Can anyone tell me about this bout?Was it close ? Did pyatt win easily or did Kalambay present problems for Pyatt?
Kalambay suffered a little bit of his own medicine if I remember correctly, and perhaps deserved the nod as the defending champion. It was very close, although that was in part due to Pyatt's lack of confidence in his own ability; Kalambay was fighting purely on memory.
Pyatt was lucky as **** catching Kalambay at that point. Half a decade earlier and he would have been comprehensively outclassed. Kalambay was excellent, truely underrated.
On a H2H basis at middleweight they were evenly matched as their fights show. Overall McCallum is bound to be rated higher. He has a superior resume, and is surely one of the most outstanding 154lb fighters. His exploits at middleweight up to 168 where he gave a supposedly "prime" Toney hell speak wonders for his ability as a fighter. Kalambay's resume is good in itself.
Not many people were willing to fight Herol Graham at all, so to get in there twice shows some balls.
He deserved his wins over Graham. A tough guy to outpoint but he did it. He was an excellent technical fighter for sure. Add to wins over Barkley, DeWitt, Sims, McCallum and even Steve Collins when he was past his peak...makes a solid resume. He deserved a rematch with Nunn, too. That fight puts a dark cloud over his resume but most people know it was essentially a fluke. It would never happen again, 99 out of 100 times that would not happen again and it would be a close fight.
I recall one of the fights being a very close affair though that could have gone either way..... can't remember whether it was the first one or second..... Collins did an interview in Boxing Monthly, and said that he felt Kalambay wasn't much behind McCallum - bearing in mind Kalambay was past his best at the time and McCallum was at his peak, it would suggest they are pretty much equal.
The fight could have gone either way, as Pyatt faded towards the end. kalambay looked an old washed up fighter in this fight though, getting by just on craftiness and a still good defence.
Graham was the victim of a hometown decision in their rematch, he won at least eight rounds. The first fight Kalambay won easily.
Never saw the fight myself but I remember at the time many people felt Graham was ripped off. (in the 2nd fight)
Graham got the hell beaten out of him in the rematch, busted up over both eyes and staggered about 6 times at least.I certainyl don't think he won at least eight rounds. What he did do was win the first and get a 10-7 in the second which gave him a four point cushion.kalambya had the better of the rest of the fight, with Graham sneaking enough rounds where he could have legitimately got the decision by a point or two.I don't think it was really a robbery in terms of competitiveness or scoring...more of a Pac vs Marquez 1 kind of fight. The real controversy seemed to be that the ref was corrupt, taking two unjustified points off Graham to cancel out the early knockdowns. Both fighters looked shot in this fight imo.A brutal slugfest where they both showed massively deteriorated skills and physical ability.Graham's punch resistance had obviously evaporated after the Jackson KO.
I never said he only won 2 rounds. He won the first two, the second being a 10-7.though actually the first round might have been a more or less even round, i'd need to watch it again. Kalambay won the majority of the rounds after that imo, with Graham doing enough where the two knockdowns in the second may have given him enough extra points for close win. It was more of a debatable could have gone either way fight than an outright robbery.Both fighters looked like ****. The real injustice was the corrupt ref, though i didn't count the points he took away from Graham when i scored it.
