Just want to clear something up for bailey who said: And Also BBC Sport thinks: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/boxing/7872746.stm Was Eubank past his best when Calzaghe beat him?
Im flattered that you have made a thread specially for me, still Eubank had fought 6/7 months before fighting Joe and around 5 months before that scoring KOs in both against low opposition, before that he was fighting Collins to a SD after losing to Joe, Eubank went up to CW and gave WBO champ Thompson 2 hard fights. When Eubank weighed in for his last fight with Collins he was half a pound inside the SMW division, I agree Eubank had weight making trouble but he did at MW also, and so do alot of fighters, but at 31 with only 2 losses on his record to Collins and how well Eubank fought after Calzaghe beat him, no I dont think he was shot.
The thing is, bailey's posts are too long and are in between some quotes and not everyone reads them. So I made it easier for Bailey.
realsoulja, So we have to pick between Eubank being a shell of himself or in his prime? That's silly. Like it's that simple. He could still be a very good boxer, but not a shell nor in his prime.
Dont mean he was in his prime [YT]WQm8wgKxcyQ[/YT] Dont really look like a hard fight, and a prime Eubank to be honest
he wasn't his best. jenny's analogy of 08 barrera was pretty accurate though may be selling eubanks a TOUCH short. the thompson fights should not be used as evidence of his prime or nearness. instead the first benn fight should be examined to see what he really looked like...then compare that to the calzaghe/thompson fights. the eubank from calzaghe looked similar to that of the thompsons fights but neither compares with true prime