STEVE COLLINS. WAS HE REALLY A CHAMPION?

[STP]

But yes, Eubank was very awkward to get to grips with early doors, because he wouldn't allow you any rythm with the way he moved. And you struggled to find your range, the way he always seemed just out of distance.

[mrkh]

Chris often lunged in, I mean just look at the first Benn fight which was supposed to be still his best performance all along, he just lunged in all the time. And most of the right hands he threw were very long and missed. On the rare occasions he would step in and let off a sneak right hand and move, he looked phenomenal.

But he didn't seem to care about looking good, and seemed to try to be as awkward as he could be.

eubanks was an outfighter, simple as, a damn impressive one at that albeit unorthodox. inside he was beautiful w/ the uppercut.

[STP]

He did have a great right and left uppercut. No question about that! But measuring opponents attacks, stepping in and letting them have it with tight punches was never one of Chris's strong points :)

Bloke didn't have a clue how to cut off the ring, and couldn't even double a left hook. And when he missed a long right, he'd have to duck and dive across the ring because he didn't have the ability to come back with a left hook after (which should be just basic boxing).

But he definitely did have a lot of ability - a TERRIFIC stiff jab, I'll admit to. And very good foot movement. And flashy flurries.

[DavidPayne]

I always, always thought he looked awkward, jerky, uncoordinated offensively.

Just absolutely coffin nail hard, fit and mentally unbeatable. Does him a massive injustice of course but he wasn't fluid or classic in style, he really was a one off.

[jamesmcdonnell]

Wildly unorthodox to the point of looking totally inept at times, but there's scarcely been a fighter with a bigger heart, harder chin or physique, or indefatigable will to win.

His fights against Carl Thompson, in retrospect, look even better now, when you see what Thompson did to Haye, a naturally much bigger man than Eubank.

Eubank took unbelievable shots from Thompson, who was younger and fresher back then, and just kept on coming in both fights.

[Arbachakov]

Eubank was not really that unorthodox.

He was a lot like Jose Napoles technically, albeit not as good of course.

His upper-body movement, jabbing, counterpunching and lateral movement were all fairly textbook stuff.

He had his own flaws and quirks in there but was a strong technician.Technically he's a far more classic fighter than Calzaghe for instance, or almost any other very good Brit since Conteh.

[Syntax Error]

Collins wins the WBO middleweight belt off Chris Pyatt in 94. Does anyone actually think he could of beaten the divisions true #1, either Gerald McClellan (WBC) or Bernard Hopkins (IBF)?

Collins wins the WBO super-middle belt off Eubank in 95. Does anyone actually think he could of beaten the divisions #1, Roy Jones (IBF)?

If not, then he is a paper champ.

The WBO: making champions out of those not good enough, since 1989.

He was a paper champ; but unfortunately, so are most of the so-called champs today.

Until we have some serious unification bouts or scrap all these trinkets. it's going to become increasingly difficult to tell who is the linear champ anymore.

The HW's (boxing's most famous division) just highlights this; who is the linear champ?

Lennox Lewis took the title into retirement 5 years ago: will there ever be a linear champ again?

[Al Savani]

Napoles was more like Nigel Benn than Eubank,the way he let his punches go. Eubank was more like Hedgeman Lewis. (Anyway,Napoles,he was as smooth as butter!) One thing that Eubank relied upon that I've not seen another fighter use as much or as effectively was body sways. He was regularly swaying his body out of reach,which frustrated his (already-intimidated) opponents alot,along with the posing,strutting,dancing,stock-still standing,stop-starting and hands down walking around the ring,ofcourse. C ertainly an incredibly difficult fighter to beat,as was proven,obviously,with his run.

[Loftgroov]

I always thought Collins was a bit over-rated. Good...but over-rated.

He just seemed to fight the right big names at the right time (i.e. when they were half way shot to shit)

[Knucklez]

Steve Collins was a great boxer, and yes he did deserve to hold his title... For nay who ahven't noticed, Collins defeated Eubank and Benn TWICE!!!
So whenever your naming the greatest of this divsion, clearly Steve should come above either of them....

PLUS, When Steve was WBO champion, here ar ethe name sof the other champions

WBC - Robin Reid.
Steve would have crushed Reid within 6 rounds, Reid was never the fighter that the Brits tried to make out he was... Just because he held the WBC, doesn't mean he was no. 1.

WBA - Frankie Liles.
Liles is a boxing unknown, not many people remember him, but each time he came up against someone taletned he would fall.

IBF - Charles Brewster.
On his best day, Brewster MIGHT have given Collins problems, BUT he was far too inconsistent to beat him...

Collins was DEFINTELY no 1 during his reign...

Collins was at his peak when he beat Benn and Eubank, who were way past theirs. By your logic, Trevor Berbick should be listed as greater than Muhammad Ali.

Frankie Liles is an unknown?! In cricket circles, maybe....

[Al Savani]

Hedgeman in blue http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8beOdBxOcMQ similar jab and patience to Eubanks,similar uppercuts and fairly similar movement too.