The skillful Kalambay of the McCallum win against this assortment of Middle s? Jake Lamotta (15 rounds) Randy Turpin (15 rounds) Dick Tiger (15 rounds) Rodrigo Valdez (15 rounds) Vito Antuofermo (15 rounds) Thomas Hearn s (12 rounds) Roberto Duran (12 rounds)
Surprised at a couple of the opening remarks. Duran? I honestly think Kalambay would have stood him on his head. I'd take Sumbu over Antuofermo, and think he's 50:50 against La Motta and maybe Tiger based on styles, assuming all are at their 160 lb best (Tiger was a late bloomer, of course). Turpin is a difficult one, but I do feel that Randy gets occasionally overrated as a result of him just having the drop (to a degree) on Robinson. Feel he has a bit of the Norton or Barkley about him, in the sense that he wasn't quite at the elite level but benefits from a curious style advantage over an all-time great which gives him a bit more leeway than he deserves in hypothetical head-to-heads. I see no real reason why he should be an overwhelming favourite against Kalambay in any case. Valdez and Hearns start as favourite against him but I don't think Kalambay would be disgraced against either of them. If he fought all of these guys once apiece I think Kalambay could run up a respectable 4-3 or 3-3-1 ledger here.
I'm with you on this Chris. Those guys he's facing, whilst excellent fighter s, were beateble and Kalambay is a hard guy to beat at his best. I've got him beating Duran, Turpin, Ant, and maybe Tiger and Lamotta. Hearns, im not confident, I think Tommy out points him. Valdez beats him but it's a close thing. And Duran will really struggle imo, he beat Barkley by split decision, I don't see him getting one over Sumbu.
Kalambay would've beaten Valdez cleanly imo unless Rodrigo caught lightning in a bottle as he did against Briscoe. He had similar slick upper body movement, was even sharper defensively and just as good at countering with either hand. And he had much better feet and lateral movement, quicker and lighter. Valdez was monstrous if you tackled him head on and a bigger puncher than Kalambay with a better chin, but he was slow of foot and poor at cutting off the ring. Quite an easy fighter at the elite level to turn and force a reset upon. A fairly basic stick and move merchant like Robles was able to give him a lot of trouble, so I think it fairly likely that Kalambay would just outmanoevre him to take a safety first decision. Valdez was very faded against Corro but I think would've always struggled against that type of opponent, he just never looked comfortable with movement. Monzon was more flat-footed and slower on his feet than in his prime when he faced Valdez and never a pure mover anyway. I think Tiger might force a better fight because of his size, strength, work rate and quick hands but still drop a closeish but clear decision for the same reason. Too static and slow of foot against that type of fighter, though more successful than Valdez against movers and mobile types. Vito would probably put up a stern fight and be a potentially awkward night for Kalambay with that gritty, mauling approach but I don't think he's talented enough to win tbh, ultimately. Not enough clean punching from him. Turpin would probably lose on points too, I'm not sure that his awkwardness would throw Kalambay out of his stride enough. Kalambay was able to effectively track down Graham and land leads on him when Bomber tried his more evasive range of unorthodox manoevres and I don't think that that low stance of Randys would give him an edge if he tried making Kalambay miss like he did Robinson. I'll weigh in later 're Hearns, Duran and Jake. Ironically, it's Hearns the lanky non-career middleweight who I see being Kalambays biggest problem.
