Gene Fullmer v Chris Eubank

I agree with the sentiments of @mcvey , here.

Eubank was strong in some areas, but weak in others. His stamina was always an issue, in my opinion, and Watson (in their first fight) played right into Eubank's hands, when he slotted into a gear set by Eubank, rather than force his own pace.

Even then, it was a razor thin decision. But, fair play to Eubank, in that he was a warrior with a good set of skills and had a peculiar style, which tended to upset his opponents' rhythm; particularly those, who were unable to push themselves up in gear against him.

Watson, in their second contest - perhaps, having learned from the first bout and benefiting more from the move to SMW - turned the dial up considerably, leading to that exhausted, desperate and ultimately tragic effort from Eubank in the Championship rounds. Eubank had been forced to fight at a pace he was not comfortable with, and he hit the wall; spent, but for that last-ditch attempt, which won him the fight.


However, didn't Gene Fullmer deliver those kind of intense performances, as a matter of routine, with his own brand of unorthodoxy mixed in? Not to mention, Fullmer's physical strength and all-round toughness.

I can't see Eubank bearing the kind of pressure that Fullmer would bring and I can't see him knocking Fullmer out, either. For these reasons, I'd bet on Fullmer, by late stoppage win.