Is Chris Eubank the lowest ranked divisional ATG ever?

I'm not the one continuing to troll to get a reaction

 

In the answer to OPs question, yes, I don't think Jake Lamotta was ever top 2 middleweight in the world head to head. I think he got too many gift decisions and losses.

The whole basis of this thread seems to be on the basis that The Ring didn't rank him in the top 10. But the Ring rankings are opinion. When Eubank first became champion at SMW they had Nunn and Barkley ahead of him. Yet Eubanks had beaten Benn who had stopped Barkley in a round. Eubank-Watson was clearly at a higher level than Barkley. So in answer to LUFCs question, Eubank was undoubtably top 2 during this period as he was clearly a class above Barkley.

The fact they're leapfrogging Benn over Eubank on the basis of a draw if true is simply bad. I'm wondering if the McCellan win leapfrogged Benn over Eubank though

SMW resume wise Eubanks is better than Nunn, Liles and it's on par with Toney's. Jones has better top wins but lesser depth.

In terms of ability at the weight, Eubank would of taken the past prime Nunn and fought on even terms with Toney. Jones would of beaten him though

Let's analyse his resume a bit:

Watson 1 and 2: Probably his best win - I thought Watson won the first fight and the second was an absolute war of the ages and an ATG fight

Benn 1 and 2: An absolute great win over a fellow belt holder and a decent draw. This was the only SHW unification in the 90s unless I'm mistaken

Rocchigiani: I'm not sure if OP is aware about Rocchigiani history. He was an undefeated IBF champion that had moved upto LHW. He would go on to beat Michael Nunn for the WBC LHW title. He also was beating Dariusz Michaeuski when Darius feigned an injury/foul. This is a top tier win

Mallinga - Mallinga was robbed against Benn and would go onto beat Benn for the title. He was robbed of his title in Italian gift decision and then won it back of Robin Reid.

Lindel Holmes - ex IBF title holder

Ray Close - very good European Champion, who beat a future WBC champion

Collins 1 and 2 - Close fights. I think he probably deserved the rematch.

Is he great? Yes I think so in different metrics. Boxing is partly an entertainment business and he was one of the biggest draws and entertainers of the 90s, he's iconic. On a boxing basis, yes, because he's fought fellow world champions, fought different styles and gone through absolute hell in wars to win through adversity. In terms of boxing ability what he's doing is on a very high level.

 

Calzaghe also had so many off-nights when he should've been fresh, looking truly awful/amateurish at least six times (Thornberry, Starie, Salem etc) and arguably losing to Reid.

 

You are definitely the one out of line here, not Luf. And if you don't care about the opinions of those who haven't boxed professionally, I don't see why you are so upset.

No one has called Eubank anything derogatory. Luf only says that he never broke the top 2 at SMW and isn't in the top 10 all time, both perfectly reasonable opinions and you lose your **** over that. It's just a bit weird.

 

LaMotta isn't a consensus top 10 MW, though, I'd say.

 

yeah, this was one of the crazier rants. Maybe not enough to get booted, but we'll see.

 

No they aren't. In what way can Barkley ever be ranked ahead of Eubank? It's nonsense.

And yes he avoided Toney and Nunn. It doesn't mean he loses. I take you also assume Charles Burley would beat Sugar Ray Robinson. Because Robinson avoided him. I take it you also think Cocoa Kid beats Robinson and Holman Williams and Bert Lytell. You have to if you want to be consistent with your logic. So I hope you don't have Sugar Ray Robinson down as a great fighter. Or Henry Armstrong for that matter.

In reality it simply means he has more to lose and it's not worth the risk. He had a deal with Sky making a huge amount per fight while selling out stadiums. Why would he risk it against Toney or Nunn when he gets very little extra income? If Toney and Nunn were PPV stars and it could have made him extra income it would of made it worthwhile but they weren't.

 

I also have a lot of respect for Eubank. Always came in shape, even though he had a hard time making weight, and his performance in Watson 2 was also absolutely heroic, even though it's hard to celebrate given the tragic end.

And I like that, unlike most, he is perfectly up front with that he had no interest in facing the likes of Jones and Toney, since they were too dangerous. He was satisfied with what he did, and he did make the most of that, being a fantastic showman that he was.

 

No but it's a division with a greater history and many still have him there and pick him over number 1s, which I find unrepresentive of the boxer he really was

 

I think it was very important that Eubank remained at the top of the game and controlling boxing, he couldn't risk losing to McCallum or Toney and we must be glad he didn't - the game wouldn't be what it is today (the ring entrances that Naz took to HBO, the showbiz and direct TV deals that Eubank broke so much ground with).

Also, we forget his activity - no other fighter out there could've defended their world title 5-6x a year for five years. Going to South Africa where it was 6,000ft above sea level and Germany where he was spat at on the way in.

The US boxing media despised Eubank. But he won them over at the end by coming back for the first Thompson fight as chief support to Naz, with his bravery - 'I take back everything I ever said about him.' - Larry Merchant
'When have you EVER seen such guts?' - Bernard Fernandez
'The greatest display of heroism I've seen for a long time.' - George Foreman

 

He was champion of the world when the champion wasn't fighting the best by a long long way. It actually means less

He was also losing all over the place and getting all kind of gift decision thanks to MOB connections