how good was chris eubank?

I agree with all of this.

 

Very good fighter. Not as good as Benn in my opinion.

 

I think his defence was most impressive. He would **** that right glove to catch jabs, use lateral foot movement or lateral head movement, then could dip and lean or cup his forehead if those phases were got by.

Outside of Watson II, when he just gave up, I never saw him hit cleanly with two head punches on the spin in his prime, only an occasional lead right one time (and his chin would pass that test every time).

The best display of his reflexes was against Watson in their first fight, extremely impressive.

 

He always seemed to have incredible talent / ability in his locker but rarely produced it

I think he was a guy who fought to his opponents level

He'd have been competitive with any fighter out there though

 

He also had a TERRIFIC stiff jab, and perhaps the sneakiest counter one-two I've ever seen in R7 of Benn '90.

 

Great guy too

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCsl8RIYCvk[/ame]

 

I heard you were something of a Chris Eubank fan Atberry, any truth to that?:think

 

I'm not a fan of anyone

 

Michael Marley - email
Great fighter, great personality. Eubank was a great talent in the South Bronx, I remember Johnny Bos talking about him back then. I went to Belfast with DK and never forget the hilarious 'hardly Rudyard Kipling' remark he made to Ray Close before schooling him in the ring.


Michael Marley - email
RE bythemoonlightshadow, Bos used to say there was a kid from South Bronx in Gleasons Gym sparring with a Union Jack t-shirt on who was being run out the gym for being bone idol with his showboating. He didn't find his name for a while but asked me to remember the name when he did because he was boxing the ears off fighters at the new Gleasons. However he had to flee NY after a street fight in which an "opponent" lost his ear or a chunk of same, try Bos himself for more info,

This content is protected

:?

 

You should read his book mate, its very forthright and honest about his past. I wasn't a fan of Eubank the boxer but after reading the book I'm certainly a fan of Eubank the man.

 

Very good fighter. Not a Great. One of the best in his weight class(s) in an extremely strong era for both Middleweight and Super Middleweight

 

Why, just why?

 

Every fight, Reg would say "Well he once went the distance with "(World Champion)" so he can't be that bad". :yep

 

The rose tintedness comes from hindsight.

For arguments sake here is The Ring's Top 10 Heavyweights for October 15 1991:

Holyfield (World Champ)
Tyson
Bowe
Ruddock
Witherspoon
Mercer
Foreman
Tucker
Lewis
Moorer

It looks brilliant, and indeed at the time it was considered good, but to be honest not great; looking at time, there seem big flaws in it:

Holyfield was considered too small and was keeping the title warm for Tyson...

Tyson; clearly not as good as he once was, but it is not going to matter when he fights Holyfield, he is still a lot better...

Bowe; looks good, but Tubbs has put a few doubts in people's mind.

Ruddock, a dangerous costumer for anyone, maybe second only Tyson when it all becomes said and done...

Witherspoon; the fact the poster child for the lost generation still gets ranked, suggests all is not quite right at Heavyweight.

Mercer; fun, but clearly limited.

Foreman; had his fun taking Holyfield 12 rounds, proved his point, should just retire now.

Tucker; amazing what Don King can do, he has not put in a decent performance for over four years, and yet is still a top 10 fighter...

Lewis; undefeated yes, but still looks amateurish, and a British Heavyweight has not won the big one for nearly 100 years, history is not on his side...

Moorer; Why did he not step up to Cruiserweight first? His chin looks too soft at Heavyweight and his conditioning does not seem the best either.

In 20 years time, the rose tintedness of history will look back fondly at 2011...

 

:yep

Memories...