Best Light Middleweight fighter: Mike McCallum, Winky Wright, or Terry Norris

Discrediting him is discussing how he did with lesser guys to demonstrate how he would not beat the fab 4 or that they did not duck him? You won't convince me, so if that is what your intent is then don't waste your time. I am just saying what I feel. He was technically sound and a smart fighter and economical. But those guys at their best were pretty good also.

 

Perfect post .

 

It changed little . we all know the timelines .. My point is the point .. they were all still fighting men in and out of the weight divisions but none wanted to go near McCallum. He was way too much risk for too little reward. None had to fight him but none felt compelled to fight the best either. In 85 Hagler fought Mugabi , a blown up one dimensional jj. Middleweight who never fought at 160 and was almost knocked out on national television by James Hardrock Green. Ray, when he chose to play, moved from super middleweight down again fighting guys like LaLonde and then Norris but would not go near McCallum. At the Kronk they all knew McCallum and Steward would not put Hearns with weak stamina and susceptibility to body blows against him. Again my point is of course they all navigated career roads but none went out of their way to fight him and they certainly could have..

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

Mc Callum

 

it is all maybe they didn't want to fight him. Mike was susceptible to jabs, and Hearns had a great one. I think Hearns would outbox him and win a 12 round decision at 154. And a UD at that. Surprisingly I think middleweight Mike might do better, but 175 I pick hearns. Who knows why. I think at 175 he fought smarter and slower pace than at the lower weights and it helped him go the distance more.. I don't think he trusted himself higher and it made him a smarter fighter. Whether they would go near him or not. Mike losing to Kalambay took away some of his bargaining leverage. He was on a roll after Donald and waited 9 months to fight and lost the fight.. So then that derailed his momentum for some time, and then Hagler retiring and Leonard retiring in May after Hagler, and Hearns losing to Barkley in June 1988. The chances were not great for a McCallum fight vs. the fab 4.

 

Agree

 

I agree there was not a huge window based on the timelines of the careers but nonetheless Mike was way too much risk for the reward. Especially at the point of the careers of the Fab 4. Post Hearns Duran entered a low point for years. Leonard was in and out of retirement and never would go near McCallum at that point. Hearns pretty much moved up post Duran to 160 and Hagler was all about big money at that time. Mike was all risk and for what ?

 

I agree with your points on McCallum.

But, you're off base on Mugabi.

He Kod Curtis Parker in 1 brutal round.

He was very dangerous, and proved his worth by giving Hagler a very tough fight.

And James Green had fought successfully at 160 lbs, beating the solid Wilford Sypion and almost stopping Animal Fletcher before getting badly cut and reacting badly to it.

 

McCallum for me. Skill wise it is the Fab 5 , not Fab 4

 

\Watch round three starting at the 12:30 mark .. Green had Mugabi out on his feet nd saved by the bell .. Green was a tough guy but not championship caliber. Mugabi was a network dream but a limited fighter and the vast majority of his wins came at 154. He fought a still very tough and dangerous but faded and slower Hagler and hung in for a gallant showing that proved as much about him as it did about what Hagler had left. Hagler looked so slow and hittable Ray Leonard chose to come out of retirement to fight Marvin based on that performance. Mugabi would go on the be decisively defeated in every major fight he'd have following the Hagler loss.

This content is protected

 

I agree Green fought well and hurt Mugabi
But, Mugabi recovered to win. It was a good test. I saw the fight live on NBC. I wanted Green to win.