Kalambay really is one of the most technically impeccable boxers on film. He's essentially the perfect pure boxer, excelling at every area that makes that style effective.
The Nunn fight was confusing. Maybe the wrong style for Kalambay. A guy 6 foot 2 who was a southpaw and quick. Maybe Kalambay was not warmed up and ready. Who knows.
It's strange how sometimes an anomaly can end up defining a boxers career: in every other walk of statistics we're encouraged to eliminate anomalies but in boxing they end up overtaking the layman's perception: griffith v carter; kalambay v nunn; douglas v tyson; khan v prescott and many more examples. We see fighter's being defined by post prime accomplishments for example jones being chinny because of a series of losses after the age of 35. As a teacher of maths and statistics it always perplexes me because my students are always told to ignore the outliers. I apologise for this post btw, i've had a bottle of teacher's and i'm trying to stay awake for pacman (currently watching the gazza program with piers morgan) but yeah the discussion no kalambay prompted this drunken speech. Peace.
I honestly just view Kalambay/Nunn as one of the most flukey results ever. Fair play to Nunn. He threw the punch. It landed. He won. I don't think that result would repeat itself in 100 rematches.
Mike Tyson Roberto Duran Salvador Sanchez Marvin Hagler Ray Leonard Juan LaPorte Mike McCallum Marlon Starling Jose Luis Ramirez Khaosai Galaxy
Nunn landed an anomaly punch. Lufcrazy i don't 'hate' Khaosai, I'm just a realist when it cones to him and don't give a **** for his numerous 'defences'. Dangerous banger but no great shakes.
Kalambay-McCallum 1 - elite performance. McCallum sometimes looked like a plodding novice in that fight.
Marvin Hagler is #1 id put maybe larry Holmes, mike Tyson, mike Spinks, Ray Leonard, thomas Hearns , julio cesar Chavez, salvador Sanchez, Azumah Nelson in the top 10 as well