H2H (not p4p) at their own weight, who was better: EUBANK at 160, or CALZAGHE at 168?

Very close but I go for Calzaghe

Both went to Germany to succesfully defend a title but didn't always chase the best fighters

Both had punching power although Eubank proabably had more

Speed goes to Calzaghe, workrate goes to Calzaghe

Chin I would say is very hard to separate both have good punch resistance

technique goes to Eubank even though his jab was as unorthodox as calzaghe's 'slaps'

 

Eubank.

He punched with the knuckle part of the glove on the odd occasion.

 

Just a wee joke...which dropped like a titanium baloon obviously.

I don't mind Joe actually.

I just think that Eubank was more talented overall. Joe has a workrate advantage, which isn't to say that Eubank is a slouch in this department; Chris just liked to pose a lot, but could go into the trenches when he needed to. In fact both have great heart. They both have great chins. Eubank threw his punches with more authority IMO. Their speed is comparable. Both are good ring generals, in the way that they can both dictate the tempo of a contest (but in different ways). I feel that Eubank could pick a punch better. Eubank had a better reflex reaction, and a better defence overall. Joe sometimes looks a bit sloppy in the technique department, hence my original reference to the knuckle part of the glove (but in fairness he has had hand problems). Style-wise I think that Eubank was just better to look at in the ring, but I do think that he lost something after the Watson tragedy. Still, Eubank takes it for me; not by a huge margin though.

 

very tough question. so tough i'm not gonna vote

 

Eubank hes a legend.

people will remember him more than calzaghe

 

Very, very tough,close to not giving an answer but i think id go for Eubank based on he was a great counter-puncher and ive seen joe get tagged, especially when he gets excited and i think a MW eubank makes him make more mistakes than joe can make him, if that makes any sense. No KO but if i had to put my life on an outcome Chris on points.

 

Putting my unbiased head on here I think Joe edges it.

I remember Eubank getting a couple of gift decisions in his time at 160 where he didn't look convincing at times. He also should have lost the decision to Watson in the first fight and was losing the second one uintil that devastating uppercut in the 11th.

Calzaghe has never looked like losing at 168 apart from the split decision against Reid where he broke his hand after the first few rounds.

Both great fighters but Calzaghe for me.

 

I totally dissagree with you on this i'm afraid.


If you can be arsed, look for pfp british boxers of all time threads and I bet Calzaghe is higher than Eubank.

(BTW I cant be arsed ocs I know its true )

 

Eubank was a superior physical being and better boxer than Nigel Benn

Benn just had that nasty streak and heart and of course brutal punch

Eubank I think might have been superior to Calzaghe

Eubank himself said he nearly knocked Calzaghe out in the closing seconds of their fight

Have a close look yourself - he defenetly nailed him good