BoxRec

Another name fighter Barkley beat was Darrin"Schoolboy" Van Horne by a second round stoppage.

kick asner wrote:Another name fighter Barkley beat was Darrin"Schoolboy" Van Horne by a second round stoppage.

I didn't include him because that fight took place at 168, but Van Horn was a pretty good fighter.

Barkley also lost a very close decision @ 160 to Michael Nunn, who was a very gifted and generally under-rated fighter.

>>>Purely subjective, but I would rate Barkley’s list of opponents as much more impressive than McClellan’s. While some of his wins were over aging fighters, there were a number of very solid names as well.<<<

I agree...I think overall Barkley fought the better competition, but that does not change the fact that he was a wild-swinging, face-first fighter and that is a style that McClellan absolutely destroyed. McClellan may not have been the best boxer in the world, but he wasn't the worst either, he had pretty solid technique and decent skills, he wasn’t the face-first type of fighter that Barkley was...if he had been Julian Jackson would have knocked him out...and there is no question about his punching prowess...he was arguably, P4P the hardest hitting middleweight of his era with the exception of maybe Julian Jackson and Roy Jones at middleweight, but that eventually harmed him. He fell in love with his power and went in for the first round kill every time out and that really hurt him in the Benn fight, the same thing happened to Hamed a few years later…he thought that he could knock everyone out and as a result they’re work on basic skills took a backseat. Though I certainly believe that McClellan had a solid enough defense to handle the likes of Barkley's wild swings and Barkley’s lack of defense would be his end as McClellan just loved and steam-rolled over face-first fighters that were not hard to hit…and Barkley was never, ever a fighter who was hard to hit!

I still say KO 1 for McClellan...definately within 3!!!!

barry wrote:>>>Purely subjective, but I would rate Barkley’s list of opponents as much more impressive than McClellan’s. While some of his wins were over aging fighters, there were a number of very solid names as well.<<<

I agree...I think overall Barkley fought the better competition, but that does not change the fact that he was a wild-swinging, face-first fighter and that is a style that McClellan absolutely destroyed. McClellan may not have been the best boxer in the world, but he wasn't the worst either, he had pretty solid technique and decent skills, he wasn’t the face-first type of fighter that Barkley was...if he had been Julian Jackson would have knocked him out...and there is no question about his punching prowess...he was arguably, P4P the hardest hitting middleweight of his era with the exception of maybe Julian Jackson and Roy Jones at middleweight, but that eventually harmed him. He fell in love with his power and went in for the first round kill every time out and that really hurt him in the Benn fight, the same thing happened to Hamed a few years later…he thought that he could knock everyone out and as a result they’re work on basic skills took a backseat. Though I certainly believe that McClellan had a solid enough defense to handle the likes of Barkley's wild swings and Barkley’s lack of defense would be his end as McClellan just loved and steam-rolled over face-first fighters that were not hard to hit…and Barkley was never, ever a fighter who was hard to hit!
I still say KO 1 for McClellan...definately within 3!!!!

You left out my closing sentence where I pick McClellan. Within 3 is certainly reasonable, but I think it would be a competitive war.

>>>but I think it would be a competitive war<<<

No doubt about it, for how ever long it lasted it would be bombs away and very exciting...very much like Hagler-Hearns!

Anyone picking the G-Man by easy KO I think are wrong. Barkley had a great chin, stamina, decent power and was non stop. He definitely has a chance. He was easy to hit and Gerald was a great puncher and even better finisher, so it could be a KO, though I think Barkley's chin and strength may see him weather the storm and rally late. The later it goes, the better for the Blade. In defense of Gerald, he not only had ferocious power, but he could box pretty good when he wanted to. Would Toney at his best beat the G-Man?

G-Man destroys Barkley. Toney schools the G-Man.

walshb wrote:Anyone picking the G-Man by easy KO I think are wrong. Barkley had a great chin, stamina, decent power and was non stop. He definitely has a chance. He was easy to hit and Gerald was a great puncher and even better finisher, so it could be a KO, though I think Barkley's chin and strength may see him weather the storm and rally late. The later it goes, the better for the Blade. In defense of Gerald, he not only had ferocious power, but he could box pretty good when he wanted to. Would Toney at his best beat the G-Man?

I agree, Barkley had one of the best chins around and to say that he'd be wiped out by Gerald is a huge overrating of the G-MANS ability. Ok Barkley wasnt hard to hit but Gerald was easy to hit as well and Geralds style would be made for Barkley also... it would be bombs away, and the G-man would certainly have a chance but to say it would be easy for him is just foolish and the more I think about it the more I see the Blade weathering the early storm to win in about 8 rounds... at the end of the day Barkley proved himself against better fighters than Gerald and was a better all round fighter imo...