Page 2 of 2
Posted: 23 May 2005, 15:19
by Chopping Right
everyhookinthebook wrote:In my opinion, Eastman could be a world beater!
BUT, he would have had to go to the USA to do it, call me crazy but with the right trainer and schooling, i feel he could have beaten Hopkins.
Eastman has a great chin, stamina, and power, everything is there to be built on, but if you watched the fight against Hopkins, he just didnt have the savvy to fight his own fight.
Every time Eastman pressed he took one step to far and just nulified all of his work, I,m not trying to say i know better than his trainers but i think if he had time with Stewerd, Mayweather, Rooney or a host of other American trainers, i think he would a whole different fighter.
I call you crazy. Howard has never had the workrate to beat the very best, nor has he the temperament to learn from a top trainer how to be the best. He does everything in own way, which unfortunately at top level is not the right way.
Posted: 23 May 2005, 15:30
by everyhookinthebook
Were both saying the same thing!
thats why i said COULD and BUT!
I disagree with you that Eastmans not top class, he has beaten everyone put in front of him and only lost two bouts against World champions, The joppy fight could have gone either way and then he went twelve rounds with argubly the best middleweight in the last decade.
He looked stronger than Hopkins to me but like i said before he was just outsmarted.
Posted: 23 May 2005, 15:38
by Chopping Right
I think Howard's biggest enemy is himself. Fighters that make all the decisions about their preparation don't seem to do so well in the bigger fights. Always found it strange he went with McCracken, seems difficult to believe you're going to learn much from a guy you once caned in a domestic fight.
Posted: 23 May 2005, 16:07
by nickd
Eastman is vastly overrated, what has ever done to earn his status as a world class middleweight? He beat McCracken who himself was lucky to be WBC#1 off the back of 1 win over Beasley. Other than that he's failed in world class against a shell of William Joppy and obviously Hopkins - no shame in the latter.
Face it, he's European level at best.
I don't see him beating any of the following. Hopkins, Taylor, Ikeke, Sturm and I think he'd probably be beaten by Soliman if they fought a rematch.
Where is he anyway?? Gone into hiding again??
Posted: 23 May 2005, 16:46
by Gary_V
I think Eastman will most definitely get a shot at one of the 4 belts when the big man retires and they're fragmented.
I can see Eastman beating Sturm and Soliman. I'd give him a good shot at Taylor.
I could see Wright becoming 'the man' of the division in the near future, though.
Posted: 23 May 2005, 16:51
by Gary_V
I dont think he was in any danger against Elliot.
Elliott is very very well built physically but limited.
Eastman looked in control but he looked a tad lethargic; this wasnt the guy he had planned to face after all.
Posted: 23 May 2005, 16:53
by Matchfixer
Gary_V wrote:I think Eastman will most definitely get a shot at one of the 4 belts when the big man retires and they're fragmented.
I can see Eastman beating Sturm and Soliman. I'd give him a good shot at Taylor.
I could see Wright becoming 'the man' of the division in the near future, though.
As much as I like Eastman I would not be too sure about him fighting Taylor.
His experience would help but Taylor's power seems like something else for a middleweight.
Posted: 23 May 2005, 16:57
by nickd
Taylor would beat Eastman easily. Who has Eastman beaten who's as good as Taylor seems to be? Nobody close.
Posted: 23 May 2005, 16:59
by Gary_V
Possibly, but Eatsman has fantastic conditioning and is big. Also Taylor chose not to fight Eastman, perhpas cos of the risk v. reward factor.
I have to say I'm not sold on Taylor yet.
For me, Ikeke beating Echols was a more dangerous fight and proved more than Taylor beating a survivcal-minded, X-ecuted and cash-happy Joppy.
Matchfixer wrote:Gary_V wrote:I think Eastman will most definitely get a shot at one of the 4 belts when the big man retires and they're fragmented.
I can see Eastman beating Sturm and Soliman. I'd give him a good shot at Taylor.
I could see Wright becoming 'the man' of the division in the near future, though.
As much as I like Eastman I would not be too sure about him fighting Taylor.
His experience would help but Taylor's power seems like something else for a middleweight.
Posted: 23 May 2005, 17:04
by nickd
I think Taylor not fighting Eastman was as much him not wanting to put himself into a situation where he'd have to fight Hopkins immediately after. I seriously doubt he was actually ducking Eastman that's ludicrous.
Take a look at their respective results against Joppy. I know Taylor faced him later but he absolutely hammered him beyond doubt. Eastman couldn't even beat him.
Posted: 24 May 2005, 05:13
by stujones
dookus wrote:stujones wrote:Riddick Blowe wrote:eastman is limited, he's a middleweight ben tackie.
Wherever he goes now, he will end up being outboxed in a dull fight again.
Good analogy. Although I would say Tackie is a tad better.
Tackie is a good analogy for Eastman, but I wouldn't say he's better. Eastman has got a much better selection of punches - that right uppercut is a beauty. I don't think his defence is quite as leaky as Tackie's, either - there aren't many challengers to Hopkins that don't end up as many punches as Eastman did without running like hell.
In his inability to get out of third gear and lack of ideas coupled with strong but not explosive punch power and a granite chin, yes, he is a lot like Tackie. I think he has a fair bit more to his offence, though, even if they fight at a similar pace.
Tackie has some world/fringe world class W's on his resume - I don't think Eastman has.