More skilled: Mike McCallum, Michael Nunn, Sumbu Kalambay, or James Toney?

[Scott9945]

Do people choose to forget the manner of Kalambay's performance in the first McCallum fight? It always seems like it.

He had a bad style for McCallum and that was a very good performance. But the rest of his career doesn't stand up to the other three mentioned. He clearly comes in #4 on this list.

[Humean]

He had a bad style for McCallum and that was a very good performance. But the rest of his career doesn't stand up to the other three mentioned. He clearly comes in #4 on this list.

In terms of overall career then I agree that both McCallum and Toney rank higher than Kalambay, whether Nunn does is more questionable to me. However the question was not about the overall quality of their careers but skill. I think that Kalambay's performance in the first McCallum fight, along with his other notable performances, warrant more consideration than it has been given.

I think it is a bit of a cop out to say 'he had a bad style' for McCallum, that takes too much away from Kalambay and really attempts to make out that that particular fight doesn't carry much weight in terms of judging their skills when I think it does. Kalambay was the only man to comprehensively defeat McCallum until Jones jr did it in 1996.

[#1Assassin]

mccallum for me.

arguably the most well rounded skill set i ever seen in a fighter, the man could do it all.

toney had heavy feet and while he utilized angles very well when using sharp pivots he struggled when someone forced him to pick both feet of the ground. especially if they moved to his left.

nunn was skilled, but his skills very heavily dependent on his tremendous physical talent. he made many technical mistakes a less athletically gifted fighter wouldnt be able to get away with. he also wasnt that good on the inside (not bad either) and had a tendency to slap with his punches at times.

kalambay was very good at what he did but he didnt have the well rounded game mccallum did, or toney and nunn either for that matter. great fundamental skills lead by excellent footwork, tight defense and a piston like jab. but he didnt have nearly as complete an arsenal of punches as the rest, he wasnt as good on the front foot as the rest nor as good on the inside.


mccallum is easily the most skilled out of the four imo, just as toney is easily second. but picking between nunn and kalambay is difficult.

nunn showed much more advanced technical ability but like mentioned, would he be able to do that stuff with the physical ability of kalambay? kalambay wasnt lacking in the talent department but he wasnt comparable to nunn and as a result had to learn boxing from the ground up, something nunn never did.

its not like nunn was all flash and no substance either, he got things done without being fundamentally sound. just as kalambay got things done by mostly sticking to the basics (compared to the rest). i honestly dont know who to pick, i guess i would slightly favor nunn perhaps mainly based on personal preference.

[BennyST]

In terms of overall career then I agree that both McCallum and Toney rank higher than Kalambay, whether Nunn does is more questionable to me. However the question was not about the overall quality of their careers but skill. I think that Kalambay's performance in the first McCallum fight, along with his other notable performances, warrant more consideration than it has been given.

I think it is a bit of a cop out to say 'he had a bad style' for McCallum, that takes too much away from Kalambay and really attempts to make out that that particular fight doesn't carry much weight in terms of judging their skills when I think it does. Kalambay was the only man to comprehensively defeat McCallum until Jones jr did it in 1996.

Skill isn't what you show in one fight against one style. It's what you can do overall against all styles. Versatility, adaptation, offence, defense, leading, countering etc etc. All of the above.

Kalambay was an exceptional talent and could have been quite a spectacular champion in another era, todays anyone, but while he showed great skill, he didn't do it enough, against as broad a range of fighters, at the highest level, as the others did.

He also dropped fights that he arguably shouldn't have if he was as skilled as the others.

[young_robbed]

Skill isn't what you show in one fight against one style. It's what you can do overall against all styles. Versatility, adaptation, offence, defense, leading, countering etc etc. All of the above.

Kalambay was an exceptional talent and could have been quite a spectacular champion in another era, todays anyone, but while he showed great skill, he didn't do it enough, against as broad a range of fighters, at the highest level, as the others did.

He also dropped fights that he arguably shouldn't have if he was as skilled as the others.

His performance against McCallum basically validates that he could hang with anybody at middleweight. There's no doubt in my mind. When you can clearly outbox somebody like McCallum, then it's not far fetched to think that he could beat someone like Toney. He was smart enough to do something like that.

I get what you're saying, he didn't exactly have the career to match the great middleweights. What I'M saying, is that his talent could match anybody. He was great

[billeau2]

His performance against McCallum basically validates that he could hang with anybody at middleweight. There's no doubt in my mind. When you can clearly outbox somebody like McCallum, then it's not far fetched to think that he could beat someone like Toney. He was smart enough to do something like that.

I get what you're saying, he didn't exactly have the career to match the great middleweights. What I'M saying, is that his talent could match anybody. He was great

Its the most frustrating thing in boxing right? the Zab Judah's the Oliver Mccalls....guys who you just know on another time line with a few different circumstances.... Oy vay!

Yes the talent is there and perhaps the heart is willing but for whatever reason it was not meant to be. But I feel your pain

[young_robbed]

Its the most frustrating thing in boxing right? the Zab Judah's the Oliver Mccalls....guys who you just know on another time line with a few different circumstances.... Oy vay!

Yes the talent is there and perhaps the heart is willing but for whatever reason it was not meant to be. But I feel your pain

well he was a great fighter. he also beat kalule, barkley, DeWitt, simms, Graham x2, Collins, etc. his resume is actually pretty good.

He is definitely a lot better than McCall & Judah. McCall had a freak knockout against Lewis and then didn't accomplish much more than that. Judah never beat anyone as good as McCallum... He was a much better fighter than them, and he has the resume to prove it.

[SCtrojansbaby]

Toney, Kalambay and McCallum are all boxing masters none is more skilled than they are. Nunn is less skilled but the most athletic

As for those 4 against Hagler. I think McCallum beats Hagler. Toney and Kalambay are 50/50 fights. Hagler gets a come from behind win against Nunn

[billeau2]

well he was a great fighter. he also beat kalule, barkley, DeWitt, simms, Graham x2, Collins, etc. his resume is actually pretty good.

He is definitely a lot better than McCall & Judah. McCall had a freak knockout against Lewis and then didn't accomplish much more than that. Judah never beat anyone as good as McCallum... He was a much better fighter than them, and he has the resume to prove it.

Be that as it may...there is a general feeling that of all the guys mentioned, with due respect to the victory over McCallum....that he never reached his potential.

MCcall and Judah, are examples of guys who never became "that good" but both of whom had tremendous natural ability. The Mccall victory over Lewis is ironic but alas, it does not change the projection for Mccall's career, Witherspoon is another guy in that category, Ward might ge heading that way as well.

[MartinC]

McCallum was good at everything but not great at anything. He was very well rounded but not fast footed, fast handed, powerful or a defensive master. He was very balanced and that made him successful.