Comments Thread For: Chris Eubank Jr. Destroys Avni Yildirim in Three Rounds

[Mexican_Puppet]

The NEW arthur abraham, and he's turkish and named Yildrim

Abraham was way better

And he had a great chin

[bluepete]

I watched one of his fights on YouTube and wasn't impressed. Not saying he can't win over his elderly opponent in the opening round cuz I think that's winnable for him, but he's 30/70 vs Callum at best I think and if he somehow upsets 2 opponents I can't see him beating Eubank Jr at all.



Lol bro quit taking everything so f#cking serious. I like being serious, but I like joking too sometimes and either it's obvious with anyone with 2 brain cells to rub together or I put a lol after my joke (like in the post you quoted) to make it clear I'm just kidding or playing around.

Respect on the projecting angle doe I think a lot of cats do that too in fairness. I'm not that guy doe. I think Groves would fight whoever at 168.



True. No shame in that L, but I feel like a lot of people are defining him on that L and let's not act like BJS stock market value isn't at an all time low since he won that belt so that reflects on Eubank Jr too fairly or unfairly.

Sorry if I couldn't see the humour in your post, I'm not used to it around here, mustve overlooked the lol. As for Jnr, he's good to watch but this is the first time he's showed the ingredient that seemed to be missing, power. Whether that's just because of the opponent remains to be seen. Ive always thought its strange he didn't hit harder since he has great speed and looks like he gets alot of leverage.

[Tatabanya]

Yildirim stands there waiting for uppercuts to come like an old man for a late-hour bus.

[Sledgeweather17]

I completely disagree with that

I agree that they should fight the best available

but I do not agree that your opinion on why those fights have not happened (yet) is sufficient justification to immediately draw that conclusion

in some examples you could be right, but not in all

plenty of fighters fought everyone, but were not as good at those who did not, for whatever reason

nobody gave Burley his shot.... Wilder's opponents keep failing drug tests.... Golovkin has avoided better opponents than he has fought.... they ALL said that about Canelo back when he was about 19/20..... fighters develop differently, some come on faster than others.... Chavez Jnr will fight anyone, but he is not very good.... etc etc

actually, not 100% disagreeing with you, but you can't say that as a rule..... it's just not that simple

which is why in Rold's MAAT articles, Cliff briefly mentions fights that did not happen, but specifically states that he does not concern himself with why those fights did not happen..... mainly because he wouldn't know, it would only be guessing, and he-said she-said type information is notoriously unreliable

who would we rely upon for that type of information, someone like say..... Tom Loeffler???

EVERYONE (was dumb as a fkn rock) when they blamed Mayweather for killing the Pac fight back in 2010..... NOW, almost everyone can see that it was Arum, and some have even smartened up enough to wonder why Pac refused the blood tests

you can't go by public opinion

they are both good fighters, but largely untested..... to find out how good, we will have to wait and see..... we don't know the ceiling for either of those guys yet, so you simply cannot refuse to rate them

1) Saunders signed to fight Golovkin, in Kazakhstan.....

I am not going to call Saunders an outstanding fighter just for signing the contract, so why would I refuse to rate him just because Golovkin passed on BJS to fight Canelo?

2) Eubank signed to compete in a knockout tourney where his opponents will be mandated

they have both stepped up in one way or another

more time required, things will become clear

I sort of get what you are trying to say, especially about the he-said-she-said thing. However, you just have to look at a fighter's history to be able to tell what's going on.

Eubank has a history of avoiding top fighters ever since he lost to BJS. He pulled out of the WBA rankings because he was going to be mandated to fight Jacobs, and we know what he did with GGG, he tried to play the he-said-she-said thing back then too but Brook stepped up and it became clear that Eubank was the one refusing to sign because how the hell could Brook have gotten his hands on the contract and Eubank was claiming no contract was placed in front of him? Only way to believe that is for us to complete dumb ourselves down for him.

Now with the revenge rematch thing. Okay that was is a little harder to tell, simply because they both have been avoiding top comp since they fought each other, so it is hard to tell who is ducking who.


But then again, as you said so yourself, Saunders agreed to fight Golovkin in June and Golovkin pulled out, whereas Eubank on the other hand is the one who couldn't find his pen.

So again the behavorial pattern is giving us a hint as to who really is the one that is lying between the two. Saunders has a history of honesty. When he wasn't ready for Golovkin, he didn't make excuses or make up lies about not getting a contract. He went public with it and said he wasn't ready for Golovkin.

When he was ready, he signed the contract. Again, behavioral pattern is what enables us to predict what actually happened.

Eubank always does the opposite of what he says he will do when it comes to elite comp, Saunders tells it exactly how it is.

Ps. I'm not a fan of either of these fighters in case you think I have a personal bias. I'm a Jermall Charlo fan at 160. I got my money, heart, and mind on him.

[ashadam]

Groves vs Eubank Jr will be good and likely the fight of the tournament.

Totally agree in fact could be in the top ten for the year based on what we potentially have to come.

[ashadam]

Well said. Plus, according to Eubank Jr he has wanted the rematch with Saunders ever since the end of their first fight. I know Saunders has said he was willing to do the rematch and he says Eubank wasn’t. But unless I missed something this is just usual Boxing **** talking and mudslinging and i don’t know why we necessarily would take BJS version as truth and assume Eubank is avoiding him and not trying to avenge his only loss.

Only a mad person would take BJS camp over anyone unfortunately these lot talk ****. Saunders has avoided every good fight out there then takes the easy fight, he has defended the **** title 3 times in 2 years.

[Sledgeweather17]

I completely disagree with that

I agree that they should fight the best available

but I do not agree that your opinion on why those fights have not happened (yet) is sufficient justification to immediately draw that conclusion

in some examples you could be right, but not in all

plenty of fighters fought everyone, but were not as good at those who did not, for whatever reason

nobody gave Burley his shot.... Wilder's opponents keep failing drug tests.... Golovkin has avoided better opponents than he has fought.... they ALL said that about Canelo back when he was about 19/20..... fighters develop differently, some come on faster than others.... Chavez Jnr will fight anyone, but he is not very good.... etc etc

actually, not 100% disagreeing with you, but you can't say that as a rule..... it's just not that simple

which is why in Rold's MAAT articles, Cliff briefly mentions fights that did not happen, but specifically states that he does not concern himself with why those fights did not happen..... mainly because he wouldn't know, it would only be guessing, and he-said she-said type information is notoriously unreliable

who would we rely upon for that type of information, someone like say..... Tom Loeffler???

EVERYONE (was dumb as a fkn rock) when they blamed Mayweather for killing the Pac fight back in 2010..... NOW, almost everyone can see that it was Arum, and some have even smartened up enough to wonder why Pac refused the blood tests

you can't go by public opinion

they are both good fighters, but largely untested..... to find out how good, we will have to wait and see..... we don't know the ceiling for either of those guys yet, so you simply cannot refuse to rate them

1) Saunders signed to fight Golovkin, in Kazakhstan.....

I am not going to call Saunders an outstanding fighter just for signing the contract, so why would I refuse to rate him just because Golovkin passed on BJS to fight Canelo?

2) Eubank signed to compete in a knockout tourney where his opponents will be mandated

they have both stepped up in one way or another

more time required, things will become clear

I sort of get what you are trying to say, especially about the he-said-she-said thing. However, you just have to look at a fighter's history to be able to tell what's going on.

Eubank has a history of avoiding top fighters ever since he lost to BJS. He pulled out of the WBA rankings because he was going to be mandated to fight Jacobs, and we know what he did with GGG, he tried to play the he-said-she-said thing back then too but Brook stepped up and it became clear that Eubank was the one refusing to sign because how the hell could Brook have gotten his hands on the contract and Eubank was claiming no contract was placed in front of him? Only way to believe that is for us to complete dumb ourselves down for him.

Now with the revenge rematch thing. Okay that was is a little harder to tell, simply because they both have been avoiding top comp since they fought each other, so it is hard to tell who is ducking who.


But then again, as you said so yourself, Saunders agreed to fight Golovkin in June and Golovkin pulled out, whereas Eubank on the other hand is the one who couldn't find his pen.

So again the behavorial pattern is giving us a hint as to who really is the one that is lying between the two. Saunders has a history of honesty. When he wasn't ready for Golovkin, he didn't make excuses or make up lies about not getting a contract. He went public with it and said he wasn't ready for Golovkin.

When he was ready, he signed the contract. Again, behavioral pattern is what enables us to predict what actually happened.

Eubank always does the opposite of what he says he will do when it comes to elite comp, Saunders tells it exactly how it is.

Ps. I'm not a fan of either of these fighters in case you think I have a personal bias. I'm a Jermall Charlo fan at 160. I got my money, heart, and mind on him. At 168 it's between Rob Brant and Eubank.

[Lou Cipher]

I completely disagree with that

Did you say something or did the toilet burp? Shut your snitch hole little girl before Lou Cipher kicks your vagina over the moon again little snitch ho.

[aboutfkntime]

I sort of get what you are trying to say, especially about the he-said-she-said thing. However, you just have to look at a fighter's history to be able to tell what's going on.

Eubank has a history of avoiding top fighters ever since he lost to BJS. He pulled out of the WBA rankings because he was going to be mandated to fight Jacobs, and we know what he did with GGG, he tried to play the he-said-she-said thing back then too but Brook stepped up and it became clear that Eubank was the one refusing to sign because how the hell could Brook have gotten his hands on the contract and Eubank was claiming no contract was placed in front of him? Only way to believe that is for us to complete dumb ourselves down for him.

Now with the revenge rematch thing. Okay that was is a little harder to tell, simply because they both have been avoiding top comp since they fought each other, so it is hard to tell who is ducking who.


But then again, as you said so yourself, Saunders agreed to fight Golovkin in June and Golovkin pulled out, whereas Eubank on the other hand is the one who couldn't find his pen.

So again the behavorial pattern is giving us a hint as to who really is the one that is lying between the two. Saunders has a history of honesty. When he wasn't ready for Golovkin, he didn't make excuses or make up lies about not getting a contract. He went public with it and said he wasn't ready for Golovkin.

When he was ready, he signed the contract. Again, behavioral pattern is what enables us to predict what actually happened.

Eubank always does the opposite of what he says he will do when it comes to elite comp, Saunders tells it exactly how it is.

Ps. I'm not a fan of either of these fighters in case you think I have a personal bias. I'm a Jermall Charlo fan at 160. I got my money, heart, and mind on him. At 168 it's between Rob Brant and Eubank.

I think that is utter nonsense

you have 10% of the information, and are using that to draw the least likely conclusion

pretty sure you just don't like Eubank

I gave you a ton of reasons why fights don't happen

and a ton of examples

listen, Saunders agreed to fight Golovkin in kazakhstan

so..... let's not talk shht about him

but let's not forget this little tidbit.....

FACT: Team Bullshht clearly low-balled Saunders the first time they negotiated

they offered him 1.5mil, then leaked that he refused 4mil..... and Saunders then watched Brook take home 4-5mil

lets not forget that little tidbit

so you have no idea if Team Bullshht tried that exact same nonsense with Eubank..... those 154-168 ****heads refused to make a single concession for Cotto/Canelo..... so I would not trust a single thing they say

Eubank has now signed a knockout tourney, so imho he proved that you are talking nonsense

he will be MANDATED to fight the top guys

I believe little/none of that ducking crap, most of it boils down to timing/details

[aboutfkntime]

the behavorial pattern, huh ?

what about running around for FIVE YEARS saying that you can beat "anyone from 154-168"..... but then killing three HUGE fights over weight?

let's not forget about that behavioural pattern

that behavioural pattern tells me that they likely low-balled Eubank because they preferred Brook, who had already been mentioned

Cotto has PROVEN that he will fight anyone
Canelo has PROVEN that he will fight anyone
Ward has PROVEN that he will fight anyone

FACT: all three of those guys were accused of ducking by a bunch of lying a55holes who refused to back up their ****-talk despite being offered career-high paydays

so yea, I will not refer to those lying a55holes as a source of accurate information