I always wondered about this too. Nunn wins on points becuz MM never burned down buildings with middleweights. he was competitive, but not the top dog
As mentioned McCallum had already peaked by the time he stepped up to 160lbs. The Nunn of the Tate, Roldan and Kalambay period was excellent. Nunn by very comfortable decision.
Nunn for me. McCallum is the historically greater fighter, but Nunn stylewise would be a nightmare for McCallum. Obviously, McCallum has his moments, but I think he drops an 8-4 type UD.
Very close match-up. My head says Nunn, heart says McCallum. I would probably bet on McCallum.... and lose.
This would have been a good match up around 1989-1990 and I always wondered why it never happened. Nunn should probably be favored but McCallum's defense and body punching techniques would bring something to the table that Nunn hadn't seen much of. Could go either way.
Nunn at his best I feel would be far too quick and elusive for the rather static McCallum. The Bodysnatcher was (is?) pretty avoided and underrated, but he could be outboxed as the Kalambay fight proved. I think McCallum would end up a very frustrated loser over 12.
Over 12 IDK, Nunn mait hev autpointed McCallum, but olso, end morso if it iz skejuld 4 15, McCallum kud bit him 2d panch on inaf okeijens end/or breik him dawn l8 laik Toney menejd. Nunn's saiz advantej mait pley egeinst him in e long fait, bi'ing 2 big 4 e midelw8 .
McCallum easily, better fighter, maybe the most underated fighter of my lifetime. Ask James Toney who'd win.
Didn't happen because McCallum brought $5,000 from Jamaican TV to the table. Why he couldn't get the big fight with Eubank either... If Nunn stood his ground, McCallum was too gifted with counter uppercuts to the body and cute little head shots inbetween ducks, rolls and parries and hooks below the shoulders. If Nunn moonwalked, McCallum would plod and struggle and lose a decision.
