Were these super middleweights overrated?

No. Calzaghe and Eubank were both excellent fighters. Froch was a very good fighter, but not on the same level as the first two.

 

Calzaghe wasn't but I feel both Eubanks and Crotch were.

 

Calzaghe is rated about correctly among or atop the best of the division.

Eubank underrated by most, and overrated by me lol- 13-0-2 at SMW prior to Collins at the tail end of his prime. I have not done rankings for divisions outside of the original 8, but my guess is he is borderline top 10, but just a guess.

Froch- rated about right by most. A solid guy but not great

 

Interesting idea, editing what the thread was about. The funny game to play is making it look like people are giving absurd answers. You make it something like "Who would win Prime 4 Prime Kid McCoy Vs Eric Crumble" then once a few people answer Kid McCoy, you edit it to "Who would win Prime 4 Prime Kid McCoy Vs George Foreman", and watch the confusion. Though it works better when editing has a time limit, and you do it at the last possible second, then by the time people notice, they can't change their answers.

As for the actual question, I dislike Eubank, so I won't answer that, though I feel he gets too much credit for the WBO belt.

Froch and Calzaghe are probably rated about right IMO. Calzaghe was the better, probably the best in the division's short history. Froch was very good, though not exactly one of the greats, fought good competition and did well against them on the whole.

 

Fortunately people quoted the original question to validate that this is a fraudulent thread and one poor question followed by a 2nd slightly better but still poor question.

 

I don't mind OP, but he really needs to make less threads, and put more effort into the ones he makes. If he did that I don't think anyone would have any trouble with him.

I remember a while back on another forum we had this troll called mrduckbears. He got banend from a few places. The amount of hate he got was amazing. His method of trolling was low effort thread after low effert thread. Every thread would consist of the text of a dailymailonline article cut and paste with no attribution, and his icon was Winnie The Pooh.

Op is not on that level, but that's why he gets some flack.

 

Yeah, I think Mark is a decent guy. I tried talking to him once but he thought I was being condescending, oh well.

He obviously loves boxing and has some knowledge although I find some of his analysis based on strange criteria. The threads need to be a little more consistent.

A shorter catchy thread name- not a paragraph

An OP that matches the title- rather than naming a thread and making an OP that asks a slightly different question.

I can deal with no commas and periods, but they would be nice as well lol

 

I think he could do with putting more of his own opinions in the OP, or atleast express them more in his threads. In general he could do with responding more to replies in his own threads, and generally engaging more.

 

All three are absurdly overrated on this forum, yes.

I've heard clowns pick Calzaghe over Michael Spinks on this forum.

And Eubank for some strange reason is always referred to as a "great". I get that you Brits loved him, but the man fell far short of "great".

And it didnt help Eubank's case that was blatantly afraid of the likes of Toney, Nunn, and McCallum. That lisping sonuvabitch is without question overrated.

 

Mark Ant editing his thread but leaving behind tremendous amounts of forensic evidence lololool.

Legend

 

Interesting? I have not seen anyone pick him to beat Spinks...I must have missed that one. It surely is not reflective of this forum even as it has declined over the years.

Eubank? I am probably his biggest fan on here and from the states. Seems like most UK guys I interact with favor Benn. I likely overrate him on a perceived h2h ability not ranking. But I feel he is generally underrated by most...

 

I think he is used to Quora where you ask a question and get responses rather than a forum based dialogue and sharing/debating of ideas. Not a big deal but I enjoy and learn from the back and forth both as a participant and observer.

 

I think Eubank was a very good fighter, and theres a couple of elite middleweights in history that he was talented enough to give a good run. Others not so much.

Benn was less talented, but willing to test himself more against elite opposition.

I think Eubank pretty openly wanted no parts of Michael Nunn at a time when Nunn ruled the division.

Froch is overrated at times, but I think he's fairly rated most of the time. Froch is what he is, a classic overachiever. A limited guy who got a lot further than where his talent level should have taken him.

I do think both Calzaghe and Eubank in their primes would defeat Froch.