Fights that didn't happen: Sugar Ray Leonard v Mike McCallum

Yeah, Leonard by a close decision.

 

Ah. I really can't decide. Could go either way. McCallum was so versatile, and Leonard was extraordinary.

I wonder why the Fab 5 didn't fight McCallum? Did they duck him? Unfortunately, I'm a bit ignorant in that regard.

 

Oh, thanks. Those reasons make sense.

 

Same as Duran as far as I'm concerned. Mike just too good for him, and Tommy. I can also see him beating Hagler if he had been in the ring with him in November 83 instead of Roberto. Duran was leading on points after 12 rounds and even 13 on one judges card. No way would McCallum have gassed, and no way Marvin KO's him. I see Mike winning that fight that night, by a couple of points.

 

If he gets by Hagler, he might as well go for Spinks then. And he was probably a little too smooth for Spinks. Might as well go for Carlos Deleon at that point (sarcasm). He wouldn't have beat Hagler in '83 anyway, but the fight couldn't have happened in '83 because the casual boxing fan didn't know who the **** he was in '83.
The Fab Four didn't fight McCallum because they were too busy making millions fighting each other. Why fight McCallum for 3 to 500,000? Not to suggest in any way they were ducking him. They were big game hunters looking to maximize their profit. McCallum was champ of the lightly regarded IBF fighting the likes of Luigi Minchillo and Sean Mannion. He wasn't worth Duran shedding 30lbs in the timeframe being discussed. McCallum wasn't really a big name until he stopped Curry in 87. Wasn't much left of the Fab Four by then.

Prime for prime I think Leonard would beat McCallum 145-140ish with a couple anxious moments.

 

I think prime for prime, Leonard would win a decision. I think his speed advantage would be the difference. I think if they had actually fought, say in 1984 after Leonard beat Howard, or 1987 when Leonard came back after a layoff - McCallum would win a decision at either of those junctures.

 

That is merely your opinion.Mine is the opposite. Hagler showed far too much respect to the former Lightweight Duran, who did NOT possess the skills, power, or sheer presence of McCallum. Again if that was a 12 round fight Duran had it won. McCallum would not have had a problem with the last 3 rounds the way Duran did.

I am not remotely interested in the politics of why they all avoided Mike, just that they certainly did. Funny how Hagler was willing to take the L / Middle Mugabi in 86, but he wasn't interested in McCallum who was also unbeaten, and ended up KO ing Jackson in the same year.

How convenient that Hagler retires after Leonard, and Leonard goes up to fight some Canadian that no one ever knew about, and Tommy decides he wants to be either a Light Heavy or a S / Middle after McCallum destroyed both McCrory, and Curry in 87, and was looking for a move to 160.

Duran gets a pass, because he couldn't beat McCallum as long as his ass points downward's.

 

Hagler fought Mugabi, because Mugabi was connected and hyped, somehow acquiring an undeserved number 1 contender rating across the board if i remember correctly.

He'd have fought McCallum instead if Mike had those kind of connections, it's not like he was in a habit of ducking his mandatories or number 1 contenders.

The bigger issue between the two of them not fighting is McCallum staying far too long cutting weight at a less relevant junior weight class.He had the frame and size to have moved up from 154 boutsafter 2-3 years, same as Kalambay etc did, and really should have if he was looking for a Hagler fight.His 154 belt was irrelevant compared to being undisputed middleweight champ.He would have needed a big fight win or two earlier(which as we saw being high risk\low reward was hard to get in a fractured 154 division), been well connected, or already an established star of the sport to get a Hagler fight from lower in weight.....if he had fought at 160 from earlier on and just taken on a few contenders like Hamsho etc then he could easily have forced the fight himself.