BoxRec

If you were wondering what he was up to. Also looks like Howard has really, really toned down his look.

Eastman wrests middleweight title from Dalton

Is McCracken still his trainer?

Interesting and seemingly clever move.
That said, he could've gotten back into contention for the British or European really.

Shelly Gibson looks hot!

Max Molyneux wrote:Is McCracken still his trainer?

No. McCracken got disillusioned with the fella - by all accounts Eastman pissed McCracken off with his laziness, he started cutting corners in training, lack of sparring etc

Wow..Howard has slipped, fighting crackheads for toffees.

Holy crap Howard is still fighting?

Winning an MD over Denny Dalton -- a fella who was outpointed at light-middle by a faded 6 Heads Lewis? Sh#t the bed.

Does Howard have any future at all? Or has he totally blown it?

in all honesty he has probably blown it, so much talent that lad had, really his own fault he did not make a real world champion as he was better than the likes of joppy and keith holmes etc.

Rhino,
Read the record books.
Eastman was not better because he lost - simple as.
Could've Should've ........ but fact is he didn't.

overhand_right wrote:Holy crap Howard is still fighting?

Winning an MD over Denny Dalton -- a fella who was outpointed at light-middle by a faded 6 Heads Lewis? Sh#t the bed.

Does Howard have any future at all? Or has he totally blown it?

http://www.boxrec.com/media/index.php?t ... ht:1085595

Lewis also gave him a win too because he needed the toilet.

twenty six wrote:Rhino,
Read the record books.
Eastman was not better because he lost - simple as.
Could've Should've ........ but fact is he didn't.

Yep.

rhino222 wrote:in all honesty he has probably blown it, so much talent that lad had, really his own fault he did not make a real world champion as he was better than the likes of joppy and keith holmes etc.

No he wasn't. Too slow.

twenty six wrote:Rhino,
Read the record books.
Eastman was not better because he lost - simple as.
Could've Should've ........ but fact is he didn't.

errr..thats what i said, its his own fault. im fully aware of what howard achieved and what he could and should have achieved. men with half the talent have been world champions.

Your missing the point Rhino.
You said he's better than Joppy and Holmes.
Wrong.

twenty six wrote:Rhino,
Read the record books.
Eastman was not better because he lost - simple as.
Could've Should've ........ but fact is he didn't.

Im not so sure that logic really works...

IMO Eastman beat Joppy and effectively underlined his dominance in that fight by dropping Joppy at the end. Sure, Eastman could and should have put Joppy away, but Joppy did not win that fight - yes, he got the decision - but he was not better than Eastman on that night (albeit Joppy certainly has a more impressive career record).

And Record Books should be read in the context that the result took place, e.g. Roy Jones got beat in the final of 1988 Seoul Olympic final by the Korean Park Si-Hun, but does anyone really think that Si-Hun was better than Jones simply because he got the decision??

Hogwash.

At the end of the day it was a close fight (I scored it clearly for Joppy, who did the cleaner work throughout), which was pretty clearly reflected in the scorecards.

Are you telling me that was a robbery? If you are, then you don't know how to score fights, simple and plain.

You may 'feel' that Eastman deserved the verdict, but unlike Jones, who was clearly robbed of his rightful decision, this fight was a case of Eastman not doing enough to put the decision beyond reasonable doubt.

And you know why? Joppy kept on nailing him every time he tried to put his foot on the gas. Joppy was a decent fighter, and an ok champ, a slight notch above Eastman in class.

I wouldn't have put it past Eastman to have lost to Duran had they fought, he lacked the fire in his belly to really stamp his authority in pretty much every fight, and it was only when in against an opponent he was a class above that he shone.

Eastman is lucky so many people always put "coulda" after his name and generally look past the fact he has no real names on his record (as wins) for someone regarded by so many as world class.

Eastman was a good fighter, but he was slow, had a shite engine, and couldn't put combos together. Good at most things though.

When it comes to the big fights though, Eastman couldn't deliver, not because he couldn't be arsed, but because he wasn't good enough.

I also had Joppy winning due to the fact his work was so much cleaner and landed much more

Scoring a fight is a subjective thing (as we all know).

I thought Eastman did enough and deserved to win. I certainly dont think Joppy did enough to put the decision beyond reasonable doubt - and definitely think the decision represented the fact that Joppy was the 'home' fighter.

Joppy was certainly a decent, solid fighter and Howard a lazy one - but regardless of what Howard didnt do that night, I still thought he did more than Joppy. But thats life...

Come on, Liamlion, how many times do we hear these comments when there's a close fight ?
Take the rose tinted glasses off and see Estman's career for what it is (was).

i liked Eastman, but he was a very limited, extremely slow fighter.He would have been lucky to win a British title had he been around 10\20 years earlier.

IMO there hasn'treally been a good world class natural middleweight from Britain since Benn, Eubank and Watson.