Thomas Hearns vs Michael Nunn At MW

Hearns by mid-to-late rounds TKO in a competitive match.

 

Nunn of '88 or '89 kills Hearns at 160 to 165 pounds........ Nunn was too fresh, skilled, fast and a southpaw....... Hearns gets beat there....... Nunn was all wrong for Hearns in the very late 80s.........


MR.BILL

 

Depending on the time they fought, Nunn would have a great chance of beating Hearns. Nunn was very fast and one of the best boxers in the business when he wanted to be.

 

As was Tommy.

 

good prediction as usual .

Nunn beats Hearns "prime4prime" as well b it either 160 , 168 , 175 or above .

Barkley was a mutual opponent , true he was also intermediate in terms of age , so it does take some out of this predictions' credibility , but Hearns was not a gr8 fighter . certainly over8ed . There was a time here , until about a year and a half ago when he was r8ed r8 , dis time has past dow

 

^ Weirdo

 

Kalambay beat Barkley easier than Nunn, Frank. Guess Sumbu would beat Nunn?

 

Barkley was Nunn's 4th last per4mance @ 160 .
Not sure if Nunn was drained against him or just tried 2 please crowd , because I M certain that he could bore crowd's S just like Kalambay did and "win that convincingly" .

And then I also disagree about Kalambay beating Barkley easier if it should b considered beating him at all .


Kalambay only ever beat Herol Graham*2 , Kalule and Doug DeWitt

 

He did beat him with far less hassle Frank, compare both fights.

 

But i already replied exactly 2 this

 

And McCallum and Steve Collins. Have you not seen Kalambay vs Barkley then? Because Kalambay DID beat him easier than Nunn.

 

have u not read my replies 2 this ?

 

Every word. So do you consider McCallum and Collins to have been robbed against Sumbu then.

 

Hard fight for Tommy. If he boxes and fights to win a decision, he would eeek out a decision over Michael.