was against the undefeated former IBF SMW champ (relinquished his title). In fact 6 of the fighters he faced had been or became world champs

 

I think you are right JimiRB, although like others above note Eubank being a **** back in the day does come across as being a little hypocritical.

I never liked Eubank back then because I thought he was a dick who fought in a negative way, although I did appreciate the fact he had the measure of Benn and was a tough *******.

Having watched the SMW division from it's birth with SRL and the like, I would say for British fighters at SMW, Joe is probably the best in terms of he could adapt and had decent ring IQ and could mix it with the big boys, for excitement and favorite fighter at that weight it would be Nigel Benn. Watching the man's fights live was traumatic emotionally, Benn could be hurt but would come back nearly all the time like a ****ing beast.

Carl for me sits in the middle of the best Brit SMW's, he is held back by the fact he has a limited skills set and average ring generalship and is slow, against the likes of Ward he gets beat every time, he is a tough mofo who has taken on all corners which is to his credit above other Brits.

On reflection they are all limited fighters to a degree, no one yet has stood head and shoulders above the rest, the closest in skills is probably Joe but his lack of major PRIME scalps hurts him a little, imo.

 

Well balanced post and a fair assessment of Froch and his career in my opinion

 

Talk about the ****ing pot and the kettle, oh and btw Froch beat Kessler. He was simply a victim of the hometown decision, much the same way was Dirrell was to Froch in Nottingham.

 

yeah he chose not to defend the unified title at all, but he was happy to fight WBO-level bums for his whole career. riiiiiiiiight.

he ran once he would have been forced to fight a higher unified title level of competition. There were plenty of fighters coming along that were better than Veit who would be mandatory for defence of all three titles... and Zaghes ran from that responsibility within 10 seconds of acquiring the titles. count them, 10 seconds later 'im going up to LH to fight oldies now' he says.

Yet Zaghes had NO qualms staying at Veit and Pudwill level FOR 10 YEARS whilst he was only defending the little league WBO title contenders.

Do you see the difference between 10 seconds and 10 years?

 

i disagree.

i think kessler well deserved the decision against froch, however - i think froch could have won in the same fashion in england

 

What higher comp? There was nobody left. Who are you reffering to?
Who was better/high rated than Hopkins then?

The higher comp was Steiglitz and he then got beat by unknown Berrio, so Calzaghe fought undefeated Kessler, who beat Froch who is number 2 now at SMW. So what comp are you reffering to?

 

i am referring to all the champions since. All ofthem, and all their challengers.

Surely you dont think beating Kessler means you automatically beat Steiglez when you are 36 years of age? You may be misled but you arent stupid enough to think that if A beats B who beat C then A beats C by default.

 

Of course I know the A B C rubbish, but Steiglitz got beat. He wasnt ignored, he got KOd by Berrio.

So you were reffering to Steiglitz as this big duck of Calzaghes when you didnt realise Steiglitz had been KOd atsch

So is that it?

 

Based on what ?

 

Eubank is jelly. HeMad.