BoxRec

Howard Eastman fights tonight against andrew lewis. this one crept under the radar, it is a decent match up and really is a case of 'who has got how much left' ...

another one of those guyanese middleweight title matches, but the belt is insignificant, both are 'name' fighters. and both have good 'names' on their records...

I don't know if has been, but I think Eastman should start as favourite given he is a big Middleweight and Lewis isn't a big Welterweight.

Is this still going on, I would worry about Howards state of mind, given with what has been happening with Gilbert.

i think howard may struggle here dut to what happened with his brother and also he hasnt seemed motivated for a while.

he should have done so much m ore in his title fights with hopkins and joppy

I'm sure I read somewhere that the fight was off.

oliverfennell wrote:I'm sure I read somewhere that the fight was off.

Obviously I was mistaken; just saw the result. Eastman won a SD, which doesn't look good on paper.

Eastman hasn't looked right since the Hopkins fight

I alway's liked Eastman but he has alway's let himself down on the big occasion's and will continue to do so.....Unfortunately.

HH

Eastman hasn't looked right since before the Hopkins fight. Tatesvyan and that guy who fought Magee (was it Elliot) gave him problems.

And he was never world class. The William Joppy robbery is nearly on a par with Byron Mitchell being robbed vs Ottke in myths.

Hardhitters11 wrote:I alway's liked Eastman but he has alway's let himself down on the big occasion's and will continue to do so.....Unfortunately.

HH

I don't think many people ever said the Joppy fight was a robbery. Most people felt it was a fight Eastman could have won had he stepped it up more, but there was never much talk of it being a robbery.

stujones wrote:And he was never world class. The William Joppy robbery is nearly on a par with Byron Mitchell being robbed vs Ottke in myths.

LOL! What the fook do you know?

I'd love you to tell Hopkins or Joppy or Abrham to their faces that Eastman wasn't world class.

Wish Eastman had got the nod over Joppy as he deserved (so say the crowd, the papers, BBC website and The Ring magazine) so he could at least be referred to as an ex-world champ and not just British, Commonwealth and European (although thats better than most fighters will ever achieve)

Still, decent result for Howard considering what must be weighing on his mind right now.

I wonder what the plan is with Howard? Cash out with one last big payday?

i hope so, i hope howard can getone last tilt at something decent... but i think the fat lady is already singing...

Eastman v Lee would be good.

Eastman has no-where else to go - the best he can do is the fighting for a title in his motherland - after he was beaten by Elcock there's no-where else for him to go in the UK as he's too old and there's too many new kids on the block.

I would have loved to see him fight Lockett - a sort of revenge fight for him duffing his bro

I just don't get Eastman, I watched him v Hopkins last week and thought that he did well and *could* have done better, but it's as if he just couldn't be assed. I too thought that he beat Joppy - but he just never seems to get any (good) luck and also never seemed to have any amount of fans following him...

Maybe all of this makes him one of my favourite fighters - if anyone has a copy of his last 3 fights please let me know - I haven't been able to source any.

Cheers

Terry D wrote:I agree that he won the Joppy fight on the cards. Nady was pretty tough on him and was clearly out to make sure Howard knew that he was the 'away' fighter. Then again bringing in a training team with only a few days to go was hardly world title prep. He finished that fight with a narrow loss and plenty left in the tank, that is unforgiveable.

In the end he brought it all on himself.

I agree, Joppy was pretty spent by rd 12 while Eastman seemed to have plenty more to offer.

I agree Howards attitude is why he has under achived, although it is strange to call a two-time British, Commonwealth & European champion an 'under achiever'.

Eastman never beat Joppy, he gave away too many early rounds. Its funny how a final round knockdown impairs people's recollections of this fight years later.

I think I scored it to Joppy by a round but haven't watched it since. Eastman was a frustrating fighter, it's hard to remember his truly good performances. Throughout so many fights he left a what if (Abraham, Hopkins, Miranda when he had him hurt, Joppy) makes me wonder whether he really had that extra gear to step up to that so many people believe. Take the Hopkins fight, Bernard countered him with his superior speed ever time Howard tried to step it up and I think he felt some good power from Hopkins. After that he was content to last 12 and tell everyone he wasn't even out of breath like that's something to be commended

overhand_right wrote:Wish Eastman had got the nod over Joppy as he deserved (so say the crowd, the papers, BBC website and The Ring magazine) so he could at least be referred to as an ex-world champ

It was only one of those bogus WBA vacancies which arose with the creation of a "super" champ anyway.

oliverfennell wrote:

overhand_right wrote:Wish Eastman had got the nod over Joppy as he deserved (so say the crowd, the papers, BBC website and The Ring magazine) so he could at least be referred to as an ex-world champ

It was only one of those bogus WBA vacancies which arose with the creation of a "super" champ anyway.

Yep a bogus belt, but just as bogus as any WBO belt that was simply created in 1989 even though it was never needed & has never served boxing since.

overhand_right wrote:

oliverfennell wrote:

overhand_right wrote:Wish Eastman had got the nod over Joppy as he deserved (so say the crowd, the papers, BBC website and The Ring magazine) so he could at least be referred to as an ex-world champ

It was only one of those bogus WBA vacancies which arose with the creation of a "super" champ anyway.

Yep a bogus belt, but just as bogus as any WBO belt that was simply created in 1989 even though it was never needed & has never served boxing since.

True, but I consider the splintering of SINGLE belts to be even more bogus than the creation of separate ones (for example a lineal WBO champion is more worthy than a WBA "interim" holder, IMO)

Agreed. The monumental corruption that gave birth to the WBA super champ rule still makes me shiver.