Who do you have had they fought a rematch at the time? Was Toney on the way up and improving, and was Nunn on the way down at that point? I would guess many think Nunn peaked with his KO of Kalambay in 1989, then fought some lackluster fights against Barkley and Starling after that. What do you think?
Toney by close split decision, for me. Nunn lost a little along the way after the loss. He'd take the fight seriously but his confidence would be knocked. He does well but Toney seems to have the upper hand for much of the fight. Nunn makes it close enough for the split but Toney keeps the title.
Toney had no reason to not go in and goes bombs away in a rematch. James Toney in shape breaks Nunn down every time.
I think Toney does it again, although this would have been up to James and not Michael. James had a way of not being motivated at times.
I think the opposite. Toney gets himself in half assed shape figuring it'd be an easy night's work against a guy he previously ko'd. Nowhere near the shape he was in for their initial encounter. And Nunn gets himself in top condition for the rematch and wins the decision going away.
After beating Nunn I don't think Toney was all that impressive for the rest of his run at Middleweight, at least not relative to his talent and the form he showed at Super-Middle later. The first McCallum fight being the exception. Granted, Nunn was never quite the same after that loss either, but he would always have been a stylistic nightmare for Toney and I think James was still growing into himself as a fighter in 1991 in terms of settling upon exactly what kind of fighter he was at the highest level. In an instant rematch I'd have picked Nunn to squeak past Toney on a tight verdict. Setting the pair up nicely for a Super-Middle rubber match in 1993 / 1994, which Toney would have won.
Didn't Michael Nunn move straight up to 168 after losing to Toney ? So more than likely the rematch might of took place at 168. I know this is hypothetical, but I don't see Toney moving up to 168 straight away either. So I actually have a hard time seeing an immediate rematch taking place.
I think that was only against what he thought was lesser opposition, normally against fighters he deemed as threats he brought his A game.
Yeah he wouldn’t treat Michael Nunn as Dave Tiberi. Nunn did move up, targeting the Eubank-Watson II winner in England.
I’d have to make Toney the favorite. But Nunn fought a good fight the first time. If I were to guess Michael’s best approach in a second fight, I suppose it would be more caution and strict boxing but I’m no trainer
But he did have a motivational problem, and he already beat Nunn, so the motivation would not be as strong. I remember how Hagler didn't want the Hearns rematch, and I figured because he had so much motivation the first time, he probably reasoned. Hearns would have a good right hand and Marvin's motivation could not have been the same after that first fight. And Tommy would not have been as insulting in the press conferences, so it was a lose situation for him. How I turned this into a Marvin comment who knows. I always do that. Those 4 guys and Benitez are always on my mind it seems.
It would go to the cards this time and be a close decision. I pick Toney by close decision as he had a habit of winning close fights at middleweight. I would not worry too much about Toney being in shape given the trouble he had with Nunn the first time. Toney had a habit of training to the level of his opponent and he knew Nunn was nothing to play with
