Herol Graham: I don't get the love

For what it's worth, here are my scorecards on the second Graham-Kalambay fight and the Graham-McCallum fight.

Here was a damn good fight. The second Sumbu Kalambay - Herol Graham fight. I started to watch their first fight, but the second round was missing on youtube and I just stopped realizing it's probably highlights only, but then I saw this one. Fought in a small ring, which obviously favored Kalambay and I'm assuming the 10 point must system.

Round 1: 10-9 Graham
Round 2: 10-7 Graham (although I read about this fight, I just don't remember reading that Graham scored two knockdowns this round)
Round 3: 10-9 Kalambay
Round 4: 10-8 Kalambay (the ref didn't care for Graham's penchant for spinning his opponent. He warned him twice and then deducted a point)
Round 5: 10-10 Even
Round 6: 10-9 Graham
Round 7: 10-9 Graham
Round 8: 10-9 Graham
Round 9: 10-9 Kalambay
Round 10: 10-10 Even
Round 11: 10-9 Graham
Round 12: 10-8 Kalambay (I have no idea why Graham had this point deducted)

Total: 114-112 Graham - Definitely thought Herol deserved this one. But good fight and they fought their hearts out.



Round 1: 10-9 Graham
Round 2: 10-9 Graham
Round 3: 10-9 McCallum
Round 4: 10-9 Graham
Round 5: 10-8 Graham - The ref scored that as a knockdown. I don't agree, I think it was a slip but it was scored as such.
Round 6: 10-10 Even
Round 7: 10-9 McCallum
Round 8: 10-9 McCallum - I scored it even but one point deducted from Graham makes it 10-9.
Round 9: 10-9 McCallum
Round 10: 10-9 McCallum
Round 11: 10-9 McCallum
Round 12: 10-9 McCallum

115-113 McCallum - A tough fight to score, but it was the latter rounds that won it for McCallum on my card. They were both tiring, especially in the 11th and 12th, but McCallum's punches just had that much more pop to them.

 

Definitely agree that Herol was shafted in the Kalambay rematch.

Graham had skill in abundance and with a little more industriousness would have shaded the Mike McCallum bout and let's remember that Mike was an ATG. That shot from Jackson could have poleaxed anyone. One of those once in a lifetime things like the punch that Michael Nunn landed on Kalambay.

 

I think the first Kalambay fight was the pivotal moment. I don't think a fight with Hagler while he was champ was ever realistic, despite the British press having a bit of a push for it. Graham was well placed though to pick up a belt after Leonard vacated, and build his profile in the UK at a time when (IIRC) there were only two other titlists (Honeyghan and Marsh).

Graham was lined up to fight Barkley for the vacant WBA belt, and Kalambay was supposed to be a tune up. While in retrospect it was disastrous, Kalambay's only real foray into world class was his loss to Kalule who Graham handled pretty comfortably. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but did they need to take that risk at all with a title fight waiting in the wings?

I think Graham had the style to deal with Barkley, and he probably would have then been lined up to fight McCallum earlier than he did in reality. The margins were so fine when they actually fought that the added confidence from holding a belt, along with the champions edge, may have been enough to squeak past McCallum.

A lot of What Ifs, but all that said we still have to remember that Graham was 0-3 against elite fighters and there was probably a ceiling regardless of the path he took.

 

The hand of Barney " everything I touch I turns to dust" Eastwood.....

Has there ever been a more ruthless money hungry arrogant ruiner of careers.

Lets just take that little spell in the 80s.

He picks out Kalambay as a "safe" tune up for a herol graham already world number 1 and guaranteed one of the 6 slots at the 3 vacant belts.

he picks out steve cruz as a "safe "substitute and asks the pale white irishman Barry mcguigan to fight 15 roundsin the mid day vegas sun.

He falls out with dave boy McCauley, and every other fighter he ever handled.

 

He lost to one british fighter in an 18 year pro career.(Grant in a total burned out off night)

he lost to one fighter at European level in his 18 year (kalambay)

He lost one world title fight due to a pts deduction otherwise it was a draw against a ATG.

He lost a second world title fight when he was seconds from the referee stopping his blinded foe one of the hardest hitting one punch fighters in MW history

He lost a third world title fight at 38 after a 4 year layoff after scoring 2 knockdowns and was 4 minutes from a win

.herols had a tough time out of the ring youre very much entitled to your opinion and it will hold a lot of merit with some reference shoulda coulda woulda but its cool to be polite as boxers do read feedback and herol deserves respect

 

He was European champion by 1984 and being talked up here for a world title shot.....but Hagler never got around to it.

Lets imagine for arguments sake Hagler had retired after massacaring Hearns in 1985......that would leave 6 fighters to fight for the 3 vacant titles in the aftermath.....Tommy would be taking the rest of the year out.The pool of fighters to choose that 6 from as well as the 3 first title defences opponents would be:

Herol Graham
James Kinchen
Don Lee
John Mugabi
a still useful Tony Sibson
Juan Roldan
James Shuler
Doug DeWitt

Now I reckon the Herol of 1985 would fancy the job against any of those.....

Now look at what the pool was in 1987 after srl-hagler....of six fighters matched up for the vacant titles and than the 3 first defences..

Hearns
Mccallum
Kalambay
Barkley
Nunn
Tate
Olajide
a Roldan coming off the kinchen win
come backing Duran
A now shot Sibson

I think the second pool was farc stronger and Graham is not favoured anything like two years earlier just because the competition has improved that much rather than any decline in graham although i think his peak was in 1986

 

As far as I'm concerned he's 1-2 because the second Kalambay decision was appalling.

 

The fearsome ATG, Marvin Hagler was stripped of the WBA version of his undisputed Middleweight crown for ducking Herol Graham.

 

Sorry, I messed up a bit with that one. I forgot the second fight with Kalambay and by 0-3 was just referring to Kalambay I, McCallum and Jackson.

 

He was a very good fighter in an era of greats.

 

Then why bother posting that statement at all and say it's as simple as that when you say you already know the reaction that you always get, comes back with people always disagreeing with you?

 

Your an idiot it's as simple as that