Re: Chris Eubank Jnr thought he didn't lose to Saunders
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dark Lord Al
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ross
Quote:
Originally Posted by
La Cucaracha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Silkeyjoe
Quote:
Originally Posted by
La Cucaracha
Too little too late for Eubank ;) he fought well over the second half but it still wasn't enough :p Saunders beat him fair and square :D
Doesn't matter now because Chudinov is going to knock him out :cool:
Chudinov isnt very good. Id be surprised if he won.
Get ready to be surprised ;D
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ross
Saunders is going to be defending his british title against Blackwell next.
The fights these two are having next you would think the decision went the other way.....
I thought Saunders was targeting Lee :confused:
They were.
Im pretty sure Saunders beats Lee relatively easy and I reckon booth also feels maybe not that Saunders would beat Lee easy but that its an awkward fight and he and Warren have come to an agreement that Lee gets an easy defence at home first.
Makes sense financially but id rather see Saunders build on the exposure he got with Eubank and get an old name instead of rematching a british level fighter.
Agreed , I think they know Saunders needs to be matched carefully.
Theres three Australians he could defend the commonwealth against that have recognosable names. Mundine, Geale and Soliman. All quality fights and easily winnable. Saunders is much better than I thought. Eubank Jrs progress beyond that fight will prove that.
Re: Chris Eubank Jnr thought he didn't lose to Saunders
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ross
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dark Lord Al
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ross
Quote:
Originally Posted by
La Cucaracha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Silkeyjoe
Quote:
Originally Posted by
La Cucaracha
Too little too late for Eubank ;) he fought well over the second half but it still wasn't enough :p Saunders beat him fair and square :D
Doesn't matter now because Chudinov is going to knock him out :cool:
Chudinov isnt very good. Id be surprised if he won.
Get ready to be surprised ;D
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ross
Saunders is going to be defending his british title against Blackwell next.
The fights these two are having next you would think the decision went the other way.....
I thought Saunders was targeting Lee :confused:
They were.
Im pretty sure Saunders beats Lee relatively easy and I reckon booth also feels maybe not that Saunders would beat Lee easy but that its an awkward fight and he and Warren have come to an agreement that Lee gets an easy defence at home first.
Makes sense financially but id rather see Saunders build on the exposure he got with Eubank and get an old name instead of rematching a british level fighter.
Agreed , I think they know Saunders needs to be matched carefully.
Theres three Australians he could defend the commonwealth against that have recognosable names. Mundine, Geale and Soliman. All quality fights and easily winnable. Saunders is much better than I thought. Eubank Jrs progress beyond that fight will prove that.
Saunders beating Eubank proved that Billy Joe was better than you thought. Eubank Jr's progress, if there is any, will be dependent on many things, but will prove nothing about Saunders.
Re: Chris Eubank Jnr thought he didn't lose to Saunders
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ross
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dark Lord Al
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ross
Quote:
Originally Posted by
La Cucaracha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Silkeyjoe
Quote:
Originally Posted by
La Cucaracha
Too little too late for Eubank ;) he fought well over the second half but it still wasn't enough :p Saunders beat him fair and square :D
Doesn't matter now because Chudinov is going to knock him out :cool:
Chudinov isnt very good. Id be surprised if he won.
Get ready to be surprised ;D
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ross
Saunders is going to be defending his british title against Blackwell next.
The fights these two are having next you would think the decision went the other way.....
I thought Saunders was targeting Lee :confused:
They were.
Im pretty sure Saunders beats Lee relatively easy and I reckon booth also feels maybe not that Saunders would beat Lee easy but that its an awkward fight and he and Warren have come to an agreement that Lee gets an easy defence at home first.
Makes sense financially but id rather see Saunders build on the exposure he got with Eubank and get an old name instead of rematching a british level fighter.
Agreed , I think they know Saunders needs to be matched carefully.
Theres three Australians he could defend the commonwealth against that have recognosable names. Mundine, Geale and Soliman. All quality fights and easily winnable. Saunders is much better than I thought. Eubank Jrs progress beyond that fight will prove that.
Firstly, I don't see why your opinion of BJS is so much higher just because he beat the Superhero that is Eubank jr.:rolleyes: surely he should've won ? he was a possible World title contender and Eubank was a relative novice albeit a good one. Both of them are exactly what they say on the tin....
Saunders- technically good Boxer looking for a World title shot. Whether he belongs at that level , we'll find out.
Eubank - a very good novice with massive "potential", but still a bit raw, a bit wild and a bit arrogant. He COULD go a long way, but he'll need to listen now and again, and if he doesn't , he's going nowhere.
Finally, this has lead you to think that fights with Soliman and Geale are "easily winnable". Forget about Mundine, because his last fight was at LMW And he's nearly 40, But Geale and Soliman have both been World Champions and fought the best.
At the moment, that is something BJS and Eu have no guarantees of doing. Geale was Half a second from KO'ing Darren Barker and I think your comment is grossly disrespectful to both of them.
I suppose it's typical of many English people's perception that the World begins in Cornwall and ends in Carlisle.
Re: Chris Eubank Jnr thought he didn't lose to Saunders
Im not English or from the UK...
Re: Chris Eubank Jnr thought he didn't lose to Saunders
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ross
Im not English or from the UK...
No, you live in the Channel Islands, which isn't far off, you can take your pick. That's probably why you have the Union Jack in your ID. I don't see the tricoloure in there.and you, putting it kindly wax lyrical about 2 Brit fighters to the point of Blind faith.
I think that justifies my comment.;D
Re: Chris Eubank Jnr thought he didn't lose to Saunders
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Primo Carnera
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ross
Im not English or from the UK...
No, you live in the Channel Islands, which isn't far off, you can take your pick. That's probably why you have the Union Jack in your ID. I don't see the tricoloure in there.and you, putting it kindly wax lyrical about 2 Brit fighters to the point of Blind faith.
I think that justifies my comment.;D
I like them because they have a refreshing attitude towards fighting and have interesting to watch styles. I live closer to France, have a French surname but could not name any current interesting french fighters.
Re: Chris Eubank Jnr thought he didn't lose to Saunders
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ross
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Primo Carnera
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ross
Im not English or from the UK...
No, you live in the Channel Islands, which isn't far off, you can take your pick. That's probably why you have the Union Jack in your ID. I don't see the tricoloure in there.and you, putting it kindly wax lyrical about 2 Brit fighters to the point of Blind faith.
I think that justifies my comment.;D
I like them because they have a refreshing attitude towards fighting and have interesting to watch styles. I live closer to France, have a French surname but could not name any current interesting french fighters.
For the record, I don't dislike either of them. Infact , I find Fury very entertaining and watchable , in , but mostly out of the ring. My point is, I feel I'm a bit more realistic about their current standing.
Re: Chris Eubank Jnr thought he didn't lose to Saunders
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Primo Carnera
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ross
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Primo Carnera
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ross
Im not English or from the UK...
No, you live in the Channel Islands, which isn't far off, you can take your pick. That's probably why you have the Union Jack in your ID. I don't see the tricoloure in there.and you, putting it kindly wax lyrical about 2 Brit fighters to the point of Blind faith.
I think that justifies my comment.;D
I like them because they have a refreshing attitude towards fighting and have interesting to watch styles. I live closer to France, have a French surname but could not name any current interesting french fighters.
For the record, I don't dislike either of them. Infact , I find Fury very entertaining and watchable , in , but mostly out of the ring. My point is, I feel I'm a bit more realistic about their current standing.
A bit more realistic about their standing?
Im not unrealistic. Where have I been unrealistic about their standing?
Re: Chris Eubank Jnr thought he didn't lose to Saunders
I dont think Eubank won just because a judge said so and people in the crowd also thought so. I used those as examples to prove how its not ridiculous for anyone to think Eubank won.
I based my opinion on what I saw and from my experience as an actual boxer and judge.
What do you base your opinion on?
Re: Chris Eubank Jnr thought he didn't lose to Saunders
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ross
I dont think Eubank won just because a judge said so and people in the crowd also thought so. I used those as examples to prove how its not ridiculous for anyone to think Eubank won.
I based my opinion on what I saw and from my experience as an actual boxer and judge.
What do you base your opinion on?
Sometimes in the arena, you can get a distorted view of how the fight is going, so I watched it very carefully twice over, first time with no volume. And to be honest I think Saunders was spot on. He won the first six rounds and won 2 out of the next 6. That means he won the fight comfortably by 4 rounds. Eubank wasn't helped by his Dad posing in front of him in the corner, and the only reason he started slowly was that he couldn't suss out what to do to combat Saunders tactics, and he refuses to allow Davis to talk or listen when he does. That is the biggest fuckin joke in the World.
Re: Chris Eubank Jnr thought he didn't lose to Saunders
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Primo Carnera
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ross
I dont think Eubank won just because a judge said so and people in the crowd also thought so. I used those as examples to prove how its not ridiculous for anyone to think Eubank won.
I based my opinion on what I saw and from my experience as an actual boxer and judge.
What do you base your opinion on?
Sometimes in the arena, you can get a distorted view of how the fight is going, so I watched it very carefully twice over, first time with no volume. And to be honest I think Saunders was spot on. He won the first six rounds and won 2 out of the next 6. That means he won the fight comfortably by 4 rounds. Eubank wasn't helped by his Dad posing in front of him in the corner, and the only reason he started slowly was that he couldn't suss out what to do to combat Saunders tactics, and he refuses to allow Davis to talk or listen when he does. That is the biggest fuckin joke in the World.
Saunders didn't win all the first 6 at all. There was a couple of rounds minimum in the first half Eubank won. My view was not distorted. As an ex judge I'm looking at the work both produce and not the overall impression by any one fighter. As an amateur judge its difficult to watch or enjoy a fight as you are counting both fighters punches at the same time and you learn how to do it proficiently. Although pro isn't scored like amateur on number of punches landed solely if you land more punches than your opponent generally you are going to win the round, unless your not putting any effort or steam on those punches.
Re: Chris Eubank Jnr thought he didn't lose to Saunders
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ross
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Primo Carnera
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ross
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Primo Carnera
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ross
Im not English or from the UK...
No, you live in the Channel Islands, which isn't far off, you can take your pick. That's probably why you have the Union Jack in your ID. I don't see the tricoloure in there.and you, putting it kindly wax lyrical about 2 Brit fighters to the point of Blind faith.
I think that justifies my comment.;D
I like them because they have a refreshing attitude towards fighting and have interesting to watch styles. I live closer to France, have a French surname but could not name any current interesting french fighters.
For the record, I don't dislike either of them. Infact , I find Fury very entertaining and watchable , in , but mostly out of the ring. My point is, I feel I'm a bit more realistic about their current standing.
A bit more realistic about their standing?
Im not unrealistic. Where have I been unrealistic about their standing?
;D
Re: Chris Eubank Jnr thought he didn't lose to Saunders
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ross
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Primo Carnera
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ross
I dont think Eubank won just because a judge said so and people in the crowd also thought so. I used those as examples to prove how its not ridiculous for anyone to think Eubank won.
I based my opinion on what I saw and from my experience as an actual boxer and judge.
What do you base your opinion on?
Sometimes in the arena, you can get a distorted view of how the fight is going, so I watched it very carefully twice over, first time with no volume. And to be honest I think Saunders was spot on. He won the first six rounds and won 2 out of the next 6. That means he won the fight comfortably by 4 rounds. Eubank wasn't helped by his Dad posing in front of him in the corner, and the only reason he started slowly was that he couldn't suss out what to do to combat Saunders tactics, and he refuses to allow Davis to talk or listen when he does. That is the biggest fuckin joke in the World.
Saunders didn't win all the first 6 at all. There was a couple of rounds minimum in the first half Eubank won. My view was not distorted. As an ex judge I'm looking at the work both produce and not the overall impression by any one fighter. As an amateur judge its difficult to watch or enjoy a fight as you are counting both fighters punches at the same time and you learn how to do it proficiently. Although pro isn't scored like amateur on number of punches landed solely if you land more punches than your opponent generally you are going to win the round, unless your not putting any effort or steam on those punches.
Well, it's all about opinions I suppose, and no disrespect to you being an ex Judge, but I've seen judges give poor decisions as you have seen also no doubt.I'm not putting you in that bracket, just saying.
Nonetheless , I notice you never answered my remarks about Fury's experience or Eubank's arrogance, so I'll take it you concede and agree on those points. ;)
Re: Chris Eubank Jnr thought he didn't lose to Saunders
I didnt notice any comments about experience or arrogance.
If you are saying Tyson is not experienced enough thats not entirely his own fault. David Haye pulled out twice, he tried making a replacement fight with Wilder, that didnt come off and then Chisor pulled out and his trainer pulled him out of the replacement because his trainers brother was dying.
As for arrogance, so what? Its only arrogance. Its not the ignorance that spouts out of Saunders mouth. You know Tyson Fury got fined for saying lesser things than saunders did but its terrible that a boxer should believe in himself?
Whats the most terrbile thing that Eubank Jr has said that someone could take offence at?
