Eubank: RJJ DUCKED Nunn!

I agree. I will say his management (Frank) must of had doubts about Joe at the very top and Joe's unwillingness to travel across the Atlantic to prove himself will always be held against him.

The way i see it is Hopkins and Jones were the marquee names and Joe should've gave ground and been willing to travel years before he did. 9 years for his first unification fight and 15 before he went to the States says he was uncertain of himself imo. The Lacy fight lifted his and Frank's confidence.

I don't care about 2002 negotiations, Hopkins was a world name, Joe wasn't. I don't care what Frank or Joe say about them negotiations, Joe should of been willing to concede in order to prove himself. You don't go that long as belt holder and avoid big fights and names for so long. It worked out well for him in the end and he proved in the Kessler fight he was a top operator but it left me with a ' what a waste' feeling when looking at the rest of his career.

Lewis, Benn, Hatton, Froch all knew where the money and the best fights were and travelled. All different scenario's but all willing to put it on the line. Look at Hatton fighting Floyd at welter (a big ask), that is conceding in order to prove your the best.

 

I agree with this post. I am a fan of Joe, and gets a good laugh when Hopkins or Jones gets bashed, but Joe was not as great as his biggest fans likes to pretend. In terms of performence, he was one notch below both Hopkins and Jones.

 

For KO Artist and Bailey.

 

??????
Jones 95

The Dark Trade page 179

Jones 95

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...retirement-as-pressure-builds-up-1578117.html

 

Your boy Eubank lies too much

http://www.eastsideboxing.com/news.php?p=28919&more=1

http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showthread.php?t=375021&highlight=eubank+toney

 

The 2002 negotiations don't matter? It's a blatant duck by Hopkins. I don't care what way you spin it, he turned down £3m to fight Calzaghe in Vegas for a world title, to fight a bum in Hakkar for £300k. There's no excuse for that, and the blame can't fall on Joe.

Now for Roy Jones, it's clear that offers were made, and Roy priced himself out, then Roy went up to HW to fight for another paper belt against Ruiz for more money. What could Joe do?

At this time, James Toney was campaigning at CW

So tell me, who were the elite fighters across the Atlantic that Joe avoided?

 

@ Knockout Artist.

Don't make it so personal mate and bare in mind i hold no biased here, it's just the way i and most see this situation.

Hopkins was the kingpin at MW and Joe was just a titlist at SMW at that point. Bernard had superstar status for his lengthy reign and because of his win over Trinidad, he had the pulling power and was within his rights to call the shots and not take the fight if he pleased. It's not ducking it's business, something Fwank/Joe should've understood all too well.

Why should the MW king Hopkins entertain a tricky SMW southpaw titlist, who hadn't done any thing exceptional and was only known in europe?

Joe's notable wins at that point, an aged Eubank, a highly debatable win over Reid who didn't get a deserved rematch, a good win over Sheika and decent wins over Woodhall and Brewer. Nothing exceptional. Mitchell was a good win just around the corner.

Just some of his dodgy defences off the top of my head: SOBOT (a career mw who had done nothing to deserve a shot at any smw belt), JIMINEZ (a no-mark), McINTYRE (no-mark), THORNBERRY (Ko'ed and beaten more convincingly by Wharton 3 years earlier and hadn't beaten anyone of note), SALEM (had already lost to Echols and Veit before facing Joe), MKRECHYAN (unworthy).

That's six of his handpicked defences when he could of fought any of these men from 97-2005, some in unification fights. His record would have been far more impressive and he could've held more than 1 belt.

Beyer, Ottke, Echols, Lucas, Liles, Mundine, Green. Then there's Thomas Tate who he could've fought well before the proposed 2002 bout. I'm not saying Joe wouldn't beat all these men, but facing them would've held far more risk and been way more credible than the cherry picked ones i've mentioned.

To not fight any of these 8 men and go for at least one unification bout in that time is no accident mate and shows he was handled with care. Frank or Joe didn't push for the better fights like they should have, some of those defences were shocking. Like i said, a waste.

So why should Hopkins and Jones have entertained him then? Joe was quality as we suspected and later found out, but Hopkins didn't duck him in 2002-3. Far from it.

Toney didn't need mentioning.

 

I'm sure Calzaghe would have struggled big time with the likes of John Jarvis, Ray Close, Mauricio Amaral, Sam Storey, Dan Schommer and a past prime Lindell Holmes :roll: No disrespect to Eubank, but he didn't exactly always face top calibre opposition.

 

Hopkins never said ' i wont take the fight, Joe'.

He said 'i want more money for me, a superstar, giving up an entire weight division to a decent but unknown opponent'. Joe wasnt even know in ENgland, let alone the world!

He is clearly negotiating a bigger pay packet. No way does that correlate to ducking a fight. For all you know, Hopkins was sitting at his phone for the whole year waiting for team Calzaghe to ring him - but he never got a bigger deal offered. YOU dont know that he wasnt waiting for years, all the evidence points to the fact that he did wait patiently becasue he DID fight him eventually. SO shut up once and for all about it being a duck. Hopkins dont duck, and furthermore why would he duck someone to wait till he was himself half-shot and then fight him? He had every intention of fighting Joe which he proved in the flesh.

You seem to have the same opinion about RJJ ducking Calzaghe, well theres a pattern in your thinking there isnt there? Seems any huge star who wanted big money to fight Joe is automatically ducking Joe, in your small minded opinion. Has it not occurred to you that you are actually wrong about these guys? Get a grip, they cant all be ducking him. Only Ottke, and Cal woud have UDed that sucker outside Germany.

Never mention its a duck again, if you want to retain credibility on this forum.

 

if he was being floored by oldsters at LH then he wasnt going to cope with young top prime LHs. Perhaps he might have won the European crown at LH, but no more than that.

cue bailey to pointlessly remind us with the same 600 word 'cut and pasted' essay (that noone ever reads) that Joe SDed 42 year old Hopkins so therefore hes the best LH in the world. LOL.

 

As for Eubank, he was one VERY VERY VERY tough SOB, and had some skill and a mean hook, but he was limited tactics wise and lazy. Often he would simply try to ride out his opponent till they tired and then split them up. He didnt have the ability to unify the title, even in a watered down division like 90s SMW, and certianly not at MW.
Maybe he could have unified some ofthe title at SMW, but he'd never have been able to sustain the title for so long as he did if it was unified.