True or False: James Toney's win over Michael Nunn is better than any win of Floyd's?

Is Toney's resume better than Floyd's? No. I just think this is a case of beating someone who was in his absolute peak and clearly the top dog in the MW division. Not too sure about the last one. I definitely think Oscar would have fought Floyd if the circumstances were equal to Nunn's. But he was making so much damn money at the time. But I can appreciate what you mean. I don't think Cotto was a better win than Pacquiao. Cotto looked good against Margarito, but other than that it had been years since he looked like the old Cotto i.e. how he looked vs Martinez and Geale - despite the opposition. He also looked bad vs Trout. That's true about Pacquiao, and I'm not saying he was as good as he once was, obviously. But I still think he was good and had looked good beating Bradley, Rios and Algieri - 3 average opponents in my book, but he still looked good. That's fair, he did beat Nunn at Nunn's peak.

Is Toney's resume better than Floyd's? No. I just think this is a case of beating someone who was in his absolute peak and clearly the top dog in the MW division. Not too sure about the last one. I definitely think Oscar would have fought Floyd if the circumstances were equal to Nunn's. But he was making so much damn money at the time. But I can appreciate what you mean. I don't think Cotto was a better win than Pacquiao. Cotto looked good against Margarito, but other than that it had been years since he looked like the old Cotto i.e. how he looked vs Martinez and Geale - despite the opposition. He also looked bad vs Trout. That's true about Pacquiao, and I'm not saying he was as good as he once was, obviously. But I still think he was good and had looked good beating Bradley, Rios and Algieri - 3 average opponents in my book, but he still looked good. I agree Cotto was also considerably past it. He was still able to stay competitive with Floyd though, and we saw how completely he was taken apart by Pacquiao. Pacquiao didn't put in a quarter of the performance that Cotto did. Most likely because Manny is well past his prime. 36 years old for a fighter who's style was based on his physicality, who has been in many wars. Fighters like that are usually shot by the time they are 30. Manny some how managed to last a bit longer, but it was through management, and media hype. The Manny that stepped in the ring with Floyd was a shell of himself. Just compare this already slipping Manny To the one that fought Floyd. And then compare him to his prime... in fight like Barrera and Morales... always moving always punching, relentless aggression. Less refined, but that was his physical prime.

Dude, I saw all those fights and in no way am I denigrating Nunn. Your point about p4p list is fair regarding RING but not all p4p lists are like that. Nunn is not a HOF'er while shane is considered a lock by all of us. See my response above-I think the Tate and Kalumbay wins are very good. Nunn fell apart personally, and professional and ruined his career. After that high point in his career, he started to look lackadaisical in the ring. He was probably involved in drugs for quite a while before his bust for trying to buy a kilo of coke. Also, I doubt the IBHOF, is going to induct someone who's career was ended due to cocaine trafficking, and wont be released until 2024. If not for the drug rap, I would wager Nunn would be in the HOF right now.

No disrespect but I do not remember those wins over curry and starling being celebrated that much. of course its a long time ago and the memory is off. I think the Nunn win was a great win for Toney, no question. I guess the equivalent would've been prime ODH, shane or Manny, maybe cotto. Fair point about the win streak I agree no one on Floyd's resume had that string of wins. ODH, shane and Manny wouldn't fight high risk Floyd like Nunn fought high risk Toney. Is Toney's resume better than Floyd's? No. I just think this is a case of beating someone who was in his absolute peak and clearly the top dog in the MW division. Not too sure about the last one. I definitely think Oscar would have fought Floyd if the circumstances were equal to Nunn's. But he was making so much damn money at the time. But I can appreciate what you mean. I think Cotto is a better win, as he was quite a bit fresher at the time they fought. Honestly, Pacquaio has been a shell of himself for years... I mean just think of all the broadcasts where they were making excuses for Pacquiao's poor performances. Manny is having "Leg cramps"! That what they sold us as Pacquiao slid from the peak of his abilities. As he went from a guy that was always in and out side to side, throwing punches from every angle, to a guy who would stand in front of you. They also managed to mask his slide with all of the Marquez fights. When you see two guys slipping together, you can't see them slipping. For example, Rafa Marquez and Vaszquez went from p4p greats to, non competitive fighters in the span of 4 fights with each other. You couldn't see them slipping though, because you never saw them against another fighter, just against each other. Same things happened with Manny and Marquez. Manny would have an "off night" then Fight another close fight with Marquez, and everyone would be like "Well! Looks like the two Warriors are still at their best!" I don't think Cotto was a better win than Pacquiao. Cotto looked good against Margarito, but other than that it had been years since he looked like the old Cotto i.e. how he looked vs Martinez and Geale - despite the opposition. He also looked bad vs Trout. That's true about Pacquiao, and I'm not saying he was as good as he once was, obviously. But I still think he was good and had looked good beating Bradley, Rios and Algieri - 3 average opponents in my book, but he still looked good.

The p4p rankings have become the Name for Name rankings. We both know Shane Mosely was not the #3 p4p fighter in the world in 2010. His ranking was based almost entirely off his win over Margarito, who showed to be nothing without plaster in his gloves. Shane in his prime was in the same class as Nunn, but Nunn was a much more skilled fighter than Shane. Shane had more dog in him, was faster, and could take a better punch. Nunn was a much more skilled technician, much slicker, and more defensively sound, and he also was very tall and rangy for his division... and southpaw... He was a nightmare, and was destined to be an ATG, if he didn't meet Toney. Here is the Kalambay fight... The Same Kalambay that beat Mike McCallum in his prime... The same Mike McCallum that basically everyone who ever fought him listed as the best fighter they ever fought. vs Tate... The Olympic Gold Medalist... Just use your eyes. The Nunn was SPECIAL. Then consider that After the Toney loss, Nunn moved up to 168 and become the Lineal Champion there as well... Dude, I saw all those fights and in no way am I denigrating Nunn. Your point about p4p list is fair regarding RING but not all p4p lists are like that. Nunn is not a HOF'er while shane is considered a lock by all of us. See my response above-I think the Tate and Kalumbay wins are very good.

Looked a tad bit stronger against Clottey Clottey didn't fight back at all. Cotto fight, was the first fight I saw him slowing down in. I said it after the fight too, that Manny would be on the slide from there.

Fair enough if you disagree. They were top fights at the time? It's like saying Ray Leonard wouldn't get full credit for beating Duran if he won their first fight. It's always easy to look back and not give them full credit. Maybe take Roldan away, and it's still better than the streak of wins any Floyd victim has had leading up to a fight with Floyd. If not, let me know who? All I'm saying is that Floyd doesn't have a win as impressive as an undefeated Michael Nunn. I really can't see who's as impressive as Nunn. Pacquiao comes closest imo. I think Cotto is a better win, as he was quite a bit fresher at the time they fought. Honestly, Pacquaio has been a shell of himself for years... I mean just think of all the broadcasts where they were making excuses for Pacquiao's poor performances. Manny is having "Leg cramps"! That what they sold us as Pacquiao slid from the peak of his abilities. As he went from a guy that was always in and out side to side, throwing punches from every angle, to a guy who would stand in front of you. They also managed to mask his slide with all of the Marquez fights. When you see two guys slipping together, you can't see them slipping. For example, Rafa Marquez and Vaszquez went from p4p greats to, non competitive fighters in the span of 4 fights with each other. You couldn't see them slipping though, because you never saw them against another fighter, just against each other. Same things happened with Manny and Marquez. Manny would have an "off night" then Fight another close fight with Marquez, and everyone would be like "Well! Looks like the two Warriors are still at their best!"

Fair enough if you disagree. They were top fights at the time? It's like saying Ray Leonard wouldn't get full credit for beating Duran if he won their first fight. It's always easy to look back and not give them full credit. Maybe take Roldan away, and it's still better than the streak of wins any Floyd victim has had leading up to a fight with Floyd. If not, let me know who? All I'm saying is that Floyd doesn't have a win as impressive as an undefeated Michael Nunn. I really can't see who's as impressive as Nunn. Pacquiao comes closest imo. No disrespect but I do not remember those wins over curry and starling being celebrated that much. of course its a long time ago and the memory is off. I think the Nunn win was a great win for Toney, no question. I guess the equivalent would've been prime ODH, shane or Manny, maybe cotto. Fair point about the win streak I agree no one on Floyd's resume had that string of wins. ODH, shane and Manny wouldn't fight high risk Floyd like Nunn fought high risk Toney.

Mannys last PRIME prime fight was Cotto. Looked a tad bit stronger against Clottey

This is a fair point. I just wish shane didn't have his toothache when he was prime. You mean after the Vargas fight? Would have been nice if it happened then.

shane was rated about as high p4p as Nunn was when Floyd beat him, that is all I posted and that is true. I did not say or imply he was in his prime nor undefeated like Nunn. When SHane was prime he was in a completely different class than Nunn. The p4p rankings have become the Name for Name rankings. We both know Shane Mosely was not the #3 p4p fighter in the world in 2010. His ranking was based almost entirely off his win over Margarito, who showed to be nothing without plaster in his gloves. Shane in his prime was in the same class as Nunn, but Nunn was a much more skilled fighter than Shane. Shane had more dog in him, was faster, and could take a better punch. Nunn was a much more skilled technician, much slicker, and more defensively sound, and he also was very tall and rangy for his division... and southpaw... He was a nightmare, and was destined to be an ATG, if he didn't meet Toney. Here is the Kalambay fight... The Same Kalambay that beat Mike McCallum in his prime... The same Mike McCallum that basically everyone who ever fought him listed as the best fighter they ever fought. vs Tate... The Olympic Gold Medalist... Just use your eyes. The Nunn was SPECIAL. Then consider that After the Toney loss, Nunn moved up to 168 and become the Lineal Champion there as well...

My point is I disagree with you calling those 6 wins top wins, especially, Roldan, Curry and Starling at MW. I have no issue with Tate, Barkley and Kalumbay-except you saying he should be in the HOF. Roldan was in his 75th or so fight and he retired after the loss. Starling went up from WW to MW and went back to WW after the loss. Curry at MW is 2 fights removed from losing to Rochet. this wasn't WW curry. I think the points I am raising are fair. Fair enough if you disagree. They were top fights at the time? It's like saying Ray Leonard wouldn't get full credit for beating Duran if he won their first fight. It's always easy to look back and not give them full credit. Maybe take Roldan away, and it's still better than the streak of wins any Floyd victim has had leading up to a fight with Floyd. If not, let me know who? All I'm saying is that Floyd doesn't have a win as impressive as an undefeated Michael Nunn. I really can't see who's as impressive as Nunn. Pacquiao comes closest imo.

But it's true that Shane was considered over the hill before Margarito and had one fantastic performance left in him. He was clearly not considered as solid as Nunn despite what a P4P list would say. This is a fair point. I just wish shane didn't have his toothache when he was prime.

Of course Kalambay is HOF material! Took Mike McCallum's 0, perhaps even beat him twice. beat steve collins, beat herol graham twice, beat iran barkely. Other good guys like sims and dewitt too. Amazing fighter. Now you're talking about something I never said. I never said Nunn beating Curry was better than Floyd beating Hatton and which other examples you're mentioning. But Nunn beat all of those guys. We're talking if Floyd has better wins than Toney's win over Nunn, not whether Floyd has better wins than Nunn's singlular wins. If Floyd beat someone who was coming off six consecutive victories over guys like tate, curry, roldan, starling, barkley and kalambay - Then it would have been comparable to Toney's victory over Nunn. But has Floyd beaten someone coming off 6 consecutive top wins incl. one or two HOFamers and unbeaten? If so, I'd like to know who it is, because I don't remember it. Sorry my mistake. Still don't think he was comparable to Tarver. My point is I disagree with you calling those 6 wins top wins, especially, Roldan, Curry and Starling at MW. I have no issue with Tate, Barkley and Kalumbay-except you saying he should be in the HOF. Roldan was in his 75th or so fight and he retired after the loss. Starling went up from WW to MW and went back to WW after the loss. Curry at MW is 2 fights removed from losing to Rochet. this wasn't WW curry. I think the points I am raising are fair.

shane was rated about as high p4p as Nunn was when Floyd beat him, that is all I posted and that is true. I did not say or imply he was in his prime nor undefeated like Nunn. When SHane was prime he was in a completely different class than Nunn. But it's true that Shane was considered over the hill before Margarito and had one fantastic performance left in him. He was clearly not considered as solid as Nunn despite what a P4P list would say.

Kalumbay HOF, come on dude. I mean you are entitled to your opinion but I disagree. Barkley, maybe. As for Floyd's best win, I have already listed wins which I thought were comparable or better. If you disagree, fine. Nunn was on a good run, was 36-0, and had beaten some very good names. Just scrutinize those wins the same way you do floyds. Kalumbay and Barkley are very good wins. how is Nunn beating Starling better than Floyd beating JMM? How is Nunn beating Curry better than Floyd beating hatton? when Nunn beat curry, was Curry better than ODH was when Floyd beat him? was curry even a quality win at MW or was it more like Manny beating Margs at JMW? he beat Roldan in Juan's last fight, he was 33 and had like 75 fights. Are you really sure Nunn's run was as great as you posted? Of course Kalambay is HOF material! Took Mike McCallum's 0, perhaps even beat him twice. beat steve collins, beat herol graham twice, beat iran barkely. Other good guys like sims and dewitt too. Amazing fighter. Now you're talking about something I never said. I never said Nunn beating Curry was better than Floyd beating Hatton and which other examples you're mentioning. But Nunn beat all of those guys. We're talking if Floyd has better wins than Toney's win over Nunn, not whether Floyd has better wins than Nunn's singlular wins. If Floyd beat someone who was coming off six consecutive victories over guys like tate, curry, roldan, starling, barkley and kalambay - Then it would have been comparable to Toney's victory over Nunn. But has Floyd beaten someone coming off 6 consecutive top wins incl. one or two HOFamers and unbeaten? If so, I'd like to know who it is, because I don't remember it. No not compared to Trinidad. I never compared to two. I compared him to Pavlik and Tarver. Sorry my mistake. Still don't think he was comparable to Tarver.

I can agree to that, but as you say, still very good. I'm definitely believing Canelo will end up as a greater fighter than Pavlik - And I do rate it as one of Floyd's top wins. I just don't think he had hit his absolute peak when he fought Floyd. I think he didn't know exactly how he wanted to fight (not just against Floyd) but in general. He didn't look good against Trout at all before fighting Floyd. He looked really good fighting Angulo and Kirkland, so maybe it's just against technical guys like Lara, Floyd & Trout that he doesn't look so great. Nevertheless, comparable to Pavlik - Not to Trinidad. No not compared to Trinidad. I never compared to two. I compared him to Pavlik and Tarver.

Mosley? Mosley was considered shot before the Margarito win, which he miraculously pulled off, thanks in part too them finding what made Margarito Margarito... the plaster... then Floyd gets him after over a year layoff...? And you are saying that is as good as Nunn? ... ........ ................. So if Shane at 39 was as Good as Nunn, how much better than Nunn was a prime Mosley? shane was rated about as high p4p as Nunn was when Floyd beat him, that is all I posted and that is true. I did not say or imply he was in his prime nor undefeated like Nunn. When SHane was prime he was in a completely different class than Nunn.

Toney's win over Nunn was an big upset, Floyd has never been that much of an underdog to any opponent so he couldn't have a "better" win. The truth is Manny, Corrales and Mosley were rated as high or higher than Nunn was when floyd fought them. Mosley? Mosley was considered shot before the Margarito win, which he miraculously pulled off, thanks in part too them finding what made Margarito Margarito... the plaster... then Floyd gets him after over a year layoff...? And you are saying that is as good as Nunn? ... ........ ................. So if Shane at 39 was as Good as Nunn, how much better than Nunn was a prime Mosley?

Yeah even Bradley 1 he showed signs of slipping. Manny's average punch output almost halved from his peak of <2009 and maybe 2010. How do you think the fight would have gone if it happened after Cotto? Mannys last PRIME prime fight was Cotto.