Mike McCallum would have knocked out Thomas Hearns at 154lbs. Discuss.

I'm not sure I could call it a duck when he fought the much more regarded hagler.

I don't think Hearns is feeble enough that the ko is a big possibility here and I think he's a better boxer than Mike was.

 

Considering we've had no previous interactions and you've just posted a schneide comment, why do you think I threw a similarly bolshy comment back?

 

Probably because he unified with Duran and moved up to face Hagler instead then stayed at 160-175. McCallum was supposed to face Duran instead but Steward pushed for Hearns-Duran, think McCallum was pissed with Steward for that

McCallum wasn't a big name, wasn't Amercian, wasn't flashy but he was obviously very very good. He ended up with the relinquished belt fighting against top contenders that also weren't big names

I'm sure McCallum was calling for fights with Hagler too, at least he says he was and he was annoyed years later with Hagler, he must have been chasing the fight

 

He had two defenses of his JMW title before Hagler. One of them should have been against McCallum.

 

In an ideal world, but McCallum won the vacant WBA title after Hearns last fight at 154. Aside from Kalule McCallum's resume was thin at that stage

 

I think McCallum was a Kronk fighter at the time.

 

If McCallum was really chasing a Hagler fight he would have moved up to middle and tried to get fights with others contenders like Herol Graham did.

Duran and Hearns were likely on his radar more than hagler.

 

If Hearns forgets about being The Hitman and boxes in his Motor City Cobra personna,he decisions McCallum. A gung ho Hearns gets stopped.

 

I'm a big fan of both fighters and McCallum by KO would definitly be my #1 choice. If it turns into a slugfest, McCallum's got a great combo of chin/power/defense. He'd weather the storm and take him out, but it would take him more time than with Jackson. If Tommy wants to box, Mike would find an opening at some point with his great jab and great footwork. I don't see Hearns reacting well to McCallum's power and old school skills.

 

No way Mike McCallum knocks out Hearns at 154 lbs, I don`t see that at all... I like McCallum, he`s a brilliant tehnician but I think Hearns keeps the fight a range for the majority of the fight tho & nobody outpoints Thomas Hearns from range.

McCallum will definitely have his moments but Hearns beats him IMO, by clear UD.

Hearns was absolute peak at this weight, look at how he outboxed Benitez, those close scores were a complete joke, Hearns dominated him, he`d do likewise to McCallum.

For the record, I rank McCallum as the 2nd best LMW ever behind Hearns (I know this is a H2H thread but I`m just letting you know )

 

Steward thought Hamed would beat Barrera too... then go on to become the best FW of all time :roll: sometimes opinions can be wrong & sometimes embarrassingly wrong.

 

I agree, I think Hearns was just a better fighter & McCallum is not normally a one punch knockout puncher, there`s no way McCallum is going to get inside enough to score more points than Hearns without taking the most damage, Hearns puts on a clinic & boxes his way to a clear decision, having Mike in trouble once or twice & surviving a couple of rocky moments himself, nothing too serious tho, Hearns is just better.

 

Yeah, but he was an old stable-mate who had been sidestepped when Hearns got the shot at Duran. Hearns had every chance to make that right, but Steward probably just plain out didn't want to. I think he implied as much in an interview not too long ago.

 

Is there any evidence that mccallum was chasing the fight with hearns?

It was slightly before my time so i'm unsure.

 

How can you be so dismissive of this possibility? :huh

Hearns got stopped in pretty brutal fashion by ww Leonard, Hagler and Barkley, and badly hurt by Kinchen and Roldan amongst others. While McCallum knocked out Julian Jackson, Milton McCrory, Donald Curry and Michael Watson. I mean, we can quibble about what happened at what weight etc, but the evidence shows that Hearns was vulnerable and that McCallum could be a killer. I don't understand how you can be so dismissive in light of such evidence. McCallum fights absolutely nothing like Benitez. McCallum would be coming for Hearns all night, walking him down, chopping away at the body, looking for the decisive head shot. I think it's perfectly reasonable to feel that, at some point, a great technician and powerful puncher like MM would find the punch that some of Hearns's other opponents also found against him.

I'm not saying it's a foregone conclusion that MM KO's him, nor that anyone with a big punch would eventually stop Tommy, not at all. But I find your dismissive response a bit much, all things considered.