Mike McCallum v Thomas Hearns @ light-middle: who would've won?

If they could fight when both are at the top of their game, who would've won @ 154?

 

I think I might be inclined to take McCallum. He was able to keep it up for the distance and was one of the big punchers at light middle. Mike can be outpointed like you saw in the Kalambay fight. My prediction is Mike by late TKO or decision.

 

Both are capable of winning, but I've said McCallum before and I'm sticking to it. I think he had the chin, strength, and toughness to take Hearns's heat while he made his way inside to work the body. And even as an outboxer he could work effectively to the body with jabs and straight rights(though he may be open for Hearns's straight right in that case, still great chin) for the later rounds. I think Mike is capable of pulling out the Decision in the later rounds.

And according to what I've heard, and from none less than ESB's late brooklyn1550(who used to train at Kronks and saw the likes of Hearns, McCallum, Dujuan Johnson, McClellan, etc) McCallum used to get the better of Hearns in their sparring at Kronks. Based on what I've seen though, Hearns is still capable of winning, but I'd probably favor Mike.

 

people hear manny stewert .. and read in a few insider magazines that mccalum was ducked now everybody thinks there an arm chair expert and supose he'd beat anyone

 

You were a big Curry fan, huh?

 

how cum maccalum isnt discussed much on esb he was a superb fighter

 

Hearns was one of the greatest 154 lb'ers ever.

If you choose Mike, then he gets elevated up to the top.

But I think Hearns would rise to the occasion and fight his
best fight and outpoint Mike in a split decision.

 

julian jackson was a beast at 154 and terry norris was an absolute killing machine

 

Norris was overrated, would've lost to most if not all of the 154 pound best. Hearns, McCallum, Wright, Jackson(obviously), and probably guys like Tito, Vasquez and Vargas, though I give him a better shot at Vargas.

Jackson also already lost to McCallum early on in his run, and was overall nowhere near the overall boxer, though a brilliant puncher.

 

................I could see this going either way, but lean toward Hearns.


I don't think we'd see the Tommy Hearns that crushed Cuevas and Duran in this one; he's much more likely to be cautious and box carefully like he did against Benitez. That version of Hearns was as slick and quick as anyone, and would give anyone a horrible time.

 

Bump!

 

Holy Mother of God back in the dizzay.

Some O.G posters in this thread.

 

If anyone could beat peak Hearns at 154lbs it's McCallum. I'm not sure who to pick to be honest.

 

I'd go with Hearns 154 was a really good weight for him, and McCallum had issues vs a poor mans Hearns in McCrory, and was totally outboxed by Kalambay.

McCallum is a great fighter but I think Hearns is just a notch above him.

 

I love Hearns, I really do.

But Mike has a style advantage here imo.

I pick him to break Hearns down and stop him in 7.