Alan Minter vs Sumbu Kalambay

What's with all the fantasy match-ups? They seem recycled and therefore will be probably be treated as such.

I don't know who wins this, but I'd like to see more of them both. I'd be doing Kalambay a great disservice if I judged him on minimal highlights and his devastating knockout defeat at the hands of Michael Nunn. He was surely better than that.

 

I'd say the southpaw Minter takes it on points. But it's not a given, as Alan is also cut-prone.

 

Kalambay had problems with southpaws, so it could be troubling for him, but then again I just see him as the superior boxer. Minter likely won't knock Kalambay out and it would be very difficult for him to win on points, although he could pull it off. Kalambay on the other hand could stop Minter on cuts along with outboxing him for a clear decision win.

 

Minter was a superb boxer with an excellent jab,supremly fit & could breeze through 15 rounds. It's just one of those cases of a fighter being remembered for his devastating loss to Hagler as is Michael Spinks for getting wiped out in 92 seconds by Tyson. Minter would handle Kalambay but Alan's always had trouble with cuts due to his instintive desire to have a tear-up which has always led to him getting his eyes chopped up, he's one of those underated champions who would have done well for a few years IMO if it was'nt for the fact that Hagler was on the scene.

 

Yeah. Minter would beat Kalambay along the stretch,if he'd focus on boxing his man,rather than seeing the red mist and getting too involved in a tear up. Alan was one of our best,and I thought he was unlucky not to get the nod in the Hamsho fight. Mind you,he was a little past his best by this time. I can't imagine him losing to Sibson if Alan had been a couple of years younger. Even though Sibbo caught him with a peach of a punch.

 

Well he twice beat 1 of the trickest ones in Graham and I heard the Kalule fight wasn't completely on the level and he deserved the nod.

I'd go with Kalambay in a UD or by cuts, Minter doesn't really go under the 'tricky southpaw' banner and Kalambay's defense and skills seem a level above here, it also seems performed better against the best, Nunn aside.

 

I think you've got that ass backwards. Kalambay was one the finest pure boxing technicians of the last 30 years. No way is Minter winning on points by fencing with the African. Even if he did manage to drop him at some point in the fight, which is a possibility, I don't think he could sustain any prolongued success against such a poised boxer as Kalambay.

 

The Kalule and Graham fights were still razor-close though. Michael Nunn of course knocked him stiff in one round, but that could be attributed to him getting caught cold, not the southpaw style (although Nunn's big left hand came from an angle the usually elusive Kalambay did not see coming).

 

I think Minter can often get underrated, but he's certainly not going to outbox kalambay.

He was imo at his best as an aggressive measured boxer-puncher, throwing loads of quality one-twos and awkward pacquio-esque lead left hands.While he could sit back and box well behind the jab, he was too hittable doing that to win against the better cuties and pure boxers.Kevin Finnegan and Ronnie Harris both got the better of the pure boxing with him and Sugar Ray Seales was doing well there too, until Minter got more aggressive and starched him with a big left.

The best gameplan to trouble kalambay would be steady pressure high-volume straight punching, don't try any slower paced finesse stuff.Minimalist accurate one-two's are often a really good way to fight against a backfoot/counerpunching defensive specialist, but ultimately Minter is too easy to hit coming forward or boxing, and too erratic a ring-general .I'd expect him to have his moments if he fights the right kind of fight, but be comfortably outpointed or stopped on cuts.Could also end up a schooling if he gets frustrated and loses his form, as he was want to do.

I'm not so sure about the Kalambay had problems with southpaws either.At least not distinct problems with the stance itself.He fought Kalule in a typically italian poor quality slippy small ring which made for some awkwardness at times, but whatever your thoughts on the decision i tend to think Kalule was just a really tough fighter for any pure boxer-type to face.And this was a much sharper one than the guy that fought Moore or McCallum imo.160 was his ideal weight.

IMO he beat Graham widely in their first fight(well he won almost all of the 8 rounds we have on the fight at least) and looked great, despite Carpenter's brutally biased commentary.The second controversial fight was two much older past prime fighters, where both had lost much of their reflexes and kalambay looked to have lost most of his accuracy and offensive sharpness; the struggle here looked much more to do with age and declining ability.Graham got beaten up by British level Frank Grant in his next fight, and Kalambay managed a surprisingly great defensive performance against Collins where he was still pretty inactive, before looking **** against Pyatt and retiring.

The nunn fight needs no explaining, but i tend to see any struggle in these fights being more to do with other factors rather than the fact they were southpaws.If he had struggled notably with Graham and Simms(from memory i think he was a southpaw) i would probably agree.He did like his lead uppercuts mind you, and those are tougher to land against southpaws unless you are throwing to the body.

 

I don't know, unless Kalambay lost all 4 rounds we don't get to see, that fight was a lopsided one imo.Graham pressured relentlessly and didn't clown for a second(should have fought with this level of focus against McCallum imo), but he was very rarely landing any quality shots.Most of his lefts were largely partially deflected by the high right glove, slipped or rolled with and that was bout the only powershot he was throwing.Kalambay was landing his right flush far more frequently, while getting much the better of any jabbing.

You could maybe give Graham a couple of the late rounds based on workrate and being the aggressor, but it's a reach.then again i seem to be the only one who sees that fight this way from what i've read on here.Maybe i'll give it another watch, but having last watched it about a year ago it's still quite fresh in the memory.

 

I think it would be fair to say that he had problems with southpaws, as the three most troubling opponents he faced in his prime were Nunn, Graham and Kalule. Whether it was the stance that gave him problems or just those three particular opponents is a different matter though. Again, I don't see Kalambay having any particular difficulties with Minter's southpaw style. He's not going to get outboxed and the chances of a knockout are slim.

Kalambay's counter punches also carried some power so it might not be in Minter's best interests to get too aggressive and reckless in an attempt to make it a rough fight.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftAtnL9Og6U[/ame]

 

Gotta favour Kalambay. A little bit to slick for Minter. AM would pressure him and would have some success but I can see SK countering him all night. This is a very good match up as Minter would be dangerous throughout.