Boxing News: Anyone else see their best SMW list!!

McCallum? He didnt fight at SMW did he?

Kalambay was more a Middleweight anyways, didnt do much at SMW if anything.

Aye but never really fought at a recognised 168 limit, I actually beleive 167lbs was his optimal fighting weight, and you have to remember in those days the middleweight limit was 156lbs

 

McCallum had quite a few fights at 168 towards the end of his career IIRC.

 

I thought it wasup at LHW when he beat Harding.

Went on boxrec, he had 4 fights at SMW, all non title affairs

 

just checked. Youre right!!

 

Cant beleive you doubted me. At my gym they call me askGreg.com for my boxing knowledge.

Kalambay just had a few non title fights at SMW

 

Jones didn't do much at the weight. (He was petrified against a near-dead Toney.)

Calzaghe never really fought anyone, apart from Eubank - who was just making up the numbers.

Toney put in great performances against Barkley and Littles. Benn put in a great performance against McClellan.

I think Eubank has a strong case, great performances against Watson, Rocchigiani and Wharton and a draw with Benn. I thought he beat Collins clearly the first time. I thought he beat Malinga and Rocchigiani by miles to be honest, same with Thornton and Wharton.

But Toney against DeWitt, Barkley, Thornton, Littles and PC Williams demonstrated the best skills on the planet.

Hard to say but Toney and Eubank stand out for me. Benn spoilt it, quitting twice against Collins. You could say Toney spoilt it against Jones, but he didn't quit, he kept trying.


Ability?
1- Toney
2- Jones
3- Eubank
4- Calzaghe
5- Nunn
6- Benn

All of all?
1- Eubank/Toney
2- Benn
3- Jones/Calzaghe
4- Collins
5- Rocchigiani/Liles

 

Michael Nunn and Nigel Benn, Tony Thornton and Henry Wharton.


:good

 

Related to thread, came across it tonight- [url]http://www.nydailynews.com/archives/sports/1995/02/10/1995-02-10_they_play_fight_game_of_firs.html[/url]

That would've been a mental buzz if it came off man

 

The problem with Calzaghe is there are too many unswered questions about him, for example.....how good would he of been had he fought fighters who were in their prime and then lost, how would he of come back? He liked his 47-0 record but a lot of them fights he was the overwhelming favorite, so he is very hard to judge. If you catch my drift.

 

I catch your drift. An old (and fellow southpaw) Herol Graham did better against the great Brewer for most of the fight and an old (and fellow southpaw) Liles wasn't KTFD against the great Mitchell. A shot Sheika already beat the **** out of Lacy, and a shot Reid let him unload. Who exactly was this clown tested against? I predicted a domination against Lacy, FWIW. He fought once or twice a year for 10 years (mostly against the worst world title challengers in history), and got away with it. Dark times.

 

They do it via former champs faced/title defences; its like a pts system.

Calzaghe gets to no.1 by defending the WBO belt; in another era he would've been amongst the top 4 in the division, nowadays he's a 'champ'.

 

Nunn gets overrated big time IMO. Good, but not great.

 

Nunn was as close to unbeatable as you can possibly get pre-Kalambay. So slick, so incredibly smooth, really mobile, rangey, quick feet, elusive, high punch output and fast-handed flurries, tall and used the ropes well for defence (!) and the master of the southpaw left uppercut. He was never off-balance. It was rare for him to take a punch in a round FFS. He took down Roldan and Kalambay in the opening round, completely dominated undefeated Olympic GM world champion Frank Tate in every minute, as he had world-rated Kevin Watts (and just about every other opponent). He hit Kronk fighter Knox with a left hand that came from out of nowhere - Knox thought the referee had hit him.

But I agree, he wasn't 'great', didn't have that about him.

 

Nunn may well have been good enough to beat Calzaghe. Put Nunn in with Joe's opposition and he goes either 45-1 (losing to hopkins) or 46-0.....