Unbeaten Mike McCallum Vs Unbeaten Michael Nunn?

And he hardly looked spectacular against WW's Curry and Starling.

 

Nunn too slick. UD.

 

That fight wasn't close at all.

 

If your older you probably both shrunk. You might be surprised how much shorter you are than you think, that is if you are older. I know Mike is.

 

They are both Mike.

 

While i can see guys like Hopkins, Monzon and Hagler putting enough pressure on Nunn to win i'm not as confident Mike could and he didn't have the punch at 160 to offset that. He had to hit people a helluva lot at 160 to get them out of there and he wouldn't be landing a helluva lot of punches or racking up a load of accumulation in this one. His aim would be to kill the body but Nunn was so rangy and fast he'd make him start paying for that at intervals with quick counters and he had enough pop to discourage Mike taking too many liberties.

Nunn decision for me 8-4.

 

I’m 36 and 6 3. I measured myself two weeks ago. He’s barely shorter than me.

 

Nunn was always around 6’3.

 

It is one of those things where the guy who is rated lower can win a head to head if matched at the right time. Nunn in 1988 or 1989 could beat almost anyone.. Somewhere along the way he started sitting down on his punches. Maybe that Kalambay fight gave him confidence. I do remember Roldan hitting him more than he should have, and somehow that could have affected Nunn's confidence, but Roldan had a way of hitting guys who are not normally hit. He was so aggressive.

 

McCallum didn`t knock anyone out at 160 with one shot.

 

Judge:

This content is protected

115-113
Judge:

This content is protected

114-114
Judge:

This content is protected

116-113

 

Ok, did you see Nunns recent fight vs the kick boxer, lm sure you did. I saw it on YouTube.