Eubank, Benn, Jones Jr, Toney circa 1993-1994

[jameswilson]

How would Benn and Eubank fared against Toney and Jones Jr had those fights managed to be made around about 1993 and 1994 when Toney and Jones were at large in the Super-middleweight division.

The consensus seems to be Jones was a phenom around this time and I always thought Toney was considered a step above both our guys but looking at his record around this time his record doesn't necessarily indicate he was particularly deserving of such praise.

Thoughts?

[Grilling Machine]

There isn't an easy first match-up in there for any of them, but if these fights all happened in a short space of time, the 'last man in' might be able to capitalise and win a fight they weren't initially favoured to.

If Eubank and Toney had a war, say, and then a fresh Benn took on the victor within three months... The form book indicates Jones > Toney > Eubank > Benn, but based on the McCallum fight (I think Mike was better than Chris, but Chris was equally tough), I can imagine the younger Eubank troubling Jones. Losing on points, but winning a moral victory by forcing Jones to run and snipe.

Eubank-Toney would've almost certainly left both men battered for weeks. I'd give Benn the best chance against Toney, but only in the first two or three rounds. Once Toney had warmed-up, I think he'd have had too much ringcraft for Benn's wildness. I wouldn't have been surprised if none of them had made it through undefeated.

[stevieb_8006]

The truth is Eubank and benn were hugely overated cos they were entertaining and sold tickets. They weren't even the best in Britain and would vary rarely frequent the top five IMO. Nunn, jones, toney, mccallum, graham, kalumbay, Watson and many others were all above them.

[Mimmy]

Benn over rated, HAHA best thing ive heard this sunday morning.

[stevieb_8006]

Benn over rated, HAHA best thing ive heard this sunday morning.

He was. Entertaining but overated. Don't get me wrong I love the man, he was great to watch and prob my fav Eva, but very overated.

Got a gift first time vs malinga....they both get treated like the elite cos they were in exciting fights.

Ok he got the McClellan win (vs a poorly prepared middleweight u could argue), but what are his other mega wins? I suppose going to Italy for the WBC was impressive, but vs who? Barkley was beyond old and blind (and almost did him), de witt was an ok-ish fighter, no great shakes.

It could also be pointed out that when he won the wbo it was a joke title, not really taken seriously.

Neither fighter makes any excuse about the fact they preferred to be the big fish at home.

I've listed seven fighters (active during their careers) that would more than likely beat them both off the top of my head, you've rationally countered haha. Would you pick benn to beat those fighters?

If I was a pudendum I could also make arguments about him getting ko'd by a jab vs Watson and quitting in the first Collins fight (but that's just if I want to bolster my argument, his ankle generally went in that fight)

[polecateddy]

It's funny how people are sniffy about Roy Jones now he's fought on far too long. Both Toney and Jones would have been far too good for Benn and Eubank. Both would have stopped Benn, and both would have widely outpointed Eubank. Eubank might be fairly delusional generally, but I certainly recall Benn admitting in interviews that Jones and Toney would have been too good. That's not to say the Brits weren't world class, they were, but those two Americans were the best of their generation and true all-time greats.

[Mimmy]

You cant say he was over rated, he would have been found out at a lower level than he fought at. Come on over rated with wins over Barkley and the war against McClennan? Over rated fighters do not beat these kind of people.

[Mimmy]

You cant say he was over rated, he would have been found out at a lower level than he fought at. Come on over rated with wins over Barkley and the war against McClennan? Over rated fighters do not beat these kind of people.

[stevieb_8006]

It's funny how people are sniffy about Roy Jones now he's fought on far too long. Both Toney and Jones would have been far too good for Benn and Eubank. Both would have stopped Benn, and both would have widely outpointed Eubank. Eubank might be fairly delusional generally, but I certainly recall Benn admitting in interviews that Jones and Toney would have been too good. That's not to say the Brits weren't world class, they were, but those two Americans were the best of their generation and true all-time greats.

Totally, and nunn

[Mimmy]

It's funny how people are sniffy about Roy Jones now he's fought on far too long. Both Toney and Jones would have been far too good for Benn and Eubank. Both would have stopped Benn, and both would have widely outpointed Eubank. Eubank might be fairly delusional generally, but I certainly recall Benn admitting in interviews that Jones and Toney would have been too good. That's not to say the Brits weren't world class, they were, but those two Americans were the best of their generation and true all-time greats.

Thats a fair comment but it does not make Benn over rated.

[stevieb_8006]

You cant say he was over rated, he would have been found out at a lower level than he fought at. Come on over rated with wins over Barkley and the war against McClennan? Over rated fighters do not beat these kind of people.

My argument stands, read my reply. Barkley was ancient and blind. One legendary win (you could argue it should have been stopped in the first btw). You could argue he was found out vs Watson for the commonwealth. If he's career was nowadays he may not have got thru the Anthony Logan fight. Plus, he was stopped a lot in losing fights.

[187]

It's funny how people are sniffy about Roy Jones now he's fought on far too long. Both Toney and Jones would have been far too good for Benn and Eubank. Both would have stopped Benn, and both would have widely outpointed Eubank. Eubank might be fairly delusional generally, but I certainly recall Benn admitting in interviews that Jones and Toney would have been too good. That's not to say the Brits weren't world class, they were, but those two Americans were the best of their generation and true all-time greats.

Eubank admitted the same on the gloves are off super middles

[187]

Roy jones was the best by far

[polecateddy]

You cant say he was over rated, he would have been found out at a lower level than he fought at. Come on over rated with wins over Barkley and the war against McClennan? Over rated fighters do not beat these kind of people.

Benn has the better record, but Barkley and McClellan were both overrated at the time Benn fought them. Barkley was caught cold and probably past his peak. McClellan was poorly prepared for any kind of distance fight. Jones and Toney lack obvious flaws to exploit, certainly in those years.

[rm1]

Roy jones was the best by far

Absolutely but they were all absolute first division fighters. Jones jr was just something else.

[n1ebf]

according to Michael Watson's book he was superior to Mike McCallum but he got messed about waiting and when they finally met, he wasn't very well or prepared and got beat! Is it true?? It's hard to really know with boxers I suppose, but reading his book you got a sense that Watson could beat just about anybody! In his fateful fight with Eubank he'd apparently controlled the whole fight and just got caught with a huge shot, in a fight that only happened cos he got robbed the first time! And as for Benn, stopping him in 6 rounds! You didn't just "stop" Nigel Benn, yet Watson made it look EASY!

[SteveDow]

I think Roy Jones at his peak would have beaten every fighter who ever fought at the super-middleweight.

He beat Toney comprehensively when Toney was at his peak in 1994, he'd surely have schooled Benn, would have outpointed Eubank conclusively and would also have beaten a peak Hopkins (I know he beat him in 1993) and a peak Calzaghe for me although those fights would have been closer.

Ward would have given him the most problems but I think Jones would have got a decision.

[danconnollyeire]

I think it's similar to today. Benn and Eubank were great but they were the Carl Froch and Jones and Toney were the Ward. A level above. Both were phenominal, Toney was a defensive master

[sharpei_louis]

according to Michael Watson's book he was superior to Mike McCallum but he got messed about waiting and when they finally met, he wasn't very well or prepared and got beat! Is it true?? It's hard to really know with boxers I suppose, but reading his book you got a sense that Watson could beat just about anybody! In his fateful fight with Eubank he'd apparently controlled the whole fight and just got caught with a huge shot, in a fight that only happened cos he got robbed the first time! And as for Benn, stopping him in 6 rounds! You didn't just "stop" Nigel Benn, yet Watson made it look EASY!

Not saying it's not true, just pointing out your frame of reference.

[Finn]

The truth is Eubank and benn were hugely overated cos they were entertaining and sold tickets. They weren't even the best in Britain and would vary rarely frequent the top five IMO. Nunn, jones, toney, mccallum, graham, kalumbay, Watson and many others were all above them.

Eubank was capable of beating everyone on that list bar jones on his night imo

Calzaghe on his night could beat them all at SMW, at other weights i wouldnt be so confident.

[Finn]

according to Michael Watson's book he was superior to Mike McCallum but he got messed about waiting and when they finally met, he wasn't very well or prepared and got beat! Is it true?? It's hard to really know with boxers I suppose, but reading his book you got a sense that Watson could beat just about anybody! In his fateful fight with Eubank he'd apparently controlled the whole fight and just got caught with a huge shot, in a fight that only happened cos he got robbed the first time! And as for Benn, stopping him in 6 rounds! You didn't just "stop" Nigel Benn, yet Watson made it look EASY!

Not saying it's not true, just pointing out your frame of reference.

Watson was winning the Eubank rematch but he still lost. Eubank was one of the toughest fighters to get in the ring he could drag something up out of nowhere BUT he was never the same after the watson fight not by a long shot (he became a very negative fighter and seemed to hold back, often let fighters off the hook, even visibly walking away from them when they were ready to be finished off), however he still continued to have a very good career.

[Finn]

It's funny how people are sniffy about Roy Jones now he's fought on far too long. Both Toney and Jones would have been far too good for Benn and Eubank. Both would have stopped Benn, and both would have widely outpointed Eubank. Eubank might be fairly delusional generally, but I certainly recall Benn admitting in interviews that Jones and Toney would have been too good. That's not to say the Brits weren't world class, they were, but those two Americans were the best of their generation and true all-time greats.

Eubank admitted the same on the gloves are off super middles

Eubank one minute will say that then another minute say RJJ an Toney were running scared, thats just Eubank for you

[palooka]

Jones was superb - he was over them all at his peak.

Toney was sheer class but was lazy and could be unmotivated and get outhustled.

Eubank was exceptionally tough and very game, I don't think he'd have been cute enough to win or draw against either Jones or Toney.

Benn was sheer excitement and a better boxer than given credit for; again though he'd have been outboxed and walked into hard counters v the americans.

[n1ebf]

according to Michael Watson's book he was superior to Mike McCallum but he got messed about waiting and when they finally met, he wasn't very well or prepared and got beat! Is it true?? It's hard to really know with boxers I suppose, but reading his book you got a sense that Watson could beat just about anybody! In his fateful fight with Eubank he'd apparently controlled the whole fight and just got caught with a huge shot, in a fight that only happened cos he got robbed the first time! And as for Benn, stopping him in 6 rounds! You didn't just "stop" Nigel Benn, yet Watson made it look EASY!

Not saying it's not true, just pointing out your frame of reference.

Watson was winning the Eubank rematch but he still lost. Eubank was one of the toughest fighters to get in the ring he could drag something up out of nowhere BUT he was never the same after the watson fight not by a long shot (he became a very negative fighter and seemed to hold back, often let fighters off the hook, even visibly walking away from them when they were ready to be finished off), however he still continued to have a very good career.

still seemed to dish out plenty of leather - I'm thinking especially of the Thompson fights. I can't really comment objectively as I never saw Eubank before Watson. He looked brilliant in the Benn I fight. I thought the way he started that fight was brilliant. He came out and looked to go after a man he admits scared him. I thought he'd fought Benn after Watson, but I would need to check.

[palooka]

Eubank boxed Benn twice, winning one by knockout (1990) and drew the other (1993) he boxed Watson twice in 1991, a majority decision win and then the knockout in a fight he was clearly losing.