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

Regardless I still think Canelo has a good chance of beating Mike McCallum. It's not huge but I think he could and would beat him. Fought plenty of good quality competition that only gets knocked because they fought in todays era. Yet this guy is here stroking McCallum and Kalambay for beating/losing to Kalule.

 

No he didn't, he lost easily and got a gift. Canelo hit absolutly nothing but fresh air, elbows and forearms all fight.

 

You’re a clown.

 

I’m fully aware of his skills.

I’ve already said that he’s a fine fighter.

 

Looking from the side it seems like you has been the one putting Mike's opposition down.

No one has called Kalule great, but was a good fighter and a Mike, as a pretty new pro, beat him decisively.

Jacskon was a very dangerous fighter and wouldn't lose again for another seven years, at a higher weight class.

Curry came off a bad loss, but he was on his game and Mike KO'd him in some fashion.

Kalambay has a very good resume, but it doesn't tell the whole story. For most who have watched him, he stands out as one of the finest technicians at MW ever. He was also always in good shape. Southpaws were his achilles heel, but he was hell for orthodox fighters. The loss in the first fight was one-sided, but I think Mike showed his real level in the rematch.

Graham was a very tricky fighter, and the fight wasn't as close as the scores (in Graham's hometown would suggest). Graham rates Mike as the best he fought.

No one broke Watson down like Mike did.

The Collins fight wasn't at all close, but Collins was still a bit green. Collins also rates Mike as the best he fought.

I think Mike won the rematch with Toney. He was turning 36 that year.

The Hardin win at LHW was also good, seeing that Mike was old and above his best weight.

 

You make me laugh.

 

Okay.

I’ll retract that statement. But many people feel as though he was lucky to get the draw.

 

And Barkley, Sims, Graham x 2 and Collins.

You feel that Lara's resume is better?

 

I'm just calling it what it is. I back up all of my statements on the level of fighters with evidence such as the amount of top ranked fighters they beat and when they beat them.

I don't knock them at all. Good fighters but Loudon is on here arguing that they were great middleweights which they were not.

Not really. Good fighter absolutely but nobody is mentioning this guy when the time comes around to talk about the great middleweights of all time. Want to tell me he was a good strong fighter of the era? I'll agree with anyone about that 100%. Want to tell me he's one of the best middleweights ever or near it? Definitely not. He lost to plenty in his own era and would lose to plenty more.

Good wins no doubt. I haven't argued against this. Really, I wouldn't go by much of what Loudon says. He doesn't have the slightest clue what he's responding to alot of the time. I tell him that beating a green fighter isn't as good as beating them at their best and he comes back with "I don’t have to CLAIM that Mike has a strong resume. Mike HAS a strong resume." It literally makes no sense whatsoever in the context of what he was responding to.

Agreed.

 

I'd bet the house that I've been watching GGG much more closely and for much longer than you have. The fact that you think he was faded tells me and everyone here you really don't know much, at the very least, about modern boxing.

 

I haven't see him call them great. Maybe Toney, but I haven't seen anyone say Kalule or Graham were great. Just good.

Strawman or just careless reading? In the part you quote I clearly call him "one of the finest technicians at MW ever". That isn't the same as one of the best MW:s ever. I agree full heartedly that his resume doesn't stack up with the best of the division. But his technical skills do imo.

 

I can't understand how anyone can score the first GGG-Canelo fight as anything other than a clear GGG win. Come on, it wasn't close. It was one of the worst robberies I have ever seen.

 

I can't understand how anybody would score these fights for Canelo. You must be biased if you think that Canelo could have won that first fight. Not really worth my time either

 

Here you go:

Normal people would say that excellent is synonymous with great if not better.

I'll pretend to ignore the aggression. No need for us to engage in that.

One of the finest technicians at MW implies that he belongs to the upper echelons of middleweight ring technicians. So that there is no misunderstanding here could you perhaps name a couple of the other finest ring technicians that you think he is comparable to? Are we talking about a Gibbons and Robinson level ring tech here?

Unless it's chin or power I never see a fighter heralded as one of the best ever in a certain aspect without being considered an atg. Especially ring technicians.

 

Paul Williams, Austin Trout, Angulo, Vanes, Freddy Hernandez, Gausha, a draw with Castano and a could've gone either way fight with Hurd; he was past it for the last two. He also didn't get ko'd in one round by Nunn or lose to Duane Thomas. I stand by what I said.