Hearns vs McCallum at 154

you guys think Thomas Hearns win over Duran was a joke? Tommy came to knock guys out. Look at Cuevas or Shuler or Hagler. He came to win and knock guys out with hard punches from a tall rangey guy of 6-1 1/2 He would go in there and land his best and if the guy could take it then he would smile and maybe a tougher fight, but he kept landing. If Duran could not take it, thati s not Tommys problem and any excuses Duran made was bs.. They were the same weight and Duran could not take it. He could beat Davey Moore,but Thomas Hearns was different story.

 

I think the Hearns that fought Hill and Leonard 2 were very disciplined,and though he was passed his peak,that mentality in his early years may have taken him further outside the Hit Man performances.

 

you are exactly right. He changed, and it was after Iran Barkley in 1988 that he slowed the pace in this fights and went rounds.. After that he went 12 rounds in his next 3 fights believe it or not... and 5 times the distance in his next 7 fights after Barkley. From the Barkley fight to the end of his career he went the 12 rounds 7 times.. Somehow he didn't go for the knockout as much and worked on inside fighting and going the distance. His total professional rounds are I think 10 short of 400, which is a lot more than knockout puncher usually go. Foreman and Hearns are two of the big punchrs who went 349 for Foreman in rounds and Hearns had I think 390. Although they had a lot of fights.

 

Absolutely. He definitely learnt to keep his hands higher and to fight at close range.

 

not much is mentioned of that. He really started to think distance and not to put himself in the range of a punch if he didn't have to.. Which is why his left hook to the body became more important, yet his right hand was a little out of range then so he had less knockouts. But he had some nice fights. Leonard 2, Barkley 2, and Hill 1... All decisions. He also went 12 with Olajide and Kinchen. Really he became a distance guy for a little wwhile there.

 

hearns wanted no part of that

 

Hill didn't want to brawl if he did Hearns would of brawled with him. McCallum would absolutely want to brawl and 10/10 McCallum would win because he can take Hearns **** but Hearne can't take his.

 

Mike was not that strong physically. he was good technically.and all those guys he fought were not as fast as hearns, except maybe the post Hagler Hearns who MIke and everyone else wanted to fight for his name. Tommy would beat Mike. Mike lost to Kalambay in 1988 and rather easily. he could be outsped, and Curry used speed to win rounds.. Hearns would not have brawled with Hill. his gameplan was to use the jab and he said later, that was all he needed. He said later, his style was all wrong for Virgil.

 

Very surprised Manny said that about his favourite pupil

 

Too many Hearn right hands is not good for anyone. I got Tommy boxing behind a jab dropping the right when he can and tieing up the smaller Mccallum inside when he closes in...

 

Mike was good at the inside angles and finding the opening and slipping them in, if you fought him inside at that point. Very good at landing with nice punches at different angles.. But Hearns was a jab and right hand man with a left hook, who would not fight guys like that when he was younger. Later he got older and his legs failed him he started to fight more inside, because he had to, but he still had the right.. A younger Hearns jabs Mike and keeps him on the outside. Remember Donald had to get inside to land on Mike which he did, Hearns wouldn't have to..

 

Manny didn't say Mike would win, he said Mike had great natural talent. Hearns had to work hard for what he had... But Hearns had speed he said once, which he thought would make the difference.

 

A Tommy Hearns right hand would be felt by every fighter south of 160. He could rattle McCallum long range all night with it with that speed. Imo he's the best 154lb fighter ever. Hearns ud for me sweet pea

 

Yes, Sir. This is the definitive memory I have of the great Mike McCallum as well. A safety first performance against a blocky, rugged journeyman with no punch in a showcase fight. Everytime you guys hype up McCallum as some sort of killer, I remember watching round after round and each one getting slower and more uneventful as he plodded around after Mannion. One of the worst performances ever in such a showcase fight. Never saw Hearns stink out the joint like that.

Maybe the Superman version would show up and grind Hearns down just like Saad wrote it up, but I'd be inclined to expect Hearns to box circles around him.

 

You realize Duran beat Leonard, right?

styles make fights and Duran was simply physically overmatched against Hearns.

McCallum wouldn't be physically overmatched.

And those picking on McCallum for the Mannion shutout.

He got better after that

that was not absolute prime McCallum

He turned pro very late for his age - at age 25 in 1981.

He subsequently beat better guys - Braxton, Jackson, McCrory, Curry.

By late '85 he's ready for post Hagler Hearns.

Hearns would be very vulnerable.

In Summer '86 Hearns defends his WBC 154 title against Mark Medal.

What if he fought McCallum in a unification fight instead?

It's a great matchup and Mike had a great shot.