Chris Eubank vs Sumbu Kalambay At MW

McCallum was far better than anything Eubank beat, and Eubank couldn't school fighters who were at least 2 levels below McCallum. At his best Kalambay schools Eubank. :yep

 

Watson in their second fight was better than McCallum, overall. So was Calzaghe, overall.

 

Eubank gets underrated here alot.He has an unorthdox style that could give Kalambay problems and I wouldnt have been suprised to see Eubank win on points.Kind of like Ali-Norton where 1 boxer has a style that gives the overall better boxer problems for whatever reason.

 

Kalumbay is simply too slick and busy for Chris. This poll has restored my belief in this forum, I expected Eubanks to be the popular pick.

 

Except it's the exact opposite here, as Kalambay is the one whose style would be poison for Eubank.

 

Eubank would take Sumbu's jab away with his tremendous head slips, leaving Sumbu with not a lot else to do.

 

And what would kalambay's own defensive moves be doing to Eubank's arsenal, nothing?

I rate Eubank as a fighter, really skillful on his day, but this just isn't a good match for him.He was unusually poor by world class standards at taking a leading role, and while there will be slower paced ring-centre stuff he will be competitive in as kalambay is not going to be running out of range or outright spoiling, that drawback in his footwork\balance means he's rarely going to be the one dictating things.

Unless he goes strictly onto the back foot, but his fights tell us he was more likely to adopt the stalking boxer-puncher role when faced with another back foot fighter.He rarely tried to make them come to him even when that was what he was best at.Too easily drawn into doing things he's not good at.

They'll probe at each other for a couple of rounds, some cautious jabbing and angles, then before you know it Eubank will start stalking forward more than he should.Overreaching punches like fellow counterpunche Marquez does and getting picked off.

 

He made back foot fighter Malinga turn into a front foot fighter, and Malinga couldn't touch him with his world-class left.

Sumbu is quite respectful and respectable (Malinga was respectful to Eubank pre-fight), as well as being extemely good, so Eubank would have no reason to stalk his prey, which he did usually against either an annoying fighter (Sherry) or one everyone pressured him to KO (Essett).

 

Love winning debates. It's really cool.

 

Give me the more skilled guy and that one is Sumbu.....

 

Nahhhhhhhhh mayne

 

Must be a **** forum for you then.:tong

 

no.

 

This was the same Watson that was schooled and outclassed by McCallum just a year before. McCallum was a class above any Watson. And i said that McCallum was better than anything Eubank BEAT not fought, learn to read, although it's highly debatable Calzaghe was better than McCallum.

 

Watson clearly improved tenfold between the McCallum and Eubank I fights, and clearly improved tenfold AGAIN between the Eubank I and Eubank II fights. He was unable to shake off 11 months of ring rust against McCallum, and against Eubank II he was fighting at his natural weight and not weakening himself to make 160. Those blistering clusters of 4-5-shot combos for 11 rounds straight at a lightweight pace was about as impressive as anything I've seen in a boxing ring, from Watson in Eubank II fight. Overall, Watson would've been too physically strong for McCallum at 168 in 91-92.

Overall, Calzaghe was much stronger, much more powerful, much faster-handed, and had a much more awkward style, than Mike. Eubank fought southpaw Calzaghe weight-drained on a few days notice with bad knees - Eubank would've taken him at his best, we can see that from the fight they had.



-atberry