Chris Eubank Jnr insists he did not lose to Billy Joe Saunders and vows to destroy Dmitry Chudinov | Boxing News - boxing news, results, rankings, schedules since 1909
Printable View
To be fair so did one of the judges so hes no way out of line.
So did a lot of people who watched including some of Saunders own gypsy supporters sat behind me in the arena.
Eubank Jr will suffer in instances like this where it was clearly a very very close fight everyone agrees (apart from the very biased against Eubank) but yet its insane that anyone could think he won?
He will suffer because he is confident and generally british people don't like confidence. Saunders talked a lot of rubbish, childish rubbish in the lead up and Eubank didn't. He didn't even attend most of the press conferences! In the end he will have a better career than Saunders in the pros because he has the strength and resilience needed.
Saunders put himself on a decent training camp and looked in his best shape he'd ever been but even still he was falling apart in the last round. Either Eubank is better than what some will give him credit for (he is by a mile, otherwise how else does he go from fighting journeymen and only ever going 8 rounds to nearly stopping and giving Saunders the hardest fight of his career and pushing him to a split decision?) or Saunders is fucked when he meets genuine world class (he beats Lee).
It was a close fight but I think eubank won and if they fight again I bet jnr is a big favourite to win
I think I had Saunders by 1. Could make a case for a draw or Eubank by 1. Would back Eubank heavily in rematch.
I think that's what most people think Ross.
Theres no doubt Eubank has ability but he completely bottled it. He did fuck all for the first half of the fight which cost him the W. Either Saunders is a lot better then people thought or Eubank isnt as good. Eubanks team took a calculated risk which didnt pay off. He has been given a great opportunity now to fight a highly rated fighter who really shouldnt be rated so highly.
His main problem is he has gone from only Andre Ward having a shot of beating him to getting beat by Saunders. Id like to see him fight Ryder. Both him and Ryder did as well as each other against Saunders.
What are you on?Quote:
Originally Posted by Silkeyjoe
Your trying to tell people who have seen these fights that Ryder did as well as Eubank?;D
Did he come close to a split decision? No! Did he have Saunders is as much trouble late as Eubank? No!
Its getting tiresome reading opinions saying Eubank should drop below British title level and fight the likes of Saunders, Osullivan and Blackwell. Its like bitterness that Eubank is the real deal and has more promise or rather potential than any of the other british middles. Yes he has more potential, even the people who don't like him all say he could have fought better, whereas Saunders fought his best. He's on the same level as Saunders now which is european and he's got the confidence in his ability to keep moving up and fight world ranked opponents. Thats how you learn.
Compare who Eubanks fighting next to who the three fighters I mentioned are. Chudinov is ranked higher than Saunders.
John Ryder scorecards: 115-114 115-113 115-113Quote:
Originally Posted by rossWhat are you on?Quote:
Originally Posted by Silkeyjoe
Your trying to tell people who have seen these fights that Ryder did as well as Eubank?;D
Did he come close to a split decision? No! Did he have Saunders is as much trouble late as Eubank? No!
Chris Eubank Scorecards: 115-114 115-113 113-116
Good old ross. Selective rankings.Quote:
Originally Posted by ross
Saunders is ranked 4 by WBC, Eubank 11. Chudinov unranked.
Saunders is ranked 11th by WBA. Eubank unranked, Chudinov number 1 (this is clearly the best ranking system eh Ross)
Saunders is 4 in IBF. Other 2 are unranked
Saunders is 1 in WBO, others are unranked.
Saunders is 19 by boxrec, Chudinov is 15 Eubank is 33.
Saunders likely going for world title next which will definitely be a higher standard then Chudinov. O Sullivans trainer has said he has a big fight coming up. I Have no idea who it is against but I was thinking someone like O Kane makes sense. If this is true (by your logic) this is a better opponent then Eubank as he is higher ranked in boxrec (because they are the real experts on rankings) and Nick Blackwell will fight for the British title as he is mandatory. Chris Eubank has decided to skip this, which is fine.
So he didn't come close to getting a split then;)Quote:
Originally Posted by SilkeyjoeJohn Ryder scorecards: 115-114 115-113 115-113Quote:
Originally Posted by rossWhat are you on?Quote:
Originally Posted by Silkeyjoe
Your trying to tell people who have seen these fights that Ryder did as well as Eubank?;D
Did he come close to a split decision? No! Did he have Saunders is as much trouble late as Eubank? No!
Chris Eubank Scorecards: 115-114 115-113 113-116
The difference between the Ryder fight and the Eubank Jr fight is no one thought Ryder won or that it was even close.
I hope Eubank can fulfil his potential, but I really don't think he can. I can understand him not telling the media about the not so positives things he learnt, but if he's telling the complete truth, he hasn't learnt enough. When someone says "Ronnie is only there to apply the Vaseline, when it's going wrong, I know how to put it right , I don't need telling." And then in the middle of the fight , to tell Ronnie Davis to stop talking is the most disgraceful thing I've ever heard a boxer say in all my life.
I have never known even the most arrogant fighters ever to say something as disrespectful as that. If that continues to be his attitude , he will NEVER make it. And to be fair, that would be disappointing.
When his Dad showed off, he knew that that part of it was a bit of a game, but I'm not sure his son has taken that in.
Except for the 3 judges?Quote:
Originally Posted by rossSo he didn't come close to getting a split then;)Quote:
Originally Posted by SilkeyjoeJohn Ryder scorecards: 115-114 115-113 115-113Quote:
Originally Posted by rossWhat are you on?Quote:
Originally Posted by Silkeyjoe
Your trying to tell people who have seen these fights that Ryder did as well as Eubank?;D
Did he come close to a split decision? No! Did he have Saunders is as much trouble late as Eubank? No!
Chris Eubank Scorecards: 115-114 115-113 113-116
The difference between the Ryder fight and the Eubank Jr fight is no one thought Ryder won or that it was even close.
I agree, if you are unwilling to learn from everyone around you then you have just revealed your own shallowness and given away half the game. Bluff and Bravado alone ain't going to win you fights.Quote:
Originally Posted by Primo Carnera
Erm..... The three judges in the Ryder fight all had him losing:vd:Quote:
Originally Posted by SilkeyjoeExcept for the 3 judges?Quote:
Originally Posted by rossSo he didn't come close to getting a split then;)Quote:
Originally Posted by SilkeyjoeJohn Ryder scorecards: 115-114 115-113 115-113Quote:
Originally Posted by rossWhat are you on?Quote:
Originally Posted by Silkeyjoe
Your trying to tell people who have seen these fights that Ryder did as well as Eubank?;D
Did he come close to a split decision? No! Did he have Saunders is as much trouble late as Eubank? No!
Chris Eubank Scorecards: 115-114 115-113 113-116
The difference between the Ryder fight and the Eubank Jr fight is no one thought Ryder won or that it was even close.
;D
Yea but was it not close?Quote:
Originally Posted by rossErm..... The three judges in the Ryder fight all had him losing:vd:Quote:
Originally Posted by SilkeyjoeExcept for the 3 judges?Quote:
Originally Posted by rossSo he didn't come close to getting a split then;)Quote:
Originally Posted by SilkeyjoeJohn Ryder scorecards: 115-114 115-113 115-113Quote:
Originally Posted by rossWhat are you on?Quote:
Originally Posted by Silkeyjoe
Your trying to tell people who have seen these fights that Ryder did as well as Eubank?;D
Did he come close to a split decision? No! Did he have Saunders is as much trouble late as Eubank? No!
Chris Eubank Scorecards: 115-114 115-113 113-116
The difference between the Ryder fight and the Eubank Jr fight is no one thought Ryder won or that it was even close.
;D
Did anyone ever think Ryder won?Quote:
Originally Posted by SilkeyjoeYea but was it not close?Quote:
Originally Posted by rossErm..... The three judges in the Ryder fight all had him losing:vd:Quote:
Originally Posted by SilkeyjoeExcept for the 3 judges?Quote:
Originally Posted by rossSo he didn't come close to getting a split then;)Quote:
Originally Posted by SilkeyjoeJohn Ryder scorecards: 115-114 115-113 115-113Quote:
Originally Posted by rossWhat are you on?Quote:
Originally Posted by Silkeyjoe
Your trying to tell people who have seen these fights that Ryder did as well as Eubank?;D
Did he come close to a split decision? No! Did he have Saunders is as much trouble late as Eubank? No!
Chris Eubank Scorecards: 115-114 115-113 113-116
The difference between the Ryder fight and the Eubank Jr fight is no one thought Ryder won or that it was even close.
;D
I gave it to Saunders by 2 rounds. The same score as I gave Saunders over Eubank. Some people on twitter gave the fight to Ryder. Both fights were clear in my opinion. Both were close but the right man won both.
I actually think I may have had Saunders by more than 2. Havent seen the fight in awhile. In any case I cant remember anyone argueing too much about the scorecards which would indicate a close and competitive fight.Quote:
Originally Posted by Silkeyjoe
Your opinion but even yourself don't have Ryder doing as well as Eubank did.Quote:
Originally Posted by SilkeyjoeI actually think I may have had Saunders by more than 2. Havent seen the fight in awhile. In any case I cant remember anyone argueing too much about the scorecards which would indicate a close and competitive fight.Quote:
Originally Posted by Silkeyjoe
Ryder was younger and had less pro fights then Eubank had when they fought Saunders. Will you not take that into account for Ryder? :DQuote:
Originally Posted by rossYour opinion but even yourself don't have Ryder doing as well as Eubank did.Quote:
Originally Posted by SilkeyjoeI actually think I may have had Saunders by more than 2. Havent seen the fight in awhile. In any case I cant remember anyone argueing too much about the scorecards which would indicate a close and competitive fight.Quote:
Originally Posted by Silkeyjoe
Saunders was slightly more experinced, had for the first time come to the scales looking like a boxer and had taken himself away on a training camp.Quote:
Originally Posted by SilkeyjoeRyder was younger and had less pro fights then Eubank had when they fought Saunders. Will you not take that into account for Ryder? :DQuote:
Originally Posted by rossYour opinion but even yourself don't have Ryder doing as well as Eubank did.Quote:
Originally Posted by SilkeyjoeI actually think I may have had Saunders by more than 2. Havent seen the fight in awhile. In any case I cant remember anyone argueing too much about the scorecards which would indicate a close and competitive fight.Quote:
Originally Posted by Silkeyjoe
Had it been the Billy Joe who was turning up looking like a fat welter as he was in all his fights previous the. I think Eubank probably would have stopped him. The new fitness effort scraped him through that fight.
Conversely, had Saumders been in this shape and this focussed against Ryder the margin would have been much wider.
LOL. Is Saunders not like Chisora? Being fatter made him more durable. Thats why Eubank could rock him because he wasnt carrying the extra weight on the night ???Quote:
Originally Posted by rossSaunders was slightly more experinced, had for the first time come to the scales looking like a boxer and had taken himself away on a training camp.Quote:
Originally Posted by SilkeyjoeRyder was younger and had less pro fights then Eubank had when they fought Saunders. Will you not take that into account for Ryder? :DQuote:
Originally Posted by rossYour opinion but even yourself don't have Ryder doing as well as Eubank did.Quote:
Originally Posted by SilkeyjoeI actually think I may have had Saunders by more than 2. Havent seen the fight in awhile. In any case I cant remember anyone argueing too much about the scorecards which would indicate a close and competitive fight.Quote:
Originally Posted by Silkeyjoe
Had it been the Billy Joe who was turning up looking like a fat welter as he was in all his fights previous the. I think Eubank probably would have stopped him. The new fitness effort scraped him through that fight.
Conversely, had Saumders been in this shape and this focussed against Ryder the margin would have been much wider.
I thought Eubank Junior won too. I have to admit Saunders was better fighter than I thought and both put up a great effort where they both gave their all in that fight.
That logic doesn't work when you have to make a weight limit;)Quote:
Originally Posted by SilkeyjoeLOL. Is Saunders not like Chisora? Being fatter made him more durable. Thats why Eubank could rock him because he wasnt carrying the extra weight on the night ???Quote:
Originally Posted by rossSaunders was slightly more experinced, had for the first time come to the scales looking like a boxer and had taken himself away on a training camp.Quote:
Originally Posted by SilkeyjoeRyder was younger and had less pro fights then Eubank had when they fought Saunders. Will you not take that into account for Ryder? :DQuote:
Originally Posted by rossYour opinion but even yourself don't have Ryder doing as well as Eubank did.Quote:
Originally Posted by SilkeyjoeI actually think I may have had Saunders by more than 2. Havent seen the fight in awhile. In any case I cant remember anyone argueing too much about the scorecards which would indicate a close and competitive fight.Quote:
Originally Posted by Silkeyjoe
Had it been the Billy Joe who was turning up looking like a fat welter as he was in all his fights previous the. I think Eubank probably would have stopped him. The new fitness effort scraped him through that fight.
Conversely, had Saumders been in this shape and this focussed against Ryder the margin would have been much wider.
Eubank lost :p he gets KTFO by Chudinov :D
Eubank lost the fight more than Saunders won it imo, he did absolutely fuck all for the first half and even after that fought like an idiot banking on those corkscrew uppercuts with nothing to set them up. The fight was really an underwhelming mess:-X No question Saunders won't have a chance to be as good as Eubank, should the latter improve even slightly, but I wouldn't bet on either going to the top.
I'm glad the loss is pissing Eubank off , maybe he will start fighting from the first bell next time , instead of posing and dicking about.
Eubank... had stage fright... started late after he found out Saunders, with his amateur pedigree, wasn't all that... but, do NOT cry. Just win. Rematch him, and win. Easy!
Some people could have told him beforehand that he didn't have the experience and he didn't know how to fight a southpaw. Unfortunately the cheerleader squad were too busy trying to get their mug on camera.
Fightscorecollector - press scores.
Saunders-Ryder - 15 of 25 for Saunders (10 don't think Ryder lost).
Saunders-Eubank - 33 of 43 for Saunders (10 don't think Eubank lost).
Almost an identical reaction to the fights. The majority agree Saunders won but accept both contests were pretty even.
fact!!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by fenster
This is a fact.
As I mentioned most people who thought Eubank lost are biased against him because of his confidence. He doesn't say childish derogatory things about his opponents like Saunders does (how Saunders didn't get fined like Fury for saying worse things is beyond me!), its just british people seem to be programmed to despise or be jealous of confident people.
This influenced the scoring big time and also viewers perception of what they saw, probably including the judges. Eubank says it will be an easy fight, viewers think "well you didn't find that round easy so you don't win it", rather than, "Eubank outworked and out landed Saunders that round so wins it". I keep reading that "Eubank did nothing in the first half". Yes he did. There was possibly 3 rounds he should have won in the first half and if the landed punches were actually counted I think you would be surprised to see Eubank out landed Saunders. A lot of Saunders punches never landed on scoring areas either.
Its easy now for those who dislike Eubank to dismiss his efforts as "he did nothing" when they know its not the case. If he really did nothing one of the judges would have awarded him the fight.
These are not facts, these are your opinions.Quote:
Originally Posted by ross
I am not biased against Eubank. I scored the fight fairly, if anything I was generous to Eubank and still had Saunders winning.
What you said applies to YOU more then anyone else I have ever met. If you like a fighter you are over the top biased towards them and if anything it influences your scoring.
Did my "bias" also influence the judge and all the people who saw the fight that think Eubank won?
No. And it didnt influence the majority who thought Saunders won. The majority of the people who thought Eubank won are people who backed him to win before hand.Quote:
Originally Posted by ross
Your wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by SilkeyjoeNo. And it didnt influence the majority who thought Saunders won. The majority of the people who thought Eubank won are people who backed him to win before hand.Quote:
Originally Posted by ross
I had a tall (6,4ish) loud English Gypsy behind me who we got chatting with called himself Randy. He had a few mates and some of them thought Eubank won. They were there in support of Saunders and none of them were confident Saunders had won at the final bell and like i said, some had Eubank winning.
So because some Gypsys at the fight were unsure of the result Im wrong?Quote:
Originally Posted by rossYour wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by SilkeyjoeNo. And it didnt influence the majority who thought Saunders won. The majority of the people who thought Eubank won are people who backed him to win before hand.Quote:
Originally Posted by ross
I had a tall (6,4ish) loud English Gypsy behind me who we got chatting with called himself Randy. He had a few mates and some of them thought Eubank won. They were there in support of Saunders and none of them were confident Saunders had won at the final bell and like i said, some had Eubank winning.
NO...Quote:
Originally Posted by SilkeyjoeSo because some Gypsys at the fight were unsure of the result Im wrong?Quote:
Originally Posted by rossYour wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by SilkeyjoeNo. And it didnt influence the majority who thought Saunders won. The majority of the people who thought Eubank won are people who backed him to win before hand.Quote:
Originally Posted by ross
I had a tall (6,4ish) loud English Gypsy behind me who we got chatting with called himself Randy. He had a few mates and some of them thought Eubank won. They were there in support of Saunders and none of them were confident Saunders had won at the final bell and like i said, some had Eubank winning.
Some thought Eubank won. The rest were unsure.
Saunders won - over Eubank . points
FACT . get over it.
That isn't an opinion it is fact.
I never said he didnt.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Lord Al
My argument is that no one has ever come as close or pushed as hard as Eubank Jr.
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: