Legacy's of Benn and Eubanks ...

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

 

ApatheticLeader, the thing you have to rearlise is Eubank post watson fight was a completly different animal to before. In a strange neither persons life was going to be the same after that fight, watson for obvisue reasons but eubank seemed to go in to every fight after that almost holding his punches, having enough skill to get by with points victorys..

 

well eubank may not have been the most gifted of boxers but he could punch and had a hell of a chin!!!
as for his good performances, well he was world champ for 4 and a half years making i believe around 18 defences. i agree that some of his performances were lacklustre but he always seemed to find a way to win until collins came along.
i remember the rocchigani defence was a good one and the 2nd watson fight was incredible.

as for benn , he had great wins over dewitt, barkley, 2nd eubank fight was a draw but great performance and the mclellan fight emphised what benn was all about.

these two guys had it all and could raise their game to better opponents.

i agree that jones, toney, mcallum etc ,were great fighters but to say that these two would not have stood a chance is ridiculous.

 

Have you read his autobiography? He says that he was really deep down in love with the sport but also admits that he was only interested in fighting challengers for his WBO belt. He covers the Roy Jones issue & says that had he become a number one challenger for the WBO he would have fought him. Good book, I recommend it.

Yes he did say that, it's a shame we didn't have Michael Nunn somewhere involved in that interview, he could have got a nice dig in on the WBA as well. I should imagine it would have involved Don King.

 

NO, he held a minor version of a alphabet bet, that does NOT make a champion. He defended it against mostly poor challenges and mostly was ridiculously unconvincing.

Benn did a lot more in his career than Eubank ever did, but on the whole I think he was a level below the very best.

 

I do realise that. I also realise that Watson deserved the victory in the first fight in Eubank and was clearly the superior fighter in the second. People go on about how he was a different fighter post-Watson, my point is he was never that good at any stage in his career.

 

I wouldn't. Sumbu would outbox all three, with only Benn standing a real chance of scoring the KO. Kalambay was better than Eubank, no doubt there. An excellent boxer. He even 'outsmarted' Graham, an almost impossible feat and his performance against McCallum was a schooling bordering on embarrassing levels.

 

I don't agree with everything you're saying here, but you do have some good points. This being one of them.

 

so on that basis i assume you think calzaghe was not a champion due to holding the wbo version.
it seems to me you have something against the wbo, i watched eubank at live shows on 4 occasions and he was awesome!!!
and as for the first benn fight well that version of eubank would have given anyone a hard time, i dont care who it was.
also you have to take into account that eubank was never the same after the 2nd watson fight, that tragedy messed him up a bit.
so dont come back with all this bull**** about him not being a champion!!!

 

This content is protected

This content is protected

Chris' Truck.... lol

 

Same ****ing bull**** each and every time - what's the point.....

 

your a waste of space goodbye!!!!!

 

Fine ******, then I'll answer one of your last posts in more depth.

I have nothing against the WBO, apart from the fact that you can get away for the longest time with fighting truly god-awful fights, which is what Eubank (and to a lesser extent, Calzaghe) did when long standing holders of the belt. The WBO is just a worthless governing body like the rest - except even more so because it's so recent and it's rankings are so damn poor. I mean FFS, it's an extension of the WBA.

Calzaghe wasn't a champion until he fought Kessler as far as I'm concerned. Maybe in unifing by beating Lacy you can call him a champion, but sure as hell not before then. And it's not even the fact that Calzaghe beat a fellow title holder that made finally made him a champion in my eyes, but the fact he finally beat an opponent that was top 3 in his division.

And you seriously, SERIOUSLY ****ing overrating Eubanks performance against Benn, who was still crude, raw, and hadn't yet learned how to pace himself in the ring. It was good, sure, but any fighter with a good chin and a decent defence would have beaten Benn - he was no better that night then he was against Watson. All the top names in the division would have dealt with Benn in a similar fashion, don't make it out to be some kind of superhuman effort.

Answer me this: In his career, how many fighters in the top 5 in their division did Eubank beat? How many good performances did he have in comparison to bad ones?

Actually, I feel like going out of the way to name the truly lousy ones:

Dan Schommer - a fight even Eubank himself admits he lost, and keep in mind he has a monumental ego.
Dan Sherry
Mauricio Amaral Costa (seriously....WTF?!)
Ray Close (both fights)
Thulani Malinga
Mauricio Amaral Costa

All of which were close as hell fights against fighters outside the top 10 of the ring rankings - apart from maybe Malinga.

The last champion to come up with that many awful performances is........???

And seeing as he lost to Collins twice, was the inferior fighter on both occasions against Watson (blatantly should have lost the first fight and got dominated in the second), and other then that beat almost total mediocrity, how the **** can you say he'd have lived with the top fighters? With his win over Benn which he couldn't even replicate? Don't be ****ing stupid.

 

I strongly disagree that the malinga fight nor the first watson fight were bad decisions.

Sherry really just fought to spoil and survive.That was a joke of a performance from him.People forget he was on the verge of getting knocked out anyway.

Eubank had his flaws and bad performances for sure but most of them were after a while as champion, when he was starting to fade\struggle at the weight.

Toney and Nunn were even worse for stinking the joint out over the course of their careers.

 

I never said the Malinga fight was a bad decision, Sherry was by no means at the point of getting KOed (although he was weakening) and seeing as the score was a SD at the time the fight was stopped, Sherry clearly did more then simply spoil and try to survive. Eubank was extremely lazy that fight and showed NOTHING to suggest he was world class.

Eubanks best performances were against Rocchigiani (I'll gladly give him his due, he was very good then), against Wharton (a very underrated fighter) and, paradoxically, in his defeats against Thompson - where he showed more skill and heart than in any fight since, well, ever actually.