Gerald McClellan vs Michael Nunn @160

McClellan would have to land something big in the early rounds. He had the speed to do so, but I think Nunn outboxes him to a decision.

 

I agree. Nunn 117-111. However, you picked G-Man over Kessler and Kessler is a much better fighter all around in comparison to Nunn, despite lacking the obvious resume. Nunn had more height and reach, but Kessler's quicker with better timing and quite a bit more skill.

 

Nunn. He was amazing in his pre-crack days. Also, he was extremely exciting and maybe was the best copycat of Ali's style. A true Pavlik of his time.

 

Nunn would KO Pavlik early, don't kid yourself. But Mikkel Kessler would own Nunn badly.

 

Nunn at his 88 best is a level above McClellan, and if the G man was totally disrespectful of Nunn's power, Michael Nunn could be a one punch threat; ask Kalambay!

I think the odds are though Nunn increasingly outboxes, damages and hurts McClellan as the fight goes on and wins on a late stoppage, whilst comfortable ahead.

Nunn TKO11 (whilst leading 7-3 on the cards)

 

I knew this would come up one day

That was a quick pick and I didn't think about it too much...

I watched some of their fights last week to try to have a them fresh in my mind and try to also make a more educated guess. From what I observed, this is my newly formed opinion on the fight.

Kessler's speed, ring generalship, movementand jab would have been enough to beat McClellan. Kessler is phenominal at keeping a distance and his defense is great. After watching McCllelan against Jackson and Benn a week ago, I definitely dont think he could outbox the bigger Kessler. Kessler is the more cerebral fighter. Better ring intelligence, better jab, straighter and more accurate shots.

The only problem is McClellan landing some bombs early. Could Kessler stand up to it? If he could avoid those shots or pick himself up off the canvas, he would gain more momentum as the fight progressed and establish technical class. However, I don't think McClellan puts Kessler down early.

Kessler UD

 

I was doing Nunn a great service by comparing his level of skill and excitement to Pavlik's. You must be in a bad mood :-(

 

Nunn was more skilled than Pavlik. Not as powerful or exciting, but definitely more skilled.

 

Alright, I'm not going to argue against this because there definitely is a lot of truth to it and it would make me look delusional. But, I will rephrase it: Nunn was quicker, had better footwork, better combination punching, and better defense than Pavlik.

 

Cause Nunn had quicker hands than Taylor and more power. Nunn at 160 could legitimately knock you out with one punch when he wasn't movin and slappin his punches..

 

Don't kid yourself, power was not one of Nunn's strengths.

 

Michael Nunn was one of the most talented middleweights of all times. He should rank higher than guys like valdez, benvenuti and tony zale cuz hes more skilled, has just as good of a resume and would beat all 3.