Nunn vs McCallum?

I can see Nunn outpointing McCallum in a scenario...but I would go with McCallum at his best, grinding Nunn down enough to take a come from behind decision, as my pick.
I very much wanted this fight to happen back in the day.

 

Early Nunn a little too slippery, UD.

 

The Nunn that Toney fought, McCallum wins.

 

I know that Toney rated McCallum very highly. I think he wins a close fight here.

 

I can not help thinking About how good Nunn looked against Frank Tate, and how bad McCallum was made to look against Nunns Fellow Middleweight 'Ring Houdini' Herol Graham,

Mike only just scaped home with an assist by Herol for being docked a point for throwing McCallum to the canvas... watching the fight you can feel the frustration pouring out of McCallum

The point is Nunn was more predisposed to make you miss and make you pay than the Cautious Graham ( where was that caution when he needed it against Jacko !?) So i suspect not only would Nunn get the frustration factor, but also pick up some additional Pain with his Predudice.

Give Mike someone who seeks to Physically Contend with him Like a Watson or Collins and he will be happy to accept, A Top Class points Pinching Scavenger however Then McCallum's 'Dismantling Technique' is Neutralised to a large degree

I was always in favour of seeing that conceited smirk wiped off of Nunn's Face. But do not think McCallum was the man to do it, Through Styles, Nunn's like the Sparrow who nips in and steals the Bread from the Pidgeon. Nunn on Points

 

I can't see McCallum faring too well here at all. He didn't like speed (Jones, Curry) or movement (Kalambay, Graham), let alone both. He didn't like southpaws (Graham) and he didn't like height (Tiozzo).

Hard to see Nunn lose a round unless he either stood his ground or ran without throwing, but he was as capable of hitting on the move as any fighter ever (and I include Robinson and Ali).

 

It is hard to refute the logic in this post...I'll offer up this weak response...In the time frame when both Nunn and McCallum held the titles, I don't think either McCallum nor Futch were afraid to chance a fight with Nunn...McCallum fancied his chances to get to Nunn's body actually...I just looked at some video Nunn v Tate, and fighting Nunn in that time frame is a tall order...maybe a little like around the Barkley or Curry fights, McCallum could close the gap...maybe. But I now lean towards Nunn, in his early title run. That combination of speed, height, and southpaw is something. Cheers people...

 

I don't know...I see McCallum follow Kalambay helplessly around the ring ( first fight) and can't help but think Nunn would have had a field day with this guy.
And Sumbu wasn't doing anything particularly clever...just jabbing and circling and Mike couldn't do a thing about it.

The Herol Graham fight as already pointed out made McCallum look pretty ordinary too.

In all honesty, from my perpective, Nunn should win this pretty comfortably on points. It's only if he gets too careless or elects to brawl more than be should (something he was wont to do on occassion) that McCallum has a shot. Otherwise, a comfortable and fairly straitforward UD for Nunn.

 

I thought Nunn took quite a few chances against Roldan as well...silly, needless chances. He didn't need to fight that type of a fight but he did. And in fairness, he beat the **** out of Roldan doing so.

Nunn was labeled a cutie but in reality he was a pretty tough guy with a bit of a mean streak.

 

I agree with you on Nunn's habits and temperment...haven't watched that one (Roldan) in years and years. Remember that when Nunn fought Barkley, he did it off the ropes quite a bit...It's instances like those that would open the door for McCallum imo.

 

Yeah I can agree there.

 

Kalambay I was McCallum's poorest showing before he got old, so I think it's a bit unfair to use that against Nunn's best.

And I think McCallum won with a wider margin against Graham than the judges thought in front of a hometown crowd. As is usually the case. Actually, Graham seems to think so himself. He named Mike the best he faced, and in a interview about it he looks like he accepts that they in reality were separated by more than that point. ("It would have been a draw. But... yeah... then again..." at 0.44)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yX8bWXmb9R8

As for the fight:

Nunn doesn't get a KO, of course, and how did Nunn fare with world class opponents whom he couldn't stop? Close decision over Barkley and Starling and a KO loss to Toney. McCallum on the other hand beat Kalambay over 12 and imo should have had at least one pts victory (rematch) over Toney as well.

I don't think Mike would have KO'd Nunn, but I can easily see him doing better than Barkley. And he's more proven against top opponents. Watson, Graham and Toney (whom I thought Mike beat in the rematch) were superior to Tate, Roldan and Barkley.

I see a pretty close fight. Over 15 McCallum probably wins, perhaps even by stoppage actually, but 12 is very close. I lean toward that the greater substance in McCalum's work would win him this.

 

I love Mccallum, to me he was one of the most technically sound fighters Ive ever seen. But Nunn would be wrong for him. esp at middle where he really seemed to slow down. Nunn was a slippery southpaw, no real punching power but he was super quick. Just a bad match up for a fading Mccallum.

 

Nunn would beat McCallum.
Nunn was the best middleweight of that post-Hagler period. I think Nunn likely beats Toney if he was at his absolute best too.