What if Chris Eubank and Motell Griffin had met up ?

[Master]

Agreed with ICB, Eubanks achieved far more than Montell, at there best Eubanks would have beaten him. Did not think Montell fought at super middle and Eubanks only fought at light heavy at the end of his career, so a bit of an unfair comparison.

[Spicoli]

Assuming this is a "p4p" at best go regardless of weight? Toney 2 (1st fight was a bs call I think) and asterisk win vs Jones aside....Griffin lost to the world class and top tier he fought. He was crafty as hell but I think Eubank to strong in chin, punch and mind to lose to Griffin who didn't exactly set a pace similar to those that had troubled Eubank.

[Dark Lord Al]

Montell proved in his wins over James Toney , he was a smart boxer.
To smart for Chris he wins on points.

[berry]

Frank Maloney offered Eubank the Griffin fight in '95, but for pittance (compared to Eubanks millions) and at the Royal Albert Hall (hardly Earls Court or Old Trafford)!


Griffin was very short and compact, like Lindell Holmes, but didn't have Holmes's skills, though he was very tricky and crafty and difficult. Toney and Jones struggled because they didn't have (or use) effective rangey left jabs - Eubank did. I see Eubank staying out of distance, stepping in with his untelegraphed stiff jab at the right times, doubling it and grinding Griffin down; Griffin's head would be in the right pos. See Chris against short, squat guys (Thornton, Giminez, Holmes and Wharton) and how effective his jab is when he uses it - he can't miss. He had those high hips, and that stretchy waist to pull back out. Very effective.