Eubank Sr. the REASON...

[Dark Lord Al]

Eubank didn't win .
The End.

[ross]

Eubank didn't win .
The End.

One judge thought he did.

I was thinking about split decisions last night. If one judge thinks you have won its unfair that you get a loss.

[Fenster]

Eubank didn't win .
The End.

One judge thought he did.

I was thinking about split decisions last night. If one judge thinks you have won its unfair that you get a loss.

Calzaghe-Hopkins was a SD. Who won?

[ross]

Eubank didn't win .
The End.

One judge thought he did.

I was thinking about split decisions last night. If one judge thinks you have won its unfair that you get a loss.

Calzaghe-Hopkins was a SD. Who won?

Eubank didn't need to crawl around on the floor looking for respite. Hopkins didn't finish the fight knocking Calzaghe all over the shop. Hopkins was fighting in front of his countrymen in his country.

[Dark Lord Al]

It was a close fight but the result is a Eubank loss.

[Fenster]

Eubank didn't win .
The End.

One judge thought he did.

I was thinking about split decisions last night. If one judge thinks you have won its unfair that you get a loss.

Calzaghe-Hopkins was a SD. Who won?

Eubank didn't need to crawl around on the floor looking for respite. Hopkins didn't finish the fight knocking Calzaghe all over the shop. Hopkins was fighting in front of his countrymen in his country.

That didn't matter to the judge that scored it for Hopkins. So by your rationale it's unfair that Hopkins lost to Calzaghe. You set the criteria not me. Fact.

[ross]

Eubank didn't win .
The End.

One judge thought he did.

I was thinking about split decisions last night. If one judge thinks you have won its unfair that you get a loss.

Calzaghe-Hopkins was a SD. Who won?

Eubank didn't need to crawl around on the floor looking for respite. Hopkins didn't finish the fight knocking Calzaghe all over the shop. Hopkins was fighting in front of his countrymen in his country.

That didn't matter to the judge that scored it for Hopkins. So by your rationale it's unfair that Hopkins lost to Calzaghe. You set the criteria not me. Fact.

What I'm saying is Eubank actually looked like he was winning. Hopkins didn't.

[Fenster]

Eubank didn't win .
The End.

One judge thought he did.

I was thinking about split decisions last night. If one judge thinks you have won its unfair that you get a loss.

Calzaghe-Hopkins was a SD. Who won?

Eubank didn't need to crawl around on the floor looking for respite. Hopkins didn't finish the fight knocking Calzaghe all over the shop. Hopkins was fighting in front of his countrymen in his country.

That didn't matter to the judge that scored it for Hopkins. So by your rationale it's unfair that Hopkins lost to Calzaghe. You set the criteria not me. Fact.

What I'm saying is Eubank actually looked like he was winning. Hopkins didn't.

Hopkins looked like he was winning to that judge. Eubank jr didn't look like he was winning to the judges that scored it against him.

You need to rethink this one.

[nuggetdotcom]

Eubank didn't win .
The End.

One judge thought he did.

I was thinking about split decisions last night. If one judge thinks you have won its unfair that you get a loss.

Calzaghe-Hopkins was a SD. Who won?

Hopkins, obviously, bloody judges cost me money!!!!!!!

[nuggetdotcom]

If I was a conspiracy theorist! Who had been living on Mars for the last two months, and seen none of the pre-fight bullshit................

I may think that the EU's knew exactly what the strength and power advantage they had was, and they ended up with

1. a nailed on guarantee for a rematch with a bloke they know they can beat
2. An official/unofficial ranking that can get the close to a 'world' title shot

All because someone told the boy to start at 11 o clock instead of 8

This losss is no loss to the EU's