McCallum vs Canelo at 160?

Canelo 7-5 or 8-4. He was really good at 160.

 

I'm gonna go with Mc too but I think Clenelo has a strong chance to win.

 

I knew that you’d come and type this.

We’ve had some great, technical breakdowns from various posters, and then here you are.

Canelo wasn’t as skilled as Mike, and he’d have had no stylistic advantages.

So why on earth would you think that he’d have won 8 rounds??

Based off of what exactly?

Mike beat Collins. He systematically broke down a prime Michael Watson. He could very well have beaten James Toney at his best.

Whereas Canelo barely beat Trout and Lara, before moving up and beating a faded Cotto, before then getting a gift draw against GGG.

 

Based off CJ Ross and Adalaide Byrd, perhaps ? )

 

It would be a great fight. I don´t rank Canelo all that high but I think this fight is good for him... McCallum would trade punches, win the exchanges but Canelo is a good combo guy, I give him that much... he most certainly would win a few rounds and make it competitive.

 

He beat GGG and Jacobs, pal.

 

He was incredibly lucky to get a draw in their first fight.

Danny Jacobs?

Mike beat Collins, Kalambay, Graham and Watson at the weight, and almost beat a prime Toney.

Canelo never proved himself to be a better MW than Mike.

He would also have given up height and reach, and he wasn’t as technically skilled.

He also wouldn’t have had any stylistic advantages in the fight.

So unless you’re hinting at a corrupt decision, why on earth would you have favoured Canelo to have won 8-4??

He wasn’t good enough to have beaten Mike by a margin like that.

 

Sure.

A corrupt decision is the only way that he could have beaten Mike by a margin of 8-4.

The guy was a genius.

Canelo has done nothing to have been favoured like that.

Just a different level of fighter.

 

Nelo is too slick. Always was, always has been.

You’re just pushing your UK centric agenda because McCallum whooped your boys.

 

I'll give a dissenting opinion and say I think Canelo has a decent chance of winning this fight. The version of Canelo that fought intermittently at 160 from the Cotto fight to the Jacobs fight was him at his best imo. He was at his best weight and had the best blend of the combos he threw as a younger man and the explosive counter-punching he mastered at 168. McCallum was an exemplary fighter but he was pretty late to arrive at 160 and didn't carry his power up all too well. Canelo is incredibly slick, very defensively savvy, and he forces openings in his opponent's guard in very sneaky ways. If McCallum is too over-zealous in exchanging and giving Canelo opportunities, then I could very well imagine Canelo punching through McCallum's offence. McCallum would need to fight an incredibly disciplined fight to win this, using his jab and movement but, honestly, I think Canelo would have found a way to land his counters and exploit some of the flaws Kalambay found. I'd take McCallum at 154 though.

 

Don’t be ridiculous.

A young Canelo couldn’t win a round off of Floyd.

Again, he barely beat Lara and Trout.

He then moved up and beat a faded Cotto and GGG.

Too slick for Mike?

Against a guy who beat Graham, Kalambay, Curry and Kalule?

Ha!

Are you for real?

It’s just another one of your ridiculous opinions, with no thought given.

Just basically favouring the more modern fighter.

 

I like Mike !

 

There wasn't any significant difference physically or power-wise between 154 and 160 for Mike, imo. It's not as if he was a regularly knocking good fighters out without needing to land too much there, he was always a solid hitting accumulation guy, just a also a sharp enough one that meant he could occasionally surpise with something more sudden.

the main difference is that at 160 his competition got notably tougher on a fight by fight basis and he no longer regularly had clear size and strength advantages. The guy was huge at 154 for same day weigh-in standards and cutting down to get there, whereas fighters like Minchillo, Skouma, and probably Braxton would have gone to Welterweight for the first half of their careers if they had to choose only between 147 or 160. McCrory and Curry were natural Welters too, ones that only started to outgrow the division after circa half a decade. Curry is really the only sudden knockout of a world level opponent he has at 154, but imo that punch being so effective was because Curry switched off with his defensive awareness while backing straight out of an exchange. He'd probably still have been dropped/staggered even if he took it fully aware, if not outright KO'ed, but that's because he was a natural Welter that never had more than a generically solid world class contender type of chin at 147, not because McCallum had a devastating hook that was lost when he started fighting talented fighters that were his own size. You can see him badly stagger Graham when he lands a hook in a very similar low-hands backing straight up situation, however unlike Curry, Graham saw it coming. He had Collins in some trouble during the mid-rounds of their bout too, albeit couldn't sustain it. That McCallum is not going to have any more trouble getting another hurtable, decent chinned guy like Jackson in trouble than he did when they actually fought. A slightly bigger and durable guy of limited ability like Shawn Mannion had no trouble going fifteen with 154 Mike.

imo, 154 presented managers and fighters with an often too temptingly easy option for winning belts against perceived easier opposition, which saw quite a lot fighters take that a path of lesser resistance that sometimes didn't actually suit them physically (Kalule despite already consistently beating established middleweights ruined his prime cutting down to 154 and staying too long while taking weight-drained beatings against Moore and McCallum all because his manager knew it was the easier route to a title), or did a disservice to their ability level. McCallum should always have been fighting at middle if he wanted to maximise his legacy, then maybe with a bit of good fortune he would have got his shot at Hagler, who he would later unjustly accuse of not wanting to fight him. Graham and Kalambay also fought often at 154 at the same time McCallum was there btw despite being comfortable natural middleweights, they could all have theoretically fought each other in the early-mid '80s there.

Why does McCallum need to fight an incredibly disciplined fight? I'm guessing it's because of that 10-15lb weight advantage? I think some other posters are a bit too cavalier in dismissing it, but not to that point... the styles, even outside of a "both have the same weigh-in restrictions" scenario actually still give him some clear breathing space to take risks and open up frequently as far as I see it. Canelo has very little chance of hurting him, he's notably lower output, lesser reach/ jabbing prowess, and will be right there to exchange with. While standing in range and balanced to punch, he's a well-schooled, aesthetically pleasing slip/block and counter fighter with his upperbody movement (less so from the at using his knees in conjunction with upperbody to change defensive levels, or his feet defensively in general), but "incredibly slick" is seriously stretching things - it's McCallum that is the slicker, more consistent counterpuncher imo. I think it's Canelo that has less room for error here if he wants to consistently get the better of the exchanges to the extent he wins on points, which is the issue, not being able to get a decent amount of punches through. I've no doubt he'll be able to tag Mike with some eye catching punches, but that will go both ways and not at a favourable rate for him.

Incidentally I've been watching some of his more recent fights that I missed. The Bivol one, just last night...he's in there against a well-schooled, economical and accurate textbook fighter, one that he doesn't have a size or strength advantage on and looks anything but very slick, or even hard to hit. That's the sort of fight, where being past his physical peak and not as imposing athletically as he is at 160/ 168, he should have been pulling out all the stops to fight a smart technical fight, yet his ability to get that slip and counter game going in conjunction with effective footwork on the front foot that would allow to land effective leads at a reasonable rate (if not combinations) was seriously lacking.

 

I'd take Canelo. While he doesn't have the workrate of McCallum, I feel that he integrates offence and defence better than Toney and that he carries a great deal of power at 160. He really knows how to pick his spots to explode on a guy and he feeds off dudes that come to him. Golovkin, who is a top tier body puncher was remarkably subdued when it came to going to Canelo's body, and I believe that is because he wasn't keen on getting countered. McCallum will have similar problems. Canelo carries a lot of speed and accuracy and that's something that has always counted heavily for him.