Q: Are there any injuries that you suffer from Chris as a result of your boxing career?

I remember seeing Nigel Benn in an interview last year where he was asked why you 2 didnt have a 3rd fight. He answered:-

You've got to be realistic with yourself and say I dont know, I've been bashed from pillar to post. Been hurt. Suffered a lot of internal damage. A LOT of internal damage!

I also remember you saying that you urinated blood 2-3 days following the first Benn fight. Was that the norm for almost every big fight you were in or was it the exception? In addition to that what were the full extent of your sufferings both a few days after a big fight and injury that you may still suffer. The kind of thing that the normal armchair fight fan wont be aware off.

Eubank: No not the norm, Benn just hit especially hard. All that has healed.
In my second to last fight with Carl Thompson (51st fight), I had a very bad eye injury, so there is slight damage in my left eye however, I still have 20:20 vision

Q: Given the amount of wars that you had Chris do you count yourself lucky to have escaped from the ring WITHOUT serious any injury or long lasting damage

Eubank: Yes I count myself lucky but my luck I estimate came from my forefathers who were bred as slaves which gives me the constitution, fortitude, bone density and the capability to absorb vast amounts of physical punishment. A long with a slightly maniacal artistic licence that made me train continuously and emotionally without resting my mind. I estmate this is how my luck came to be.

Q: Do you strongly believe in ancestor genes then Chris?

If I a competitor comes from a family of lazy slobs is he immediately at a disadvantage in comparison to ancestors such as you had?

Eubank: Philosophically yes it is a disadvantage.

Still, I still had to do the work, you see it is no good having good genes, but then going out and not training.

Q: How do you mean "Philosophically it is a disadvantage"?

I am struggling with your meaning of the word "Philosophically"

Eubank: Philosophically from a thinking point of view;
If you have a line of animals that are continuously matched together and bred of strong blood lines, an individual brought from this pedigree and then another line of person of no pedigree, so they don't have body muscle mass, they don't have dense bone structures, just normal human animals. Then obviously from a philosophical point of view this one which was bred is going to be stronger, if that individual from that blood line trains, doesn't smoke, doesn't drink, does all the work it is more likely to beat a person from a weaker blood line, or blood line that hasn't been bred.


Q: Chris, before your 2nd fight with Michael Watson your record stood at:-

28 FIGHTS 28-0-0 with 15 KOs (54% ratio)

Following that fight your record is:-

24 FIGHTS 17-5-2 with 5 KOs (21% ratio)

Many people have said that they felt you lost your killer instinct after the fight with Michael (which would be completely understandable). I never recall you having confirmed this and just wondered how you felt about the theory.

Would you say you ever held back on an opponent following that tragic fight?

Eubank: I held back clearly on Collins in the 10th round, in our first fight. I held back clearly against Thompson in the first fight in the 5th round and then again in the 7th. So I lost the finishing instinct, if I couldn't take them out cleanly with one shot then I went for the decision, because I couldn't bludgeon anyone into submission. Yes I held back more than just those two fights because it was in every fight after Michael that I held back, due to what happened you can't shield that from your mind when you find yourself in the middle of an arena again doing the same things. But those two fights most significantly I held back, I think, because I didn't win when I showed better boxing ability but just not as busy as they were, and could of won easily. Or sorry maybe it's better to say I could of easily won or could easily of won, rather than I could of won easily. Sorry about that lapse in concentration there


Q: As a good friend of Carl Thompson,i always in the back of my mind wondered if you prepared fully for those two fights,i watched and witnessed him take his mind and body to its limit in preparation for his fights with you,and even on winning the first fight on the saturday night,he was back out on roadwork 6am on the monday morning.
Could you in your heart of hearts been better prepared for the step up to cruiserweight and for the fight after a long absence,did the heat of the arena effect your endurance and power on the night of the first fight,sorry for the long post,just interested to know.

Eubank: Your answer first of all, he and I both know that I won the first fight, that is just between me and him. The second fight he and I know that if the ref let the fight go on he would not have won the fight, but my eye was closed. I was not given the courtesy that I had earned to give me one more round.
I do not complain though as decisions that have been given to me were dodgy for my opponents.

Q: Would you agree that whilst you may have won the Carl Thompson fights had things went your way, the decisions against Michael Watson (fight I) and Nigel Benn (fight II) were debatable?

Eubank: Yes it was debatable. But on close inspection of Watson (fight I) you'll find that Michael didn't do enough. In close inspection of Benn (fight II), maybe Nigel did do enough. But in losing a point for hitting low, which is all in the game, maybe that slurred against him if to you it was more Nigel than me. I was better than Michael and Nigel, watch all four fights and you will see more talent coming from my end.

Q: Against Ray Close you got a draw and a points win. Did you agree with the judges verdicts there?

Eubank: Lets say the fight was close and lets say he was peppering me with fair shots and with these shots he may well have been ahead. But when I hit him with that short uppercut obviously the two points that would have got me, put me back in front. Then my particular showman on top of that obviously gives the perception that this is the better person to be Champion. Because its not only about your boxing abilities, its also about your personality. Close was a guy I had never seen fight before, whilst he studied me relentlessly. He never beat me.

Q: Chris, you were conscious then that your arrogant, obnoxious body language/style would work in your favour when it came to the judges deciding who deserved to win a round?

Eubank: Something like that. It is all about winning the eye, or being the light of the show. Now obnoxious is a harsh word to use because you see the body language was probably unfair, in terms of how I projected myself. But you see so too was unfair the animosity that came my way because of my style. So the crowd who disliked me in them showing how much or venting or sounding how much they were against this attitude only made me more over confident, in which you are saying is obnoxious. I understand, but still very harsh. I am only riding the crowd here, it is a show.

Q: I looked it up. Obnoxious means "Very annoying or objectionable, offensive or odious".

OK perhaps a little harsh there Chris. But the phrase 'you either love him or you hate him' was meant for guys like you! And I mean during the peak of your career of course because nowadays you are looked on quite favourably within the British public because in your latter career you lost more than you won and the British public tend to warm more to good losers than arrogant winners. Would you agree?

But during your winning championship days you did cause annoyance to many people with your arrogance. And lets be completely honest here.

YOU LOVED IT!

Eubank: No. I would say they warmed to me because I showed what I had shown in the Benn (1) fight and the Watson (2) fight which was grit and shown that grit with the Thompson fights and the Calzaghe fight I suppose gave me the credit that I didn't get when I fought Watson (2) and Benn (1) because I was very raw and I was very new. So it took some years to go by before actually showing the same type of heart again in fights for people to see that I couldn't only give it but I could also take it. Ofcourse, if I had longer to prepare for Calzaghe then I'd give myself a 9 in 10 chance of winning.