He was a very good boxer, but the 1 round ko loss to Nunn raises questions about his durability. He had proven very durable up until then. As far as boxing skills, he was a tough nut to crack. He still a notch below B-Hop, though.
The loss to Nunn was an anomoly. As Emmanuel Steward said, it was a case of one guy throwing a punch with his eyes closed and the other taking it with his eyes closed. I think Kalambay took a great shot and this is one of those very rare cases we can all but dismiss.
What I remember about Kalambay is that he beat a PEAK and UNDEFEATED Herol Graham, in an upset, when Graham was being touted as Hagler's heir (and not just by Brits) .... then he beat tough Iran Barkley, and followed with a win over undefeated Mike McCallum, who was recognized by many as one of boxing's p4p best and expected by some to dominate the middleweights. That was a very impressive mini run at the time, and it actually seems more impressive now, knowing that those three fighters stocks have even risen - or at least not dropped - in the years since.
Not really hyped, just tipped to be the best middleweight on Hagler's retirement. Not everyone thought so, guys like Michael Olajide, Curry, McCallum, Hearns, Roldan and Frank Tate, had their supporters too. The division was seen as "talent packed" but "wide open" too. Still, people who had seen Graham were impressed with his skills and would say he was a good bet to beat the others, and really a fighter who the others should perhaps avoid. Graham was already ranked number 1 by the sanctioning bodies before Hagler fought Leonard.
I think Kalambay sits pretty well with some of the top middleweights of the 25 years. No, he can't hold a candle to Hagler, Jones, Toney, Hopkins, or a few others, but he may very well be a top 10-12 guy. He was only stopped once in 64 fights, and had huge wins over Herol Graham, Mike McCallum, Iran Barkley, Doug Dewitt, and Robbie Simms. McCallum in particular rates very high on my middleweight list, and Kalambay was the only man to beat him at his very best.
Why cant he hold a candle to Toney, for example ? Okay, Toney beat Nunn, but he needed a criminal gift to get past David Tibieri, and struggled - arguably lost once - in his fights with an aging McCallum, and had other close fights with lesser fighters at middleweight. As you go on to remark, Kalambay outboxed McCallum at McCallum's best. A convincing enough win. Kalambay's performance against Nunn is a major drawback, but I think his wins at middleweight otherwise stack up well against Toney's. Interestingly Kalambay was an aging fighter himself when he registered his best middleweight wins, whereas Toney was a young man. Accomplishments at middlweight, I think Kalambay compares well with Toney. Obviously Toney had more "charisma" and "attitude". Maybe I'm missing something more fundamental though.
Although others probably wouldn't, I think I might be inclined to. McCallum's limited recognition was a result of being overshadowed by other fighters and not because his accomplishments weren't worthy of such recognition. Its pretty hard living in the shadows of Marvin Hagler, Ray Leonard and Thomas Hearns. Of course, by the time those guys were gone, McCallum's better days were behind him, yet I still think he should have beaten Toney the first time.
Criminaly underated. His wins against quality top contenders and champs certainly give a different perspective on Hopkins achievements at 160.
Kalambay was an excellent boxer...a middleweight Miguel Canto of sorts.Among the upper-echelons of defensive stylists i have seen, though he has been forgotten over the years due to the odd nature of his career.He turned pro quite late and did not have a long prime due to it. At his peak he was at least as good as the far more hyped McCallum\Toney combo and imo would have emerged the superior of Nunn had they fought multiple times. he could be outworked, but not many middleweights would have outslicked him.Certainly not James Toney, that would be a very bad matchup for Toney.