How good was Michael Nunn?

After Toney and past 160 I felt Nunn was really guided into 'titles' and still didn't look all that.

He was very talented, fast, a southpaw, tall, not much power but ironically pulled out a big shot in his biggest fight, KO1 over Sumbu Kalambay, one of the best results of the era, even if not indicative of either man's true abilities or standing

Nunn was ace, but not 'great'. Think he was a cokehead. Looked crap against Barkley IMO. Funnily enough, looked to be backing up the hype again against Toney, but 'Lights Out' found his way back into the fight.

He seemed to peak and then fall in the middle of his prime, one of those that can't be arsed to work to stay on top. Marlon Starling, a lazy in-ring operator for other reasons, had never fought at middle before and was pushing Nunn back late and pressing the action. Poor showing from Nunn IMO, even if I had him a clear and concise 116-112 winner and rank Moochy amongst my favourite fighters ever.

Curry was another cynical scalp IMO. In some ways Nunn was moved like fighters are today, 'names' washed-up from lower divisions and whatnot. But I must reiterate, very good.

As for today, I think he'd do a better Sergio Martinez than Martinez does. Nunn might well lose
focus in this day and age as well, though the 80s was certainly an easy era to get into substance abuse. I imagine Nunn would move up for HBO money without a loss at 160 nowadays, and I'd pick Ward to handcuff him and win a decision, though if Nunn is on his 'a' game he'd pose Ward problems with his handspeed and movement, which seemed more athletic ability than intelligent ring generalship in Nunn's case IMO.

Nunn would be a top contender in any era of 160lbs IMO, in some divisions he'd reach the top, in some he wouldn't. And despite why or how it happened or whether the fight would ever go down like that again, he did waste Kalambay inside a round and as of then was THE MAN at middle IMO.

 

Had incredibly dimensions, very quick hands in combination, incredible athlete but often gave up his height while not quite getting enough leverage on shots and kept low hands that made him defensively vulnerable

Like many great physically gifted fighters he took his talent for granted, threw the fundamentals out the windown, got involved in drugs and stopped training as hard as he should, which saw his talent fade and his eventual downfall.

As a head to head middleweight he'd beat allot of men who are considered great at his best because of his sheer physical ability.

I would have liked to see him in against Leonard, McCallum, Eubank, Benn, Jones Jr and a rematch with Kalambay (economically impossible ofcourse)

If he was in his prime today he'd beat anyone from 160-175 with the possible exceptions of Ward and Dawson but they'd be interesting contests. He'd certainly beat past prime Hopkins

 

How do you think the rematch with Sumbu would've went down PP? Or the first fight if Nunn didn't throw the left hand at that time?

 

I'd have loved to see Nunn at his best against Jones jr. Would've been quite a spectacle.:admin

 

:yep even if it was a SMW Nunn, it would still be very interesting

 

Called out and pursued Roy Jones for a long time, Roy wanted nothing to do with him.

 

It's a tricky question, on 1 hand I wonder if this is a Williams-Quintana type scenario (see Williams-Martinez/Lara too). Not that Nunn isn't better than Williams. On the other Nunn is massive, athletic with the southpaw angle, athletic southpaws are tricky, something Kalambay had mixed results with against Graham and Kalule, Nunn's dimensions are a bit trickier though. There's also the trouble Nunn had with a technician like Rochiagiani past his own prime and ofcourse the Toney fight, although I Kalambay fights more like Rocco than Toney

 

A figment of HBO's vivid imagination and 'star-making' machine.

Hyped to the skies, couldn't fly.

A MW/SWM Michael Grant.

 

Much better than a Michael Grant type creation, but just not dedicated enough to stay on top for long.

It's funny to hear someone say that they'd like to have seen Nunn-Kalambay 2 as I was thinking that very thing the other day. I think of that fight as one of the flukiest fights in modern boxing. Great win, but I think Kalambay would have had a legit chance of winning or at least competing 9 out of 10 times.

 

I think Nunn was just wrong for Kalambay. You can see Kalambay getting hit with some of those lefts against Kalule. He had his hands full against Graham also. Nunn could've nulified Kalambay's jab and forced him to his right often (which Kalambay was capable of doing but I think it interrupted his flow a bit). I don't think a rematch results in another quick knockout, but Nunn had the tools to give Kalambay problems.

 

I agree with everything you said.

 

Underrated power. Knocked out Roldan with a peach of a punch while backpedaling, stopped the super tough Curtis Parker in two rounds, the only man to do so along with John Mugabi.

 

Agree.

 

He was the #1 middleweight in the world of the post-Hagler crop.

He was expected to be even better than he actually turned out to be.