Sr gives cold replies to HW topics?

[coghaugen11]

He admitted somewhere after his career finished that the tapping of the gloves was just his nervous twitch. Watson looked very wary and nervy of his calmness and glove tapping before their first fight, and subsequently Eubank sweeped the early rounds with Watson off-put and out of sorts. A form of genius I guess. A confidence trick.

[gp.]

" Genius is an exceptional talent or skill, something above and beyond the norm"

That he was not a particular style of boxer that you feel would qualify as genius is irrelevant. Boxers like footballers, cyclists, sprinters .. or any other sports person are merely gifted athletically .. cognitive and intellectual prowess is not what makes them succeed in their sport; hence why so many earn lots - and spend even more.

Senior certainly qualifies as genius in his sport.

No, he doesn't. Unless everyone who has ever become any version of world champion is, in your view, a genius, he is not "above the norm". Is that how you use genius? if it is, you are debasing the word. Only a handful of boxers should be described as "geniuses", If Eubank was a genius so are hundreds of others; it' becomes a pointless word.

[coghaugen11]

He kinda did have 19 World title fights in a row unbeaten, in three years! It'll never be matched.

[coghaugen11]

Never seen it before.

[Steveh583]

He kinda did have 19 World title fights in a row unbeaten, in three years! It'll never be matched.

against a load of no marks tho. he was a right cherry picker. and he was given gifts in about 3 of those fights.

[coghaugen11]

He kinda did have 19 World title fights in a row unbeaten, in three years! It'll never be matched.

against a load of no marks tho. he was a right cherry picker. and he was given gifts in about 3 of those fights.

Not according to professional judges. None were close to true gifts apart from one (Schommer) in reality, and that can be forgiven for flying 48hrs and fighting 7k ft above sea etc, fasting for 72hrs before et al.

They were all in the top 10. Almost all fighting for other versions too.

[tonyevs]

" Genius is an exceptional talent or skill, something above and beyond the norm"

That he was not a particular style of boxer that you feel would qualify as genius is irrelevant. Boxers like footballers, cyclists, sprinters .. or any other sports person are merely gifted athletically .. cognitive and intellectual prowess is not what makes them succeed in their sport; hence why so many earn lots - and spend even more.

Senior certainly qualifies as genius in his sport.

No, he doesn't. Unless everyone who has ever become any version of world champion is, in your view, a genius, he is not "above the norm". Is that how you use genius? if it is, you are debasing the word. Only a handful of boxers should be described as "geniuses", If Eubank was a genius so are hundreds of others; it' becomes a pointless word.

That he got to where did; and that we are still debating him many years later, proves his own genius within boxing. Not everyone who boxed as amateur was good enough to consider turning professional; those boxers that were competent enough to turn professional and were of a normal/average ability may possibly reach area title level with a bit of luck ... those better than normal/average may reach British title level .. the exceptional boxers may even win it. To go further than that is truly exceptional ... even a poor world champion belt holder will be too good for a normal guy who takes up boxing.
Eubank may not have been the best at the weight - but he was definitely in the top five in the world at that time. Compare that to how many people in the world were boxing amateur or pro at his weight then that proves he was exceptional and way beyond the norm.

[coghaugen11]

Also consider off the back of Ali there was a never ending conveyor belt of young black men taking up boxing, countless boxing gyms in each city full to the rim. Eubank emerged. Only some of thee most special talents ever seen (Jones Jr, Nunn and Toney) at any weight were considered better at his weights.

[punchoutsb]

" Genius is an exceptional talent or skill, something above and beyond the norm"

That he was not a particular style of boxer that you feel would qualify as genius is irrelevant. Boxers like footballers, cyclists, sprinters .. or any other sports person are merely gifted athletically .. cognitive and intellectual prowess is not what makes them succeed in their sport; hence why so many earn lots - and spend even more.

Senior certainly qualifies as genius in his sport.

No, he doesn't. Unless everyone who has ever become any version of world champion is, in your view, a genius, he is not "above the norm". Is that how you use genius? if it is, you are debasing the word. Only a handful of boxers should be described as "geniuses", If Eubank was a genius so are hundreds of others; it' becomes a pointless word.

That he got to where did; and that we are still debating him many years later, proves his own genius within boxing. Not everyone who boxed as amateur was good enough to consider turning professional; those boxers that were competent enough to turn professional and were of a normal/average ability may possibly reach area title level with a bit of luck ... those better than normal/average may reach British title level .. the exceptional boxers may even win it. To go further than that is truly exceptional ... even a poor world champion belt holder will be too good for a normal guy who takes up boxing.
Eubank may not have been the best at the weight - but he was definitely in the top five in the world at that time. Compare that to how many people in the world were boxing amateur or pro at his weight then that proves he was exceptional and way beyond the norm.

Just my opinion here, but surely a genius has to be more than just above and beyond the norm.

Winning a world title would be a bit like earning your PhD. It definitely sets you apart from the rest, but it doesn't necessarily mean you're ranked beside Goethe, Einstein, da Vinci, etc.

[coghaugen11]

With his lack of stamina, lunges against a mover and laziness against a pressure fighter; its amazing he kept winning. Those uppercuts and counter rights were short and out of nowhere. His timing and reactions were effortlessly good, lateral movement impressive, and head slips of the jabs very deft while remaining poker-faced. He had some very special abilities if disjointed all in all.

[coghaugen11]

Watching that first Watson fight is so impressive with the sound off, those first five or six rounds; hardly anyone can stand still in front of an opponent and counter like Eubank does there without getting nailed - it takes incredible reflexes.

[polecateddy]

I don’t think much of an argument can be made that Eubank wouldn’t have been outpointed by Jones, Nunn and Toney on their best nights. Against the best of British over the ages, I could see Eubank finding the target a lot against Froch. And maybe against Calzaghe on his injured/off-days - such as the night against Reid - perhaps Eubank could have run it to the wire.

[coghaugen11]

He'd of took the pre-Lacy Calzaghe out of there. The pre-knee injury Eubank who pivoted his shots and opened you up with his feet. Joe saved rights with his face until that night at the MEN.

[coghaugen11]

A Eubank-Toney fight 100% depends on whether James can read Eubanks stiff jab - which was terrific - or he'd be ground down.

He stands very little chance (if any) of out-pointing Nunn or Jones, does Eubank.

[tonyevs]

Just my opinion here, but surely a genius has to be more than just above and beyond the norm.

Winning a world title would be a bit like earning your PhD. It definitely sets you apart from the rest, but it doesn't necessarily mean you're ranked beside Goethe, Einstein, da Vinci, etc.

Of course we all have our own opinion on things - although if we are taking the meaning of the word genius as that given, then Eubank was far exceeding what you would expect from normal people ... after all, normal/average people would very likely lose as many fights as they won .. and at a very low level too.

Earning your PhD is indeed an excellent achievement - although opportunity plays a greater bit within that ... how many people are fortunate enough to be in a position where they can afford to pursue that much academia? the lower social classes are pretty much excluded from that even if they were intelligent enough.
And comparing the genius of Eubank to the genius of Goethe, Einstein, da Vinci, etc is not a fair comparison; because their genius are in different fields. Muhammed Ali is often described as a boxing genius .. but he failed an army intelligence test.

[Steveh583]

He kinda did have 19 World title fights in a row unbeaten, in three years! It'll never be matched.

against a load of no marks tho. he was a right cherry picker. and he was given gifts in about 3 of those fights.

Not according to professional judges. None were close to true gifts apart from one (Schommer) in reality, and that can be forgiven for flying 48hrs and fighting 7k ft above sea etc, fasting for 72hrs before et al.

They were all in the top 10. Almost all fighting for other versions too.

ray close beat him if i remember rightly. and I'm sure there were others. maybe it was sugar boy malinga but i'd have to watch it again.

but i appreciate your hero worship knows absolutely no bounds.

[gp.]

Just my opinion here, but surely a genius has to be more than just above and beyond the norm.

Winning a world title would be a bit like earning your PhD. It definitely sets you apart from the rest, but it doesn't necessarily mean you're ranked beside Goethe, Einstein, da Vinci, etc.

Of course we all have our own opinion on things - although if we are taking the meaning of the word genius as that given, then Eubank was far exceeding what you would expect from normal people ... after all, normal/average people would very likely lose as many fights as they won .. and at a very low level too.

Earning your PhD is indeed an excellent achievement - although opportunity plays a greater bit within that ... how many people are fortunate enough to be in a position where they can afford to pursue that much academia? the lower social classes are pretty much excluded from that even if they were intelligent enough.
And comparing the genius of Eubank to the genius of Goethe, Einstein, da Vinci, etc is not a fair comparison; because their genius are in different fields. Muhammed Ali is often described as a boxing genius .. but he failed an army intelligence test.

And I will repeat my point. If Eubank is a boxing genius, then everyone who achieved what Eubank achieved is a boxing genius. Therefore you say there have been hundreds of boxing geniuses, at least. That to me is nonsense. there have been a handful. To be a genius you have to be one of the handful of exceptional talents. A Maradona or a Pele. Not just someone who was better than"normal people"; that includes Henry Akinwande, or Neville Meade.

If "genius" means what you think it means, it is not a useful word. Most people don't think it means that.


Who isn't a boxing genius, in your eyes? Was Enzo Macarinelli a boxing genius? He was certainly "exceeding what youw ould expect from normal people". What about John McDermott; the same applies. Your definition seems to include "any professional boxer".

Incidentally he wasn't comparing Eubank to Goethe, he was making the point that a small number of people in any field are geniuses. You shouldn't have to be a genius to see that.

[punchoutsb]

Just my opinion here, but surely a genius has to be more than just above and beyond the norm.

Winning a world title would be a bit like earning your PhD. It definitely sets you apart from the rest, but it doesn't necessarily mean you're ranked beside Goethe, Einstein, da Vinci, etc.

Of course we all have our own opinion on things - although if we are taking the meaning of the word genius as that given, then Eubank was far exceeding what you would expect from normal people ... after all, normal/average people would very likely lose as many fights as they won .. and at a very low level too.

Earning your PhD is indeed an excellent achievement - although opportunity plays a greater bit within that ... how many people are fortunate enough to be in a position where they can afford to pursue that much academia? the lower social classes are pretty much excluded from that even if they were intelligent enough.
And comparing the genius of Eubank to the genius of Goethe, Einstein, da Vinci, etc is not a fair comparison; because their genius are in different fields. Muhammed Ali is often described as a boxing genius .. but he failed an army intelligence test.

Right...my academic example was just that, an example.

More on topic, comparing the boxing genius of Eubank to other boxers, he's shown himself to be right around the same level (plus or minus a few points) as Ray Close, Dan Schommer and Steve Collins...

[punchoutsb]

Just my opinion here, but surely a genius has to be more than just above and beyond the norm.

Winning a world title would be a bit like earning your PhD. It definitely sets you apart from the rest, but it doesn't necessarily mean you're ranked beside Goethe, Einstein, da Vinci, etc.

Of course we all have our own opinion on things - although if we are taking the meaning of the word genius as that given, then Eubank was far exceeding what you would expect from normal people ... after all, normal/average people would very likely lose as many fights as they won .. and at a very low level too.

Earning your PhD is indeed an excellent achievement - although opportunity plays a greater bit within that ... how many people are fortunate enough to be in a position where they can afford to pursue that much academia? the lower social classes are pretty much excluded from that even if they were intelligent enough.
And comparing the genius of Eubank to the genius of Goethe, Einstein, da Vinci, etc is not a fair comparison; because their genius are in different fields. Muhammed Ali is often described as a boxing genius .. but he failed an army intelligence test.

And I will repeat my point. If Eubank is a boxing genius, then everyone who achieved what Eubank achieved is a boxing genius. Therefore you say there have been hundreds of boxing geniuses, at least. That to me is nonsense. there have been a handful. To be a genius you have to be one of the handful of exceptional talents. A Maradona or a Pele. Not just someone who was better than"normal people"; that includes Henry Akinwande, or Neville Meade.

If "genius" means what you think it means, it is not a useful word. Most people don't think it means that.


Who isn't a boxing genius, in your eyes? Was Enzo Macarinelli a boxing genius? He was certainly "exceeding what youw ould expect from normal people". What about John McDermott; the same applies. Your definition seems to include "any professional boxer".

Very well said

[gp.]

Very well said

Thanks, but just edited, to try and explain to him what your Goethe comparison was about, as he seemed to miss the point entirely on that one.

[coghaugen11]

Just my opinion here, but surely a genius has to be more than just above and beyond the norm.

Winning a world title would be a bit like earning your PhD. It definitely sets you apart from the rest, but it doesn't necessarily mean you're ranked beside Goethe, Einstein, da Vinci, etc.

Of course we all have our own opinion on things - although if we are taking the meaning of the word genius as that given, then Eubank was far exceeding what you would expect from normal people ... after all, normal/average people would very likely lose as many fights as they won .. and at a very low level too.

Earning your PhD is indeed an excellent achievement - although opportunity plays a greater bit within that ... how many people are fortunate enough to be in a position where they can afford to pursue that much academia? the lower social classes are pretty much excluded from that even if they were intelligent enough.
And comparing the genius of Eubank to the genius of Goethe, Einstein, da Vinci, etc is not a fair comparison; because their genius are in different fields. Muhammed Ali is often described as a boxing genius .. but he failed an army intelligence test.

Right...my academic example was just that, an example.

More on topic, comparing the boxing genius of Eubank to other boxers, he's shown himself to be right around the same level (plus or minus a few points) as Ray Close, Dan Schommer and Steve Collins...

It's a shame Ray Close and Dan Schommer were small hall fighters and journeymen. Hardly Eubank were they, even though Close numerically did well and chubby southpaw Schommer beat him by 6-7 rounds.

Collins got a lucky break against Eubank. Fair play to him. He admits he wasn't as good a fighter as Eubank and just studied him well and planned the fights and pre-fight mind games - that WAS genius!

[coghaugen11]

Henry Akinwande couldn't even throw a punch properly. Garbage. Think what Tyson or a heavyweight Benn would've done to the poor bloke once inside his 4ft arm after 10-15secs.

[coghaugen11]

We can let him off Schommer with the circumstances. And that guy was avoided with good reason (outboxed Virgil Hill in ams before Olympics), awful match making from Bazza.

[polecateddy]

Henry Akinwande couldn't even throw a punch properly. Garbage. Think what Tyson or a heavyweight Benn would've done to the poor bloke once inside his 4ft arm after 10-15secs.

That’s not entirely true. Akinwande did go through a bit of a purple patch prior to facing Lewis where he was getting people like Jeremy Williams out of there. In fact he dropped Lewis against the run of play, although the count wasn’t taken up.

[punchoutsb]

Of course we all have our own opinion on things - although if we are taking the meaning of the word genius as that given, then Eubank was far exceeding what you would expect from normal people ... after all, normal/average people would very likely lose as many fights as they won .. and at a very low level too.

Earning your PhD is indeed an excellent achievement - although opportunity plays a greater bit within that ... how many people are fortunate enough to be in a position where they can afford to pursue that much academia? the lower social classes are pretty much excluded from that even if they were intelligent enough.
And comparing the genius of Eubank to the genius of Goethe, Einstein, da Vinci, etc is not a fair comparison; because their genius are in different fields. Muhammed Ali is often described as a boxing genius .. but he failed an army intelligence test.

Right...my academic example was just that, an example.

More on topic, comparing the boxing genius of Eubank to other boxers, he's shown himself to be right around the same level (plus or minus a few points) as Ray Close, Dan Schommer and Steve Collins...

It's a shame Ray Close and Dan Schommer were small hall fighters and journeymen. Hardly Eubank were they, even though Close numerically did well and chubby southpaw Schommer beat him by 6-7 rounds.

Collins got a lucky break against Eubank. Fair play to him. He admits he wasn't as good a fighter as Eubank and just studied him well and planned the fights and pre-fight mind games - that WAS genius!