Joe Calzaghe vs Chris Eubank Better Resume

Eubank by some distance.

The likes of Watson at his aggressive best, Benn at his best twice - far more dangerous than Reid or Woodhall or Brewer or Mitchell, an overhyped Lacy, onedimensional Kessler, old Hopkins or old Jones. Then there's Malinga at his best, still better than Reid, Woodhall, Brewer or Mitchell or Lacy. Rocchigiani at his best - better than Kessler. Lindell Holmes - more dangerous than Hopkins and Jones. Tony Thornton for me was a slight slice over Mitchell or Brewer, and Watson at his technical best was streets ahead of Woodhall.

 

Calzaghe has the better resume lengthwise. In fact noone beats his resume for that, its the BEST EVER at SMW in that respect.

but sure Eubank's best fights reached higher and were more often than Calzaghe's last fights 'Kessler and Lacy' peak ie Eubank had the better 'batting average'.

But then LOADS of SMWs had better batting averages than Calzaghe, Calzaghe is famous for having a less than average batting average. Calzaghe deliberately picked low/oldie quality opposition to maintani a long unbeaten record.

 

I think Eubank had to dig deeper for his big wins than Calzaghe. In overall quality of opponent they are quite even if you count Calzaghe's wins over Jones and Hopkins as meaning anything (which I don't really).

However I feel Eubank was never the same after Watson II. If this had not happened I think he probably would have gone onto bigger and better things and acquitted himself well, if not beaten, some of the top Americans. If he had pulled the trigger a bit more I think he would also have beaten Benn again which would put his legacy in a different light as a unified champion.

OK I have wondered off topic so in my mind I would say Calzaghe if we are looking at just the names on his record. But in my heart I say Eubank as he beat a peak Benn and a peak Watson rather than faded legends.

 

Eubank has the better Top5, perhaps even 10. Afterwards it´s more even, perhaps in Joe C´s favour.

Calzaghe compensates with him unifying and his lengthy reign as a WBO beltholder though.

 

I'm sure Calzaghe would have struggled big time with John Jarvis, Dan Sherry, Ray Close, Mauricio Amaral, Tony Thornton, fat man Dan Schommer and past it Lindell Holmes. :roll:

 

I HATE Eubank, but would say he had the better overall resume as atberry has so eloquently pointed out. I like JC, used to believe in him 6 yrs or so BEFORE BHop and Co, but in typical modern day boxing it NEVER happened...

but JC would have to fight hard against the same company and no doubt suffer a few defeats - Lacy was NOTHING overhpyed by the machine, likewise so is Pavlik to BHop, great fight for Hop though it was.

it's the same sort of arguement I have for modern greats vs past great, sure their all great fighters, but would the modern ones have remained on top fighting the comp of the 30s, 40s & 50s? Not without suffering some significant losses, losses that in many cases would have religated them to Fringe Contention & Journeyman status.

same sort of squaring off, opponents to opponents - Eubank wins it me thinks!

 

:deal

 

Boils down to quality vs. quantity, really.

 

Thornton could've knocked Joe out with a right hand. And Holmes would've.

 

Bernard Hopkins
Mikkel Kessler
Robin Reid
Richie Woodhall
Jeff Lacy
Chris Eubank
Byron Mitchell


Graciano Rochiggiani
Lindell Holmes
Tony Thornton
Nigel Benn
Michael Watson x2
Henry Wharton
Thulani Malinga


I'll go with Eubank, easily.

 

Not much in it, but at least most of the so-so guys during Eubank's run were just that...B or C level but with competent basic tools... Jarvis, Close Gimenez, esset etc...

except Storey, Amaral and Shommer the last two of which were inronically probably his worst two efforts.

Calzaghe on the other hand fought some real trash at times.Tocker Pudwill

Another difference though is calzaghe did eventually step up and fight who was highest regarded around his weight.Took him ages and some like Lacy might actually have been just B\C level hypejobs, but he did it and eubank didn't.

Incidentally Tony Thornton, though a bit of a joke with his punching postman nickname or whatever it was, actually was a solid legit top 10 fighter with decent talent imo, at least for a few years circa 88-92 gainst Dewitt, Sosa, Collins, Eubank and ending against Toney.A 2nd-tier Briscoe clone, but a solid one nonetheless.

 

Pudwill was better than Storey and Shommer, particually the latter who had no business even fighting for a world title, Eubank must feel embarrassed to this day with his performance there

 

I'm not sure Pudwill and "better" go together at all.