Is Chris Eubank an ATG ? If not , what could he have done/ should he have done / to become one?

Out of the "fab 4" of McClellan, Jackson, Benn and himself, he's the one I rate lowest. He was a good fighter though no doubt. Great chin, always there to fight

I think having simply a better resume would help him. Perhaps a win over McClellan (though I think McClellan would've beaten him) and less losses would've helped. Unifying 160/168 too. A singular WBO belt does not impress me (inb4 "but Crawford")

His series against Benn is his one and only claim to fame.

 

Great fighter but not an ATG.

 

I don't think he should be (an ATG) if I'm honest but I have him top 10 at SMW so with my own criteria I have to say yes. Benn too.

To be universally be seen as an ATG he would've had to KO Jones, Toney and Hopkins imo. Probably McClellan and Jackson as well

 

Nowhere near. Never anything more than a mere titlist (as opposed to the recognised or unified champion) in either of the divisions in which he won a world title. By his own admission wanted no part of Roy Jones and hoped he'd never have to face him. The beneficiary of more than one questionable decision in his run of uninspiring defences 1992-95.

Quality win over Benn, and decent ones against Watson and Rocchigiani, but that's a poor return for a whole career in which he boxed something like 24 'world title fights'. Middle and Super-Middle had an amazing crop of fighters in the 1990s, too. He never faced any of McCallum, Kalambay, Reggie or Glen Johnson, Julian or John David Jackson, Toney, Nunn, Jones Jr, McClellan, Hopkins etc., never mind beat them! The idea that anyone who you can level that at could be an all-time great is pretty dubious. Hell, even someone like Castro would have been a considerable improvement on the guys he was feasting on for the most part.

Eubank himself never made any attempt to deny that, having established himself by beating Benn, he was happy to take the path of least resistance and pick up his £400k per fight basic guarantees (and he was sometimes fighting five times a year) on Sky's conveyor belt of mediocrity.

I love the guy as a character, and he was a warrior and tremendously brave fighter when he needed to be. But his record is well short of greatness.

 

Well said.

 

I loved his fight, first with Benn and his two with Watson,and that's about it . He had some right stinkers. Ironically his last few fights with Joe calz and Thompson he showed real heart and guts. Just a shame he didn't take on those big names, who knows, he could have shocked one!

 

Yeah, that's one of the great ironies with Eubank, and a big part of what makes him such a fascinating character. The way he could fight through the pain barrier, soak up punishment, keep believing and turn losing positions in to winning ones through sheer grit and courage (Benn I, Watson II), or at least go out on his shield and leave nothing in the ring (Calzaghe, Thompson I and II) was completely at odds with how he spoke about the sport and how he went about building his career outside the ring. He always claimed to dislike the sport, that it was just a means to an end, that it was senseless to take risks and endure punishment when you could earn great money and remain healthy by taking the easier route etc. And yet when he was required to, he displayed bravery and heart which completely negated those kind of sentiments.

He really was an enigma.

I think the really elite guys I mentioned above (Jones Jr., a pre-Toney Nunn, probably Toney himself, McCallum and Kalambay) were a definite step too far for a guy like Eubank, but like you I'd have loved to have seen him in with the Jackson (both of them), Johnson (both of them), Castro, a pre-prime Hopkins etc., or even Herol Graham (who Eubank apparently wanted zero part of). The Super-Middleweight Nunn was a lot more vulnerable (needed a complete gift in that first fight with Cordoba) and a win for Eubank there wouldn't have been out of the question by 1993 / 1994. That one might well have been made if it hadn't been for the draw in the Benn rematch scuppering Don King's plans and voiding the prospective contracts he had in place for the 'winner and loser' of the fight.

Eubank would have had his work cut out against even those slightly below elite guys, but he certainly wouldn't have been disgraced against any of them if he was focussed. A real waste.

 

I'm a huge fan of Eubank Snr. and followed boxing more in the 90's than I do now as for me it was a bit of a Golden age, especially at MW/SMW and HW but, I fully agree with you and I give Benn the edge over Eubank regarding legacy purely based on the fact that he plied his trade in the States for a time and beat some good names, and of course there was the war with Mclellan when Benn was on the slide, an incredibly dangerous fight to take but Benn just would not be denied.

I also, genuinely beleive that the second Watson fight outcome and an incident involving a death in a RTA if I recall correctly made Eubank more risk averse, both regarding his own safety and that of his opponent. There was a time when Eubank was rendering opponents unconscious regularly and I fully understand that, that happens less as your quality of opponent improves, I just think later on in his career, he was less inclined to pull the trigger.

Certainly displayed an ATG chin and heart though.

 

And just think, if the WBO had never existed, then Eubank would have Had to fight one of those top names in early 90 "s. I reckon he'd have given the top guys a hard fight but never enough to beat em. The WBO was Eubank s life line.

 

won a recognished title and defended it many times.

but he didnt and dont think he could have.


He did have an ATG chin though, thats a fact. But was never close to being ATG. Rhe question really is whether he was an elite or not, I dont think he was, but he did take Benn's scalp which was outstanding.

 

I'd call it fab five, with watson but good stuff.

disturbing that almost half of the fab five ended up with life threatening injuries...not a great advert for the professionalism of the wbo at the time.

 

He certainly did show heart in those fights with Thompson and against a natural cruiserweight no less. It showed he had a very good chin and was tough as old boots.

Unfortunately, the 2nd Watson fight took his killer instinct. He had Thompson out on his feet on more than one occasion as I remember it and just couldn't pull the trigger.

I'm pretty sure that's also why he was content to go the distance against the lesser opposition he faced during much of the first half of the 90s.

Like has been said, a great character but not a great fighter.

 

What could he have done to become a great fighter? Taken on the plentiful greater challenges that were out there between 160 and 168 in the early 90s. He fought Benn and had a tough time, he struggled past Watson on both occasions and that was pretty much it. He never left his comfort zone of the UK and fought any of the multitude of US fighters around at the time. With his 'love to hate him' persona, he would have got attention over there. But the WBO was a poor man's world title back then - it was clearly just a belt rather than a world title that was at the same level as the WBC, WBA and IBF. So the onus was on him to prove himself beyond that narrow horizon against more 'legitmate' titlists...and with the exception of a fellow British World titlist, he didn't do it.

Eubank reminds me of a lot of German fighters in that they tend to be satisfied with being big fish in small ponds and make meaningless 'world title' defenses against inferior opposition safe in the knowledge that they've got an audience who will pay to see them. I don't blame him for that, it just excludes him from any sensible conversation about greatness.