BoxRec

the reason im saying is that many on here think joe calzaghe deserves a place in the hall of fame because he beat a past it hopkins and jones jnr.

hell joes best win came against kessler who really isnt anywhere near great.

now if joe is going to get in then eubank should already be there as he fought better men , fought them away from home and beat them in thier prime...here is the stats.....

*eubank beat a prime nigel benn to win his first world title......benn was a britsih great who will get into the hall of fame.
*eubank then beat michael watson twice , one of the wins for his 2nd world title , watson was in his prime.
*eubank then took on a prime sugarboy malinga , a guy who would go on to win the wbc title
*eubank then a year later fought benn again , for less money just to get the fight on , he drew , again benn still in prime
*eubank then fought away from home in germany against former ibf champ and undefeated rochigianni , chris won.
*eubank then fought 8 fights in a year (sky deal) fighting all over the world , collins beat him twice , both fights were close.
*eubank at this time in 5 years of being champ has had 20 title fights ....calzaghe had this in 10 years
*eubank then loses 7lbs in a week to fight calzaghe , another risk , but he loses to new champ.
*eubank then jumps 2 weight divisions and narrowly loses to thomson twice in heroic efforts to win 3rd world title.

in all eubank has beaten much better guys then calzaghe , he has taken much more risks away from home , he is a 2 divison champion and narrowly missed out on his 3rd title , 20 world title fights in 5 years is unheard of now , as mentioned this took joe 10 years to do this.

basically eubank should be there before calzaghe - eubank was a risk taker , sure he fought some guys who werent world class but he certainly beat alot who were and away from home.

eubanks best wins...benn , watson x2 and rochiagianni..all guys were in thier prime benn and roch went on to win world titles
calzaghes best wins....kessler , lacy , hopkins and jones jnr.....only kessler and lacy were in prime.

eubanks fight resume is far superior than calzaghes....fact



eubank instead of calzaghe for hall of fame.

No, just no. And that's coming from a Eubank fan.

no???? so should calzaghe then???...if eubank is no then calzaghe must be a certain no

No, but Eubank will get more respect, given that Benn and Calzaghe etc are known to US viewers. Calzaghe's success will encourage revisionism, hopefully bringing acclaim to underrated (but hermetic) British scenes at middle/super middle throuhg the mid 90s and early 00s. Eubank obviously one of the biggest UK names.


Joe beat a superb fighter in Kessler, add to that Lacy and you have 2 impressive wins vs men in their primes, unbeaten guys with titles.

Eubank hasn't beaten a Kessler quality foe that was in his prime (IMO) and he didn't beat a fighter that the Americans were slavering over (Lacy). Remember that the HOF voters are the BWAA (Boxing Writers Association of America). Fights with Hopkins, Lacy, Kessler, RJJ all got considerable US attention.

Eubank did very well, held only WBO titles in 2 weights, whereas Joe held Ring titles over 2 weights. Meaning he had wider recognition as The Man at the weights he competed in.

Eubank has a few dodgy results on his record (Watson 1, Benn 2), a close call with Thornton.

That doesn't mean a prime Eubank couldn't have beaten a prime Calzaghe, but as we know boxing is about guys on the up vs guys on the slide, is about handicapping and matchmaking over "prime for prime."

im not saying that eubank should be hall of fame but he has certainly beat much better fighter than calzaghe....i would take benn and watson vs kesser and lacy anytime.

lacy was hype , kessler is a good champion though but i think that both benn and watson would have beaten him.

calzaghe should not be near the hall of fame.

a question...if benn and eubank would have had joes wbo title fights in the 10 years he was champ....would benn and eubank be undefeated like joe???

my answer is yes....joe has been the most protected champ in britsh history

I think Kessler would have done Watson like McCallum did, and that Benn would have had a horribkle time getting by that jab.

all about opinions mate...benn would have made kessler crack and would win by late stoppage or points , watson would have outpointed him.

autobarn - should joe get in ???

ps: kessler aint no mccallum

I think you may be overrating Benn a touch there. Even at his best he was inconsistent, and could be very easy to hit.

You don't think that Kessler would have beaten the Benn that struggled against Williams and Piper, and was stopped by both Eubank and Watson?

Edit: Benn stopped by Benn? Duh!

I think Kessler will go on to good things. He can dominate many fighters with a superb jab, best jab in the game.

The man is poised for big fights - young Yanks Dirrell and Ward getting closer to title shots. This brings TV money & acclaim. Big name middles, who soon won't be bale to make 160 ever again (Abraham, Taylor, Pavlik). Froch unification, if Froch beats Pascal & calls out Kessler. Kessler can be the man, and the fights will come to him.

It's all there for Kessler, if he plays it smart & sees the bigger picture. The man will be on p4p lists before too long. I rate his abilities more highly than you do.

yeah mate you probably do regarding kessler , id like to see him fighting better guys like froch , pavlik , dawson etc.

he might come good mate but i rate benn above him....lets see what he does in the next 2-3 years

Why not? Ken Norton went 0-3 in HW World title fights despite being the WBC HW champ for a short time... he's in. I like Norton, I'm just saying... he went 1-2 vs. Ali but all 3 were close (most felt he beat Ali in the rubber match), he beat Quarry and Young. He lost a split-decision to Holmes.

Prime vs. Prime? I think Eubank may have beaten Calzaghe!

On a side note... despite not getting a win over Eubank,
I do think that Benn was the better fighter.

only fighters who fought and defeated the BEST should be allowed into the hall of fame.


signed

barry mcguigan

that certainly rules joe calzaghe out then

He's a fringe guy, not sure he makes it though.

yes i think so!

My initial take was no way. He won some close decisions, sometimes against very average opposition, and a SD over a mediocre but always competitive future paper champion like Malinga doesn't help make his case. But the wins over Benn rank pretty high, Watson wins were decent, and going to Germany and winning a decision over an undefeated local champion borders on stupendous. I think he and Benn are both the kind of fighters who probably won't get in but are close

Yeah I think Eubank is a Hall-Of-Famer...
(despite the fact that my dad's cousin was robbed in a fight against him)

As is Steve Collins and Nigel Benn also in the Hall-Of-Fame.

But maybe I'm biased... Collin is Irish. And Like Benn's style...

glittermonkey wrote:I think you may be overrating Benn a touch there. Even at his best he was inconsistent, and could be very easy to hit.

You don't think that Kessler would have beaten the Benn that struggled against Williams and Piper, and was stopped by both Eubank and Watson?

Edit: Benn stopped by Benn? Duh!

I'm inclined to agree that Benn was slightly over-rated. He was a terrific fighter and great to watch but he wasn't really a true world beater. However the same could be said for Arturo Gatti and that guy is a shoe-in for the Hall of Fame. I think there should be a place for fighters that weren't necessarily the best in the world getting a place in the HoF purely on there ability to entertain and excite us. I'm not sure that Eubank falls into that catagory though as he wasn't really that well known outside of the UK despite being a larger than life character who was in some classic British dust-ups. I just don't feel he captured the imagination of the boxing world as much as he did here in the UK. Plus he was never the same after the second Watson fight.

Calzaghe should get credit for edging Hopkins as well, regardless of B-Hop's age. Calzaghe was moving up in weight, and Hopkins has since beaten Pavlik decisively.

No he should not.

I dont think Chris Eubank should get in the hall of fame. Chris's career went off at a tangent after the second Watson fight, he became a negative fighter who just did enough to win, most of his fights after were dour, negative and frustrating affairs.

Eubank just misses in my opinion.

He got a couple of gift decisions and while Watson, Rocchiangi, and Benn were all very good fighters, none of them were great. A win over a Nunn (in 89-91), Toney, Roy,McCallum (early 90s version, McClennan, Hopkins, or Calzaghe would've sealed it.

Thing is, imo, Eubank is better than Calzaghe.

If Calzaghe warrants a place, then Eubank walks in to the Hall of Fame.

Seemingly going Prime v Prime with the likes of Benn and beating him is enough. There are plenty of better fighters Eubank beat, fighters which are leagues above the fighters Calzaghe beat.

If McGuigan is in, Eubank and Calzaghe are in.

Is there a British Hall of Fame? I know there were plans for a Scottish one

We cannot use McGuigan as an example for any fighter to be inducted. No, Eubank should not be in. And this is from someone that used to know him and is a huge fan.