Michael Nunn

That's fair enough, I suppose. The thing is, it's not as though Taylor was having any difficulties with his career at the time of the Spinks fight. He looked focused, but in the end was just shown to be the unimaginative fighter that he was. Nunn just flat out didn't show up for the Starling/Curry fights, the way I saw it. It's possible those types would've always made him look less than stellar, though.

I don't think I'd call Nunn predictable, in fact I didn't see that at all. Lackadaisical, arrogant, sure, but not predictable on the offensive. His jab wasn't a stunner or a particularly notable point-scorer, but it served its purpose. He often used it to pave the way for those unorthodox moves. He was a show-boat, no denying that. Against the right kind of fighter I believe he'd have been checked for a lot of it, but he was too talented to get his comeuppance against those guys.

I don't think so. Roldan always made an ugly fight of things. Nunn probably dealt with him more comprehensively than anyone else.

In terms of talent, I think Nunn was clearly levels above Taylor. I don't think Taylor was too dissimilar from Tate in style, either. Both guys were mainly jab-oriented boxers, not the type to switch up tactics or gears. I'd say someone like Taylor was more made to order for Nunn than someone like Roldan. If anyone's predictable, it's Taylor, and a physical/athletic marvel like Nunn seemed like he would feast on that type at his best.

To be clear, I think Nunn had a boat-load of talent, but his technical short-comings and, in particular, his attitude are likely what would've always seen him fail at the top level (provided the era was strong enough to expose these shortcomings) in the long run. It's difficult to see that kind of stylist having a long reign even if his heart were in the sport.

 

taylor looked much the same in all his defences i thought(mediocre), the Hopkins he fought was a tepid drained looking fighter, reminded me of Eubank at his worst.Minor differences in approach aside, the outcome would be just like tate against Nunn, totally befuddled and without the ringcraft or punchpicking to get anything substantial done.I'd actually say Pavlik would do better, simply because he has great range, is steady and hits hard.More likely to keep Nunn working.

At best he'd get the lazy Nunn that didn't fight 3 mins a round and was content to give the initiative away for long stretches, but it would still be painful to watch him huffing and puffing away.

As overrated and flawed as he was during his prime, the Tate that fought circa Sibson\Olajide looked like a sophisticated master boxer-puncher compared to jermaine.

 

He'd have beaten Jones and definitely McCallum.

He'd have beaten everyone in fact.

 

What the hell could you possibly disagree with?! My argument was air-tight. I even compromised. You're just a dick!

 

I'd say it was about the time of the Ramos and Harris fights his style changed...but it's been ages since i watched any of his pre-title fights.


As long as we all agree Pachilles is a disgruntled try hard who posts like he has a very small *****, i'll be contented.

 

:rofl:rofl:rofl

 

His Duran shtick is old as hell. The "sheeple" bit had me laughing, though.

 

What do you think of this avatar in comparison to the other?

 

Niiiiiiiiiiiiiice. I'll keep it, then. This one was always my favourite pic of her.