GGG vs James Toney at 160.

I don't see how a loss to Fabrice Tiozzo at "Light Heavyweight" in 1995, is relevant to a 1991 Mike McCallum at Middleweight.

No Nunn was good for many performances over the likes of Curtis Parker, Sumbu Kalambay, Juan Roldan, Frank Tate, whilst being 36-0 Lineal Middleweight champion who was ranked P4P number 3 with bags of natural talent

And finally Kalambay could be caught early, he was floored twice vs Herol Graham early so i don't consider it that much of a fluke.

 

Funny how these monsters always seem to have a 'prime' lasting the lunch break when they managed to whip some guys and then all the sucking they do on other occasions is swept under the carpet

You're cherrypicking a fighter's prime. In GGG's prime there wasn't a fighter on the planet that could stand in the same ring as him. Most of GGG's career has been as an old fighter. And yet he's still at the highest levels. That sort of consistency is greatness.

I wipe my arse on lineal because it means little. Nunn is a one-strap champion with five defences who blew a fight he was winning easily against Toney because his cardio was shyte.

I do.

 

If it's relevant in any way, it shows how great McCallum was. It's been a while since I saw it, but I remember it as competitive, close fight.. with Mike being way out of his natural weight-class, fighting at 175 because He couldn't get an opportunities at 168, past his physical prime - still holding his own against big Light Heavyweight with good skills, on the road at that.

 

Martin Murray wouldn't beat Eubanks Jr never mind Mike McCallum.

 

It's relevant because it shows how a slow, low-skills fighter could beat McCallum.

Unbeaten isn't as impressive as you think it is. GGG beat 4-5 unbeaten fighters.

So you're saying Kalambay wasn't as good as you're making him out to be? Well played

 

Tiozzo was big and strong, I give him that. Nobody would ever write a textbook on boxing using Tiozzo as a reference for skills, however.

 

I'd say He was skillful in same way as Golovkin was(is). Crafty.

 

Well that's true of alot boxers isn't it ? not everyone has a long prime due to personal problems, training habits, and a whole bunch of other reasons. Nunn had a drug problem which eroded his skills and didn't allow him to have a long prime.

Your making out Nunn was some one hit wonder, the man was 36-0 lineal Middleweight champion and P4P ranked number 3 for crying out loud.

Again i don't know why you you keep comparing Nunn to Golovkin, no one is comparing their careers. The debate is that i heavily favour a prime Nunn over the likes of Jacobs, Geale, Murray, Golovkin's best wins. And you seem to disagree which actually baffles me but again to each their own.

Well then you would be in the minority that doesn't put much regard in lineal, you have to beat the man and then you become the man that's the old saying. And as @McGrain pointed out not many people have defended the lineal Middleweight title 5 times.

No Nunn's cardio wasn't bad vs Toney its just Toney broke Nunn down, and you could see 3 or 4 rounds prior to KO. That a stoppage could be on the cards as Toney had rocked him a few times. I watched the fight last year and had it 6-4 to Nunn with Toney winning the last few rounds convincingly, it wasn't some fluke KO with Nunn's stamina letting him down, it was Toney breaking him down in the 2nd half of the fight and setting up the KO.

 

Sounds to me like you are making a case that the Nunn Toney beat was drug-eroded and past prime.

And you are doing the opposite.

To change tack, it seems that if Nunn wasn't prime when he lost to Toney, then it's pointless to compare THAT version to Golovkin's wins.

That's because the lineal champion can duck the real Man at the weight, evidence: Martinez, Cotto, Canelo who all avoided fighting GGG in his prime. This is obvious.

I understand. You are essentially saying that Nunn is a glass cannon with breadsticks for ribs who folds to body shots.

 

No it isn't relevant because we are talking about McCallum at Middleweight in 1991, not a 40 year old Mike McCallum two weightclasses above the weightclass we are discussing.

Well what is impressive to you then ? Nunn was rated the number 1 Middleweight who was ranked P4P number 3, whilst beating a whole host a top names with some of the most impressive performances in Middleweight history.

Huh ? do you just make stuff up as go along and keep putting words in my mouth ? Kalambay could be caught early he was floored a few times early, meaning i don't believe the Nunn KO was as much as a fluke as people believe. That doesn't mean i don't highly rate Kalambay, i think he's one of the most underrated and highly skilled Middleweights of all time.

 

So McCallum forgot everything he knew when he fought Tiozzo? Got it.

Sounds like Golovkin for every year for the last ten years.

So Kalambay was great but had a tendency to get floored often and early. Got it. Great win.

 

I've stated between 87-91 that Nunn was competing at highest level, and when did Nunn face Toney ? 91. So again where have i stated what your claiming ? i said Nunn had a drug problem later in his career, which means his prime wasn't what it could of been. I never claimed Toney beat a drug eroded past his prime Nunn, i've not made any excuses for Nunn's loss to Toney, he lost to a great fighter in a memorable fight no shame in that.

More like he lost to a great fighter in a memorable fight that he was leading in.

 

How do you know Nunn wasn't abusing drugs at the time of the Toney loss?

"He was involved with drugs and charged with various offenses dating back to 1983"

https://www.boxing247.com/weblog/archives/110439

Seems to me there's a chance Toney beat a guy that had been following the white powder trail ...

 

More like he's fighting two weightclasses above the weight we are discussing and is 40 year's old ? how would Golovkin do against one of the current top Light Heavyweight's now at 40 years old ? Tiozzo ended up with a record of 48-2 and was the only man stop Michalczewski.

Seriously what is it with these sarcastic responses ? Joe Frazier could be a slow starter and could be a bit vulnerable early is he not a great fighter ? All i'm saying is that Kalambay was caught a few times early. Basically i'm saying the Nunn loss wasn't as much as a fluke as your suggesting, but that isn't taking away from the amazing skill set Kalambay had.

 

The current top light heavyweights make Tiozzo look like a Boy Scout peddling cookies. I'd favour GGG against Tiozzo however.

What I'm saying is that your arguments tend to defeat themselves. That while Kalambay was good, he wasn't superhuman or anything that current boxing hasn't seen.