McCallum replaces Hearns against Duran and Hagler?

The guys Hagler fought were good fighter, just they didn't have a chance to be champions since Marvin held the title. Hagler would have beaten all the guys McCallum beat, and the one guy he lost to at middleweight. Vito and Hamsho and Minter and Fully Obel were good fighters. Fully Obel was later champion. Vito was champion before. Roldan gave Nunn and Hearns tough fights. Hagler had 10 title defenses.

 

I watched Mike all the time. He did not box around the ring normally and he did not have great head movement- but decent, but he had great reflexes-his fluid handspeed and stamina and bodypunching due to his 78 inch reach just overwhelmed guys and took their heart and he knew when to turn it on to win the fight. Great instincts. But he was not a guy who boxed consistently on his feet. He liked to use his counterpunching skills and speed to beat guys to the punch and wear them out. Something he could not have done with Hagler, and what would not work with Duran well in 1984.

 

I disagree with the fact that Duran was not as strong as Curry at 154. He was stronger. Duran was not weak at 154. Look at his fight with Cuevas. Duran could not deal with guys who moved and who had quick head movement like Benitez and Leonard. Hearns simply had quick hands and was too powerful and stopped Duran after landing right hands over and over for 2 rounds. Anyone Duran fought whom he could go 12 rounds with and who stood in front of him, Duran had a chance against. I have been saying on this board for 2 years now that Duran is all about styles. Barkley was made for him and the greats Hearns,Benitez,Leonard were too fast for him.

 

McCallum had fairly decent hand and footspeed but his reflexes could be off. Whenever he got hit it wasn't so much a technical misjudging as his reactions failing him. McCallum could use footwork quite effectively, though he wasn't exactly a fluid dancer, and he had seemingly endless stamina so he could keep it up for 15 rounds.

He had a great repertoire of punches, including some very unorthodox ones such as his looping counter right hand and the sneaky uppercut he used to throw. During the early part of his career he could be a little over-eager with these punches, but with his great stamina and balance it did not hurt him to miss as he would come back with 2 or 3 punches from awkward angles, which the Kalule fight is a great example of.

I just don't see a way for Duran to beat him. He would get the applause of the crowd with some sneaky right hands but aside from that it would be McCallum working him over for the most part.

Some early highlights of McCallum:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZQCoS4FSfk[/ame]

 

I'd pick Kalambay to beat Hagler from the Leonard fight.

 

I think McCallum is the most underrated fighter of the 80s and I think he beats both of these guys. Both by a decision. Against Duran I have him winning a wide decision due to his length. The Hagler vs McCallum would have been a war. Too bad we missed it. I think McCallum wins a very close decision in this one.

 

I think Mike could win a UD over Duran.

Hagler was coming off a win over Roldan but by Oct/Nov, was in top form again. I saw both the same night at the Garden and Marvin was in a form many levels above Mike. I think Marvin knocks him out

 

I think the Curry win is well underrated, yes Curry was coming off a loss but that was at 147 where he was weight drained. Curry put in a good performance and his defense, speed, movement was really good, and in a way a nightmare style for McCallum who had time him to the body and head before eventually catching up with him. I'd pick Curry to beat both Duran and Benitez at 154, he had nearly everything to be an ATG