If we are going to start to say and downplay SRR that SRR " navigated " , then you might as well stick a fork in every boxer that has every laced them up .. As if SRR doesn't have one of the best resumes of all time
I think Burley was a great fighter. But it seems the Murderers' Row is quite an extended list of fighters. Good fighters but there's a myth surrounding that they were all avoided by all the champions because they were all 'killers' and because they were black. But, of course, there are other explanations for why so few boxers were given title shots in that era.
Likewise McCallum can be found in YouTube interviews whining about being ducked by Hagler when the truth is that when both were active fighters McCallum wasn't even a blip on Hagler's radar. A heck of an interesting thread, by the way. Very informative.
Let him tell it,everyone was afraid of him. The one I can see him beating is maybe Duran, if he wasn't focused.
Not really. Because he was terrific out of the gate, a star and had huge coverage out of NYC he had matchmaking advantages. The whole initial question was if he would have started so strong and so long if he didn't have them. He would have been terrific regardless but may have lost a few more along the way.
This agreeing is getting freaky. Beside Jake, no one has ever written a good book in depth on LaMotta. Would love to see one. The latest, "Fight To Live" was garbage. I know we dont get along but you seem to have a good grasp of LaMotta and the time. Ever thought of bioing him? Not 10 yrs though. I will be dead.
I think the McCallum-Hearns situation is a bit different. Yes, I can definitely see why Tommy went for Duran and Hagler, but Mike and Tommy were both title holders so a fight between them would have been a unification. There was no similar situation the short time SRR and Burley were at the same weight. And Hearns did fight again at 154 after Hagler, so there was room for fight with Mike. Then there's always the question of what "duck" means. People like to say "hey, it was no duck, he just thought he was high risk/low reward", but by that definition ducks hardly exist. I don't think a fighter in history has passed on a low risk/high reward and it rarely happens with high risk/high reward either. The fights demanded by the public usually happens - if not always at the point the fans would have liked. If Robinson could be accused of ducking anybody, it was in his second reign as MW champion. His defenses were pretty weak after winning the title back from Turpin.
Good post and fair point about the risk v reward argument. I don't think McCallum was a viable opponent for Hearns in 1984 and McCallum was no. 1 contender for Duran's WBA belt rather than Hearns' WBC title, I think. Then by the time McCallum picked up the vacant WBA title Hearns was pretty much signed up to fight Hagler. The only real opportunity I see for a Hearns-McCallum fight was sometime in 1986 but I think after Hearns struggled dropping back down in weight in what would be his final defense of the 154 lb title against Mark Medal (giving an underwhelming performance by his standards) the chance to meet McCallum was gone. Hearns knew he'd outgrown the division. As for SRR ducking during his second reign as MW champion, just interested to know who in particular you think he ducked in that period?
Hearns could have gone for a unification with McCallum but there were hardly any clamor for that fight. Steward has been pretty frank about that he viewed Mike as a real threat to Hearns, but had a fight with Mike meant anything close to the money they got for Hagler they'd of course taken it. No one in particular, just all the guys ranked higher really. Graziano was ranked nr 10 by The Ring going into 1952 and Olsen was unranked. Again, depends on how you define "ducking", but he should have defended against higher ranked guys. Nothing dramatic, but more substantial than any "ducking" of Burley imo.
If I recall McCallum was Duran's mandatory at 154, but Duran took the Hearns fight instead and was stripped of the title. Can't blame someone for taking on a legend for millions ahead of a (then) obscure young contender for peanuts. McCallum also had a beef with Emmanuel Steward which may have complicated a potential Hearns fight. Then Hearns beat Duran and the next fight in the pipeline was Hearns-Hagler. I suppose there was a brief window for Hearns-McCallum, but Hearns mostly seemed to be a division or two north of him. McCallum may complain now about missing out on these fights, but even though their careers did overlap, he wasn't really a peer of the Fab Four. In the mid-80s he was just a little known junior middle titlist fighting people like Said Skouma and Sean Mannion. By the time he was coming into his own in the late 80s/early 90s the Fab Four were all on their last legs.
I certainly agree that when a fighter has talent and potential he can be navigated and protected so far but eventually he will have to fight the best and looking at SRR record he didn't have the easiest path but his management team certainly knew who not to fight. That's the point of a manager to side step the landmines and navigate the fighter every time he hits a higher level he has to have learning fights, confidence builders, proving fights and make it or break it fights. It certainly reveals how his team thought he matched up with a Burley type when they chose to fight LaMotta 6 times instead.
