Is Chris Eubank a top 100 ATG?

oh no absolutely, totally agree. his resume is weak but i'm ranking him (perhaps unfairly) on talent. it's like ricardo lopez and roy jones: their resumes aren't up to their skills but it was so breath-taking i give them credit

 

fair enough :good

 

Damn good, but not top 100. That's no knock on Eubank, but it's just that tough of a list to crack. Even if we only include the original 8 divisions, that's 12 fighters a division of all time making it. Throw in the Junior and Super divisions, and that cuts that average # of fighters down even more.

 

Very good but not top 100, probably top 200.

 

Eubank was very different.

He didn't try to be historic in a sporting sense and by his own admission didn't even see boxing as a sport.

There were always three other world champions at his weights so none of them can be considered 'all-timers' - just 10 years prior there was only one champion, let alone 100 years prior.

By 'them' I mean Nunn, McCallum, Jackson, Eubank and Benn.

Toney can consider himself 'ATG', considering he beat Nunn and McCallum and moved up and beat a third reigning world champion in Barkley.

 

He certainly showed signs - stamps, infact - of true greatness in Benn I, Watson II fights. His win against Rocchigiani was excellent on all grounds - Rocky being a German in Germany, 35-0-0, former undefeated world champion at the weight, 6-foot-3 and a southpaw!

He gave ATG Calzaghe his toughest ever fight, taking the fight on short notice.

He had more than the potential to be one of the greatest in history, but was hugely unfortunate to have the best lb4lb fighters at his weights - Nunn, McCallum, Toney, Jones Jr!

And he was based in Britain, remember, not America.

 

I agree on Tyson, but no way in hell is Eubank top 100 not even close!! Hes lucky if he makes in the top 200. There has been alot of great fighters, imeand to be honest i dont even think he makes it in the top 200.

And Carter,Briscoe dont come close to making the top 100 either.

Maybe Valdez does,but even then im not sure.

 

How is it that people have this discussion and always forget about Collins (who beat Benn and Eubank twice each)? Or Kalambay for that matter?

 

:deal this

but Benn would have been more succesfull :smoke

 

I dont think Eubank would have beaten Andre Ward:nono

Also lets see how Bute and Abraham turn out they have the potential to be as good or better

Eubank was pretty good but he tends to get overrated a little bit here.

 

fair enough. it's tough to say, i don't have the faith in my boxing knowledge to actually sit down and make a top 100

i just love eubank and have trouble saying that's 100 better fighters (though thinking logically, they're likely are)

 

Take the Benn fight out of that after McLellan he was a shell of a fighter prime Benn would of destroyed Collins.

 

Eubank is in fact top 20.

 

Wooah. Wait.

Possibly he could've been, if he took Nunn after either Benn fight or nicked a decision against Toney after the Rocchigiani fight and retired, or something. Big if's, but hey.

He was was only ever 1/4 world champion, as were the others!

He's not top 100.

He did have the longest unbeaten run between (Larry) Holmes and Roy Jones Jr, and he did appear to beat a borderline invincible opponent one night (Watson, 2nd fight), but he still cannot be a top 100-150 all-timer in the sport because he was only the 1/4 champion of his weights!

 

Not even close. Maybe top 250 and that is pushing it.