Mike 'The Bodysnatcher' Mccallum vs Saul 'Canelo' Alvarez

That’s right.

When he said that Mike was the best guy he fought, I think he was talking about in terms of pure skills.

 

So what if Mike lost to Kalambay?

He also beat him.

Many people think that Lara beat Canelo.

I don’t need to consult anybody.

It’s common knowledge to everybody who saw Mike.

That’s not to say that Canelo isn’t greatly skilled himself.

Canelo is a fine fighter.

 

My guess would be that prime McCallum beats the Canelo that struggled with Lara and Trout and lost one-sidedly to Floyd at 154. The best MW version of Canelo might well beat the best MW version of Mike, though. That seems like a pretty even match-up to me. Would probably be a great watch.

At LHW, Canelo wins.

 

Canelo's skills are as good as they come. Just type "Canelo gif" into Google. Average punch output and slowish feet are the things that give him limits.

 

The best version of Canelo at 154 was probably from the fight with Liam Smith, when he was already lineal at 160.

 

That's completely untrue. GGG was maybe at the very tip of a decline for that fight. Faded is a blatant and unjust exaggeration of the facts.

 

"Should have lost" is also an exaggeration. Canelo landed the cleaner punches, even in the first fight.

 

Kalambay is in higher class than Lara

 

Haven't seen that fight, but that seems about right. Canelo has been continually improving imo.

 

he is overrated.Everytime time he stepped up to the elite level against Floyd and GGG, he lost it my opinion

 

Because he beat Mike McCallim.

 

Here you go with the straw man. Constantly dodging the actual point and going onto small details like this. Your style of response is cancer dude. Put it all in one line and stop double spacing between each sentence.

It's actually not. Julian Jackson and Reggie Johnson are definitely not great middleweights. Jackson did very little damage at middleweight and was knocked out 3 times in 2 years. He beat all of 2 rated fighters there who were less than impressive. Nigel Benn's career at middleweight didn't even go all the way through 1991. He was ranked in 1990 and that's it. The same with Eubank. The same with Michael Watson. The same with Nunn. Herol Graham wasn't even a competitive middlweight in the 90s! He fought 5 times at middleweight in the early 90s and lost 3 times (twice by knockout) and the 2 fights he managed to win were against journeymen.

You're claiming 80s middleweights who had a small handful of fights at middleweight in the 90s as 90s MWs. That leaves you with 5. Only a third of what you claimed to be able to name and a quarter of what you say there probably is.

Hagler was famously ducked for years. Sumbu Kalambay was not. Tons of Hagler's defenses came against guys who had been pro for 5-6 years. If Kalambay was so great he should have been able to at least earn a spot as a contender sooner. Especially since he had 45 fights by the time Hagler fought Leonard. Against almost all bums.

Goes to show McCallum wasn't beating anyone that the other top guys couldn't beat with relative ease.

You blatantly distort that facts whenever you can on a level that would even put Donald Trump to shame. You've been called out on other threads by other posters in the last day or two for this exact offense.

I'm not the one going around all delusional claiming that many people are doing something when really only you and one other poster said anything.

Yes.

Yes.

You have yet to put forth any strong argument that he earned his place as anything more than a decent middleweight in the vast history of the middleweight division. You've wasted a large amount of your own time crying and complaining rather than actually using evidence such as rankings, records, and wins to support your argument. His wins over prime McCallum, Graham, Collins and an okay middleweight in Barkley prove he was a good fighter for his era but his losses to Nunn, Kalule, and Duane Thomas along with his further lack of fights against Hagler, Leonard, Duran, Hearns, Watson, or Benn. Even just one of them. Bring him down. He didn't fight more great middleweights of his era than he did fight.

Superior versatility as a fighter. He can fight how he needs to win the fight rather than stuck trying to force his style on who he's fighting. McCallum is much easier to hit solidly than Canelo is.

 

I disagree, I've watched the fight many many times and have tried to watch it favoring different tactics and styles. Every time I always score it for GGG by a comfortable margin.

 

It may have looked different to a ringside judge.

 

Personally I'm totally non-plussed about the huge controversy over the GGG fights. They were close fights and GGG could have won both without me objecting (I had Canelo winning both), but that they were some epic robberies... Just can't get my head around that.

Any boxing fan worth his salt can see that Canelo has improved significantly since the Floyd loss. To be honest with you, if you aren't good enough to see that you're not really worth my time. Might sound a bit rude, but blinding bias and/or ignorance is just a waste of time in a discussion really.