Bookmark Website  | Free Registration  | The Team
Boxing Champions |  Boxing Schedule |  Boxing Video  |  Boxing History   |  Pound For Pound  | Lounge  | The Wire |  Audio  | Arcade

Navigation
Go Back   Boxing Forum > Boxing Forums > Boxing History
Reply
Thread Navigation

#321
Old 11-21-2013, 07:52 PM
Humean
Undisputed Champion
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Scotland
Posts: 1,067
Rep Power: 3 Humean has a reputation beyond reputeHumean has a reputation beyond reputeHumean has a reputation beyond reputeHumean has a reputation beyond reputeHumean has a reputation beyond reputeHumean has a reputation beyond reputeHumean has a reputation beyond reputeHumean has a reputation beyond reputeHumean has a reputation beyond reputeHumean has a reputation beyond reputeHumean has a reputation beyond repute
Points: 1,000,024,812.75
Bank: 29,529,327,903.13
Total Points: 30,529,352,715.88
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IronDanHamza View Post
No he didn't look good against Collins. Not in my mind.

I'd have given Calzaghe credit if he beat a prime Collins as it would be his best win. Which in my eyes speaks for itself. Because whilst definitely being a good fighter and a good win I don't think it would be that good of a win. For example, I think McCallum's win over Collins was a good win but it's not that good.

And Eubank lost twice. And it was 2 years prior to when Calzaghe fought him and no significant wins inbetween.

No I didn't say he wasn't of high quality in 1993. I said he was passed his best in 1993. He definitely wasn't of high quality in 1997 that's for sure.

It's not unimportant. Because he hadn't shown high quality in years up to that fight and hadn't looked impressive even longer.

It's really simple. Eubank had not looked impressive in years, years. The last time he "impressive" in your eyes was when he had two losing efforts to Collins which was two whole years prior. The last time he actually won something of note was even longer. He'd been struggling badly with fringe guys for quite a while up to that point. He had a week to prepare and was unranked at the weight.

I don't consider that impressive, nor "high quality", "damn good" or any other nice descriptive terms. It's not impressive.
I disagree that Eubank didn't look good against Collins and don't think that anyone could narrowly lose to Collins circa 1995 and be anything other than a high quality super middleweight at that moment in time. So when did he actually lose his high quality then if not 1993,1994? 1995? 1996? I'm not contending that Eubank was at his absolute peak against Calzaghe but he was clearly of high quality at that time and to say he wasn't just seems incredulous. You are even backtracking on the amount of credit you'd give Calzaghe if he'd beaten a prime Collins, from the 'world of credit' to merely 'a good win'. Your definition of an impressive win seems like it would be too narrow for almost any fighter to have.
Reply With Quote
Humean is offline
Advertisements
>>>TO REMOVE THESE ADS, PLEASE REGISTER HERE FOR FREE<<<
#322
Old 11-21-2013, 08:19 PM
IronDanHamza
IronDanHamza
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 24,019
Rep Power: 64 IronDanHamza has a reputation beyond reputeIronDanHamza has a reputation beyond reputeIronDanHamza has a reputation beyond reputeIronDanHamza has a reputation beyond reputeIronDanHamza has a reputation beyond reputeIronDanHamza has a reputation beyond reputeIronDanHamza has a reputation beyond reputeIronDanHamza has a reputation beyond reputeIronDanHamza has a reputation beyond reputeIronDanHamza has a reputation beyond reputeIronDanHamza has a reputation beyond repute
Points: 29,220,116,090,319.35
Bank: 496,542,740,766,807.38
Total Points: 525,762,856,857,126.75
One of the best posters on the site. - Barnburner medal of honor - New England For ur award winning thread buddy - The Surgeon For getting more than 80% on my quiz. - Barnburner Super-Poster - McGoorty 
You have excellent boxing knowledge keep sharing! - rorymac Prize for thread contributions - McGoorty Merry Crimbo - The Surgeon for the facts... - Alx. Thanks for joining the discussion in my thread about GF's and boxing, its nice to hear everyones experiences with being a fan of the sport!!! - Atreyu Khalil 
Cool dude - BoxingGenius27 Happy New Year - Freedom. on the house... - mathed IronDanHamza knows boxing! - LoadedWraps 
Lou Gehrig's Disease (ALS) - New England Mourning - Anti-Gang - Melanoma - Barnburner Adoptee - Bone Cancer - Child Exploitation and Abuse - Hope and Support - Peace - Retinoblastoma - Right to Life - Student Sexual Assault - Barnburner 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Humean View Post
I disagree that Eubank didn't look good against Collins and don't think that anyone could narrowly lose to Collins circa 1995 and be anything other than a high quality super middleweight at that moment in time. So when did he actually lose his high quality then if not 1993,1994? 1995? 1996? I'm not contending that Eubank was at his absolute peak against Calzaghe but he was clearly of high quality at that time and to say he wasn't just seems incredulous. You are even backtracking on the amount of credit you'd give Calzaghe if he'd beaten a prime Collins, from the 'world of credit' to merely 'a good win'. Your definition of an impressive win seems like it would be too narrow for almost any fighter to have.
I think losing to Collins twice shows what level you're at. What is so good about Collins?

Collins is a good fighter, beating him is certainly a good win because he's a good fighter but I just don't consider him that good. Seems to get overrated in time to me due beating faded versions of both Eubank and Benn who are big favourites here.

I would say Eubank lost his high quality when he was struggling with the likes of Close, Schommer, Rocchigiani and such, between the second Benn fight and the rest of 1994. He showed he clearly was not a high quality fighter anymore and then showed it again by losing twice to Collins and then definitely was 2 years (And nothing of note) later in 1997. I mean, the tape is there. It's easy to see how badly he was performing on a consistent basis. To say it's incredulous to consider him anything but "high quality" in 1997 is nothing short of ridiculous. Let's say he did perform well against Collins, taking him to a close loss is impressive. Let's consider that as fact for a second, he still went a whole 2 years of doing nothing of note. How is that high quality? It's not.

I'm not backtracking at all. I said if Joe beat a prime version of Collins I would give him the world of credit because I would. It would definitely be his best win IMO. Still doesn't mean it's some great win, it's not. Just because I'd give him a lot of credit and he'd deserve credit it doesn't make it a great win. They aren't hand in hand.

The last part is just not true at all and you getting to that conclusion based of me not considering beating Collins to be something that's overly impressive is just ridiculous aswell.
Reply With Quote
IronDanHamza is offline
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
floyd, srr?

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


Privacy Policy - Submit News - Feedback - Site Map - Advertise with Us

Copyright 2003-2013 BoxingScene LLC All rights reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:35 AM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.