Eubank-Calzaghe who wins prime for prime?

Yes I am aware of this and Calzaghe wins all day long. Eubank was an excellent fighter but he is slightly overrated at times and not as good as Watson who was robbed in the first fight and winning clearly in teh second fight until that uppercut in the 11th.


Again, how could he win this clearly I answered you once.

You can't just state that and not give reasons why.

 

I'd favour Calzaghe 60/40 but I don't see anything on Joe's resume that is any better then beating a peak Eubank - so who says he could. Perhaps the Hopkins win, but that was a close fight and there will always be question marks given his age and recent lost fights.

Anyway, yea, I'd favour Joe, but If the odds were pretty weighted against Eubank I'd be putting a few quid on him.

 

Eubank ... . pre-watson he was unstoppable. Fast hands, intelligence, killler instinct, and rock-solid-chin.

Although after Watson fight, Calzaghe wins. Simply for workrate.

 

Eubank went from underrated, to vastly overrated on here. Hard to know exactly why we are seeing this these days. I have an idea that Americans are using Eubank to get to Joe.

It seems to be a matter of 'world order'.

The thinking is this: It is accepted that fighters like RJJ, Toney, Hopkins and many other American fighters are better than Eubank.

If we cannot get none-Americans to agree that Toney is clearly better than Joe, then we can perhaps get them to agree that Eubank (their own fighter) is better than Joe. And therefore Toney will then be better than Joe because Toney is better than Eubank.

Rubbish of course. Eubank himself has said that Calzaghe would easily beat his entire generation of UK fighters in Benn, Collins, Eubank.

 

Joe at his best..BUT if it makes ya feel any better...Joe by a VERY>>>VERY close .......SD ( it MAY even be a draw

 

I would say eubank because he had a iron chin and could deliver a brutal KO punch. I would say Eubank on a Split Decision.

 

He also said Kessler is shite! This annoys me, so what if he did say that (which I am still to see evidence of after asking countless people) - Benn once stated that if they all fought Joe may come out on top - that is it. So what if he said it anyway it doesnt make it true.

A prime Eubank gives Joe problems don't worry about that, and nothing on Joes resume is a good as a victory over a prime Eubank, imo.

 

:good

 

He was also getting beaten handily by Watson prior to the stoppage and was pretty much even money in the rematch with Benn. He was a flawed fighter, one who could be figured out and taken off his game. If one thing's been proven about Joe, it's that he won't be taken off his game, and if he is, he'll adapt. That's not to say he's unbeatable or the case would be the same with everyone, but against a flawed fighter like Eubank, I'd say that's the case, pretty confidently.

 

No he wasn't. Rewatch the first Watson fight, it's one of the biggest robberies in British boxing history.

Ring intelligence is a very generic term and it's something that Calzaghe has in abundance.

And as for handspeed Joe wins here as well.

 

In his prime Calzaghe would outbox him to a UD using superior footwork, handspeed and timing IMO. Would be a very hard and competitive fight though.

 

Talking about overating you have Joe in the top 25 greatest boxers of all time.

 

That maybe true but a prime eubank would take some shifting and he still had a range of shots what would hurt Calzaghe.

 

Thats a lie and Eubank never said that. Benn Said JC would be competative with all of them. but not Eubank.