If they fought in 1990 I would favour Nunn probably by stoppage late in a very good fight. If they fought when the offer was there (Nunn was gonna fight the winner of Benn vs Eubank 2, I felt Benn should have got the decision) probably in early 94 I think Benn would have stopped Nunn in the mid rounds.
They should of met in 88/89 as Arum suggested; and if they did, they would IMO only be one winner, and he turned out to be second to crack!
A prime Nunn would box circles around the heavy-handed but easy to hit Benn. I'd favor Benn over post-Toney Nunn, though.
i dont think it's nunn who is the intangiable it's clearly benn who needs to decid. in 1990 he is a wild swinging hooker and uses his physical attributes as much as he can. but in his later career when he had been stopped byeubank and watson around 1993 i.e. his 168 career he becomes much more pace and skills he also has a brilliant shoulder roll and a counter right hand, also he was able to outthink and counter the counterpuncher in eubank (in the rematch) which is a clear sign that he is able give nunn some serious trouble and prolly stop him. early benn is getting busted up, cut and stopped a later benn is landing right hands 1 after the other against the southpaw and stopping him mid to later rounds.
actually has anyone seen the itv broadcast of the eubank-benn II fight? don king and nunn are in every cam shot possible, both discussing the scoring after the fight aswell....also notice how nunn was looking for the winner to get a unification fight then when it was announced a draw he just went silent on the matter MF: "so who do you think won the fight mike?" MN: "it was a good fight". also nunn fought in london on a benn and eubank undercard to promote himself in the uk. he lost pretty badly if i remember,
