Eubank Sr. the REASON...

[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.

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.

Yep, you win a fight by crawling round on the floor

You hate Eubank. Iv seen it in your posts over the past few weeks. I bet its given you an itchy ass hole just knowing one judge thought he won