Originally Posted by brownpimp88
Whats wrong with putting michael nunn in a top 10 middleweight ranking? He beat tate, roldan and barkley at 160, 3 very good fighters. He knocked out kalambay in 1 ****in round and he beat the two best welterweights of the era, starling and curry. Even before his title run began, he beat about 4-5 ranked middleweights. He accomplished more at 160 then fighters like nino benvenuti and even stanley ketchel for that matter. Ketchel's top win is against jack o brien and that was NOT at middleweight. Rodrigo Valdez is another guy that is usually top10-15 at 160 and Nunn has the better title run too.
Lou Bogash never beat mctigue, his win over flowers was at 175 and he lost 3 times to him. Walker and Loughran were green when he beat them, its not like he fought the prime versions.
Informate completely before you post. You know why he fought Tiger Flowers that often? Becaue after his win against him, he was robbed (he floored him 2 or 3 times also), thatīs why he got another chance. In their 3rd fight he was completely shot, I have fight reports from some of their fights, and after the 2nd Bogash was really completely shot, Loughran and Walker were both near peak, both had over 30 fights at that point, thatīs not green. Bogash was at least three times better than a protected fighter than Nunn. Fighters like Yarosz, Gorilla Jones, Thil, Cerdan, Benvenuti, OīDowd, etc. were also much better than Nunn, sorry to say that, but you seem to be very biased. And you criticize me because I probably donīt have Hopkins in my Top 10 ATG at MW, donīt forget, at 160 lbs thereīs a deep and talented- rich era...