Re: Eubank Sr. the REASON...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dark Lord Al
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ross
Quote:
Originally Posted by
beenKOed
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ross
Eubank won.
Its such a shame he has to live with a loss now but if they do rematch Chris will start where he left off. More relaxed and letting his hands go in combinations.
Saunders maybe won two rounds after the 4th. He lost the 5th and 6th and 12th for sure. It should have been a draw if anything.
Man, you are a strange one, everything you say about your favorites is now suspect. You can't be trusted!
What the fuck are you on about?
One of the judges gave it to Eubank and it was by a bigger margin than the others gave it to Saunders by.
Doesn't matter if one judge gave Eubank every round the other two didn't agree . so he lost.
Well, put it this way, add all three scores together for each boxer and what are each boxers score?
343 a draw.
Although the way the scores are collected is different, this is how the scoring is tallied up in amateur. You dont have draws in amateur but you do in professional.
Re: Eubank Sr. the REASON...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
nuggetdotcom
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
nuggetdotcom
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
ross - I hate Eubank jr so much that - in this very thread i've said that a draw was possible, even though virtually everyone else thought he lost, and that Jr would win a rematch.
I don't think Hopkins beat Calzaghe. I was using it as an example to show why your theory about split decisions was stupid. And you've proved it straight away. The fighter you supported - Eubank jr - didn't deserve to lose because it was SD. But Calzaghe, the fighter you supported against Hopkins, deserved his SD win because you don't agree with the judge that scored against him. Can't you see how silly that is?
Put this in your pipe - Jimmy Tibbs has never trained a fighter to beat one Ronnie Davies trains (you didn't even know the fights but I know at least three). Billy Joe is too small. Eubank's lack of experience doesn't matter because he batters "world-class" sparring partners. Trot.
Fen,
Seems like we're opposites.
I normally win money on boxing and your prediction record is atrocious.
You hate the Eu's, for reasons you have not shared with us, I hate Calzaghe, because he cancelled a fight with Glen Johnson at late notice because he had ' a bad back' the real reason is that he was banged up on a saturday night for bashing his then wife.
Glen Johnson is a quality fighter, he lost £100k in travel and training expenses because of Calzaghes bad back, he then went on to beat an ageing Roy Jones, before Calslappy did.
So, we all have our own biases in fights, for various reasons.
Nevertheless I agree with you, we cant argue sensiblly that EU was a winner, only that he turned up late!
Come again?
You win money on boxing?
Fenster's prediction record is rubbish?
Calzaghe? Johnson? Roy? Bad Backs? Bashed up wives?
Lets start again with - what gives you the impression that I hate Eubank or his son? I've never said anything other than snr was a great fighter and jr is a top prospect.
Yeh. start again fen, I mistook you for a EU hater, my mistake too many posts and missing the detail. However you can deffo put me down as a calzaghe non beleiver, the wives thing is well known, ask sheffield
No problem. The only man on this planet I hate is myself.
Re: Eubank Sr. the REASON...
Re: Eubank Sr. the REASON...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Well, im not going to argue with Davies.
Re: Eubank Sr. the REASON...
The result stands so get over it.
