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

[!! Shawn]

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.

[!! Shawn]

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.

[The Big Dunn]

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.