Hearns v McCallum December 1984

AwardedSteak863 · Jan 29, 2019

I got McCallum. As much as I love Hearns I don't think he is going to get McCallum out of there. Aside from being amazing defensively Mike had a chin of steel. With that said, I could see Mike breaking him down as the fight wore on.

AwardedSteak863 · Jan 29, 2019

The Morlocks said: ↑

Hearns KO 4. NOBODY was coming close to Hearns at that time in jrmiddleweight history. That is what the special ones do.
Click to expand...

I don't know man. I can't recall ever seeing McCallum hurt bad in a fight let alone get knocked out out. I won't argue if someone thinks Hearns would win but I can't see anyone at 154 knocking Mcallum out. He fought al the way up to Cruiserweight and I don't believe was ever off his feet.

My coach used to have us watch both Hearns and McCallum film back in the early 90's. He always said those two were the best matchup that never happened in boxing history.

thanosone · Jan 29, 2019

Hitman's body and McCallum's body attack. Hmmm
Doubt hearns ko's him. Was McCallum ever dropped? I think he was hurt plenty but that was when he was older and not at 154.

PernellSweetPea · Jan 29, 2019

I think it would be tactical. They both dominated Minchillo. I think Hearns was fast and his jab would be the difference as in the sparring. I think Hearns won that sparring. I think Hearns wins a UD or Split, but he wins a close decision at that stage.

salsanchezfan · Jan 29, 2019

I agree that it would be tactical. Hearns saw Cuevas and Duran were slow to react and left him openings so he came forward and bombed . Against a fast, slick athletic fighter who could react quickly and make him pay, he got more tactical, as against Leonard and Benitez. I see McCallum as more the latter type than the former. This one goes to the cards for sure.

TBI · Jan 29, 2019

88Chris05 said: ↑

Have pondered this one plenty of times myself. I'm sure we're all familiar with the story that Manny Steward, having seen both men at the Kronk, had grave doubts about whether Hearns could beat McCallum, and in the end Steward's love-in with Tommy was enough to help make up McCallum's mind that he needed to look elsewhere to progress his career. Hears had unbelievable physical talent, but his ring IQ wasn't the best and if he was aware of Steward's concerns, you'd have to wonder how this might affect things. Could be one of those fights which is won in the head as much as anything else.

Hearns has the range and jab to give McCallum stylistic problems, whereas McCallum has the inside game and a nice, long Hearns body to go at with his fearsome body punching. Could Hearns stop McCallum? The Bodysnatcher was as tough as they come, as evidenced against Jackson, but I'm mindful that he was out on his feet and saved by the bell at the end of his first fight against Toney, albeit that was at 160 and McCallum was a little older by then. If Hearns boxes smart, waits for the right opportunity and sizes McCallum up for the perfect right hand as McCallum follows him around the ring (like the ones which took out Shuler and Roldan), then I don't totally rule out the possibility of him stopping McCallum. But if he just goes gung-ho and tries to come out on top in a wild brawl, I think it's Hearns who loses inside-schedule. Hearns would be better off utilising a similar blueprint to the one he beat Benitez with.

Also, are we talking over twelve or fifteen rounds here? By 1984, the WBC were operating over the twelve round distance (I believe), whereas the WBA didn't join them in doing so until 1987 (again, if memory serves correctly). Over twelve, I think Hearns survives a few scary moments to win the decision. But over fifteen, I think McCallum has just enough time to close the distance, wear Hearns down (he had the better engine for long fights) and force a stoppage while still a shade behind on the cards.
Click to expand...

Excellent post.

JohnThomas1 · Jan 29, 2019

McCallum would have trouble with the speed of Hearns. Going against convention I would not be surprised if Hearns got him out of there. His confidence and form at the time was ridiculous and I can see him springing a surprise KO for the second time in a row.

PernellSweetPea · Jan 29, 2019

salsanchezfan said: ↑

I agree that it would be tactical. Hearns saw Cuevas and Duran were slow to react and left him openings so he came forward and bombed . Against a fast, slick athletic fighter who could react quickly and make him pay, he got more tactical, as against Leonard and Benitez. I see McCallum as more the latter type than the former. This one goes to the cards for sure.
Click to expand...

This is probably true. I think the Hearn's jab would be the biggest factor in beating McCallum. McCrory did well with his jab against Mike in 1987, and Tommy had better jab which was 3 1/2 inches longer. I think the speed of Hearns jab would keep Mike on the outside, and Tommy would have to use it a lot and consistently and I think he would. Mike would try to get inside and have some success, but Tommy jab and speed would be the difference. In 1984 Hearns was still fresh. This was before Hagler and at a weight where he was still unique in his reach and height and speed. At middleweight he started to struggle. Perhaps it was the age or maybe the extra weight being too much for legs to handle, since his legs were never big.. I remember when he fought Virgil Hill. he stopped doing a lot of road work and concentrated more on not using his legs so he could use his jab and control the action without getting tired. It was a tactic which worked well for him when he got older.

Saad54 · Jan 29, 2019

The Morlocks said: ↑

Hearns KO 4. NOBODY was coming close to Hearns at that time in jrmiddleweight history. That is what the special ones do.
Click to expand...

Minchillo lasts the full 12, but McCallum gets starched in four?

No

Jel · Jan 29, 2019

JohnThomas1 said: ↑

McCallum would have trouble with the speed of Hearns. Going against convention I would not be surprised if Hearns got him out of there. His confidence and form at the time was ridiculous and I can see him springing a surprise KO for the second time in a row.
Click to expand...

That's exactly why I picked that moment in time for the matchup. Hearns was probably at his absolute peak as a fighter at that point. Make the matchup a year later, after Hearns' defeat to Hagler, and I think the result would be different, with McCallum having bedded in as a champion by that point and Hearns no longer riding the crest of a wave like he was in '84. So, I'd favour Hearns in December '84 but McCallum in December '85.

Jel · Jan 29, 2019

88Chris05 said: ↑

Have pondered this one plenty of times myself. I'm sure we're all familiar with the story that Manny Steward, having seen both men at the Kronk, had grave doubts about whether Hearns could beat McCallum, and in the end Steward's love-in with Tommy was enough to help make up McCallum's mind that he needed to look elsewhere to progress his career. Hears had unbelievable physical talent, but his ring IQ wasn't the best and if he was aware of Steward's concerns, you'd have to wonder how this might affect things. Could be one of those fights which is won in the head as much as anything else.

Hearns has the range and jab to give McCallum stylistic problems, whereas McCallum has the inside game and a nice, long Hearns body to go at with his fearsome body punching. Could Hearns stop McCallum? The Bodysnatcher was as tough as they come, as evidenced against Jackson, but I'm mindful that he was out on his feet and saved by the bell at the end of his first fight against Toney, albeit that was at 160 and McCallum was a little older by then. If Hearns boxes smart, waits for the right opportunity and sizes McCallum up for the perfect right hand as McCallum follows him around the ring (like the ones which took out Shuler and Roldan), then I don't totally rule out the possibility of him stopping McCallum. But if he just goes gung-ho and tries to come out on top in a wild brawl, I think it's Hearns who loses inside-schedule. Hearns would be better off utilising a similar blueprint to the one he beat Benitez with.

Also, are we talking over twelve or fifteen rounds here? By 1984, the WBC were operating over the twelve round distance (I believe), whereas the WBA didn't join them in doing so until 1987 (again, if memory serves correctly). Over twelve, I think Hearns survives a few scary moments to win the decision. But over fifteen, I think McCallum has just enough time to close the distance, wear Hearns down (he had the better engine for long fights) and force a stoppage while still a shade behind on the cards.
Click to expand...

Outstanding post and an important point about the scheduled distance which I'd neglected in my original post. I think had it happened, the WBC would have insisted on 12 rounds so pretty sure it would have had to take place at the shorter distance.

But this is a fantasy fight, so I'm going with 15 rounds!

Jel · Jan 29, 2019

Saad54 said: ↑

McCallum KO 12 Hearns

No way Hearns was gonna risk the Hagler superfight, though.

The easy ko of Duran by Hearns, after Hagler had struggled with Duran, made the demand for Hagler/Hearns off the charts.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the timing of the matchup is pure fantasy. This would have been potential career suicide for Hearns. The risk was far too large and the Hagler fight was already signed by that point.

The reason I chose that time was because I think Hearns was at his peak and confidence was sky high. The fight legitimately could have been made a year or so later, in late 1985 or early '86, but Hearns had lost to Hagler at that point and was regrouping, so, again, probably the wrong fight at the wrong time. By June '86, when Hearns fought Medal, it seems clear to me that Hearns was struggling to make light middleweight and had outgrown the division.

Still, of all the gripes McCallum has about being "ducked" by the Fab Four, I think his case is strongest against Hearns.

Jel · Jan 29, 2019

Eddie Ezzard said: ↑

I see Tommy winning a clear decision. McCallum could be outboxed, albeit only by the finest but if Curry, temporarily, or Kalambay, over 12 rds, could do it, then so could Hearns, especially if the fight is for his WBC belt and over 12 rds, rather than over 15 for McCallum's.

Mike had a great body attack and Hearns proved susceptible to this against Hagler but Marvin had to go into Tommy's wheelhouse to exploit it and I never saw Mike show he could do that. He'd try and outslick Tommy but, in 84, Tommy was as slick as they come. To beat Tommy, you had to go hell for leather (Leonard, Hagler, Barkley) and that wasn't Mike's game.

Mike took 10 rds to break down Milton McCrory when he was three years more experienced and Tommy is a much better fighter than Milt. He would be jabbing McCallum off balance and putting in the odd rib breaker of his own, Tommy was no slouch when it came to body shots and Mike was rangy too at 154. He had a great chin but a good body shot might have been his Kryptonite.

I suppose, in a battle between two elite performers, it comes down to who is capable of that truly great display. In this match up, I see that being Tommy. Mike put in lots of 7 or 8/10 displays over time and against good opposition; Tommy didn't quite have the same longevity where he was dominant and he had the odd stinker - a 5 or 6/10 - but also had the odd 10/10 in his locker, if that makes sense. And around 1984, he was in the kind of form where that kind of display was well within his reach.

Over time, Mike proved to be the steadier, more consistent champ. But in a one-off fight where it came down to who could burn brightest for a short while, for me, that would be Tommy. He carried himself like a man who belonged at the top and it could be that extra bit of belief that sees him let his hands go and make the action in what would otherwise be a highly skilled, strategic chess match.

All only an opinion and not one I anticipate 100% agreement with.
Click to expand...

Really good post and one I fully agree with. In a fight between two very well matched fighters like these, it's likely that the intangibles you mention would make the difference.

In the second half of 1984, Hearns was operating on another level and it may be that extra sparkle of self-belief that he had at that point that sees him winning a fight against Mike, the more consistent but steady operator.

The point about Mike's consistency v Hearn's highest level of performance is persuasive. At 154 at that precise point in time, Hearns just had this blend of speed, power and sheer physical presence that would have been difficult for anyone, even a fighter as good as Mike, to overcome. He was the perfect fit for that division at that point in his career. It's also why people gave him a legitimate chance of beating Hagler.

Jel · Jan 29, 2019

mark ant said: ↑

This content is protected

Click to expand...

Do we know exactly what time this sparring footage is taken from?

Jel · Jan 29, 2019

AwardedSteak863 said: ↑

My coach used to have us watch both Hearns and McCallum film back in the early 90's. He always said those two were the best matchup that never happened in boxing history.
Click to expand...

Your coach may well be right.

Log in or Sign up

Hearns v McCallum December 1984

Who wins in December '84

The Hitman

The Bodysnatcher

AwardedSteak863 Boxing Addict Full Member

AwardedSteak863 Boxing Addict Full Member

thanosone Love Your Brother Man Full Member

PernellSweetPea Boxing Junkie Full Member

salsanchezfan Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

TBI Active Member Full Member

JohnThomas1 VIP Member

PernellSweetPea Boxing Junkie Full Member

Saad54 Boxing Junkie Full Member

Jel Obsessive list maker Full Member

Jel Obsessive list maker Full Member

Jel Obsessive list maker Full Member

Jel Obsessive list maker Full Member

Jel Obsessive list maker Full Member

Jel Obsessive list maker Full Member

Log in or Sign up

Forums

Hearns v McCallum December 1984

Who wins in December '84

The Hitman

The Bodysnatcher

AwardedSteak863 Boxing Addict Full Member

AwardedSteak863 Boxing Addict Full Member

thanosone Love Your Brother Man Full Member

PernellSweetPea Boxing Junkie Full Member

salsanchezfan Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

TBI Active Member Full Member

JohnThomas1 VIP Member

PernellSweetPea Boxing Junkie Full Member

Saad54 Boxing Junkie Full Member

Jel Obsessive list maker Full Member

Jel Obsessive list maker Full Member

Jel Obsessive list maker Full Member

Jel Obsessive list maker Full Member

Jel Obsessive list maker Full Member

Jel Obsessive list maker Full Member