How does Mike McCallum do against Monzon´s opponents ?

At his best he can beat them all. However if you put him into Monzon´s shoes he wouldn´t defend the title 14 times, he would lose to someone on the way.

 

:goodSounds about right to me.

 

I could see Mike defending against that crop and staying unbeaten...he had a very good run at the top and was only bested by 2 sensational middleweights in the 10 or so years he held a belt.

But he certainly wouldn't win as decisively as Monzon did and thus I don't think he would have been remembered in the same way...I reckon he would only just get past Griffith and would have been extended a couple of times.

 

I think he'd go unbeaten over the period, he was consistant he just ran into Kalambay and Toney and there wasn't anyone quite as good as them at MW during Monzon's reign. Griffith sort of was but he was old, Valdez wasn't quite as skilled. I'd have to make McCallum a big favourite over all Monzon's opponents. McCallum also did go on a similar run of championship success for 8years bar the Kalambay bannana skin

 

He may have been detoured by Bennie Briscoe as well as Rodrigo Valdez. Valdez is horribly underrated by this forum, IMO. He may have split a couple of fights with Benvenuti and Griffith.

 

Having watched McCallum vs Kalambay 1&2 , and more relevantly 1 more than twice , it has to be stressed that Kalambay was never close to beat McCallum , let alone beat him like the consensus here has it .
Kalambay only backpedaled , stirred off McCallum's way , jabbed while retreating and did nothing more (at least not for more than 1-2 3 seconds spurt/s during their fight)
Kalambay is overrated , and most if not all of his wins are not really wins , just for the fast forwarding boxrec abusers they are considered wins.
One should be careful before stating a win is a win , especially if 1 is a long time history poster .

 

Rodrigo Valdez was an excellent fighter. I remember him in the 28th st. gym in N.Y. and seen him in the garden a few times. He was smooth and he could punch. He may have been a problem and Briscoe was no joke. Monzon was consistent but put out only what he had to to win, Yet he had 14 defenses and won pretty clearly most of the time and stepped up to the plate and took charge and this is not an easy thing to do. i think Valdes would be a problem for McCallum and so would Bad Benny

 

I really like McCallum but I don't think he would be likely to reproduce that reign. It requires iron consistency and dominance. Anyone who regularly wins close calls is not going to to do this. Hell, Monzon, given a theoretical second shot at it, would probably not reproduce that stretch.

 

He pretty much did reproduce the reign, he was a champion for 8years with 1 loss to Kalambay who was better than any of Monzon's defenses. That and the Toney fights and Kalambay rematches, 8years into his championship career are the only real close fights, the Graham fight was clear. He dominated world champs like Jackson, Curry, Watson, Collins

 

Regularily? Kalambay comes to mind. Otherwise I can't think of any of his wins that were close (except for in hometown judges' minds; i e Graham).

 

As I see it, more or less. For me, he won the rematch with Toney clearly, though. The first could go either way. A draw was not wrong.

 

Briscoe - to rough and tough, late rounds stoppage for bennie.
Valdez - vastly underated, would win a comfortable decision over mike
Benvenuti - close fight, two great technicians, could go either way, i say if they fought 7 times Benvenuti wins 4
Griffith - too schooled and clever for mike, though he would make it close and maybe win one out of 3
Napoles - close fight, both great technicians, narrow win for mike here.

 

I really rate McCallum technically he just lacks the ice cool crisp cold chilled demenor of Monzon really. Its those ruthless contemptfull eyes that define a champion

 

:deal