How highly do you rate Mike McCallum?

odd thing for someone called Sanders to say.

just an observation. RIP Corrie

 

Kalule, Jackson, McCrory, Curry, Graham, Collins, Watson, Kalambay and Harding is a good list of names from 154 to 175. And if you, like me, believe he should have won the decision in the Toney rematch (no complaints if he had lost the first, though), it gets better still.

The loss to Kalambay is the black mark on his resume, really, seeing how one-sided it was, with McCallum still in his prime.

 

Mccallum was an excellent fighter I don't think he beats Hagler or SRL. Hearns ? Possibly Duran maybe .Would be a very tough time for all involved.Not enough money and too risky.I'm surprised no one has mentioned Sumbu Kalamby in the stream? .Beat Mike convincingly lost the rematch on a very tight decision .Truly a forgotten master.

 

I wonder if McCallum had turned pro a little younger whether he might have been in a better position for one of the bigger fights with likes of Hearns and Hagler. He was 24 when he turned pro in early '81 and made quick progress to get his title shot in '84. Had he turned pro in '77 or '78 he might have been well-established as a champion by 84/85 and in position to get one of those big fights.

 

Hagler could have fought him in 84 and 85 but didn't .. he fought Hearns ( a jr middleweight ) and Mugabi ( another) .. Mike was always one of those guys too dangerous fight without enough reward ..

 

Talk about revisionism ... McCallum was the top rated jr middle in the world in 85 and 86 and the champion .. Mugabi was a television gimmick.

 

You're clearly a first hand expert on low IQ's ..

 

Sorry mate, don't shoot the messenger. I'm just passing on reliable info from a gypsy who I ran into with my pedalo. Sorry for your pain.

 

McCallum didn't fight at 160 lbs until '86 and then just vs. a journeyman (Jim Shavers). Trust me. There was never any talk in the Mags. about McCallum/Hagler in the 1984/1985 time frame. There was talk of McCallum/Duran and McCallum/Hearns.

 

By the end of 85, Mike had beaten Mannion in an uninspiring snoozer in his first big fight, Minchillo and David Braxton at 154. Why you think that qualifies him for a punt at Hagler I'll never know. Hearns had beaten Cuevas, Benitez, Duran and a slew of other contenders from 147 to 154, he was a star by that point whereas Mike was obscure and unproven in comparison. Mugabi had backing from Mickey Duff and put arses on seats with his KO power and aggressive style. Even disregarding the difference in financial pulling power, McCallum was no more worthy of a shot than Mugabi based on opponents defeated. Nobody knew at the time that Hagler would ruin Mugabi and finish him as a top fighter so quickly and that McCallum would go on to become by far the greater fighter at a later point. Hindsight is a fine thing and you're using it to accord McCallum the status in 1985 that he enjoys today but didn't enjoy at the time.

 

It had a slide on it. Helpful or amping up the dodgyness?

 

Outside of Watson, Kalambay II, Curry, Toney etc, I'd recommend his scrap with the dangerous and talented yet unpredictable big hitter Said Skouma.[/QUOTE]

 

You would be absolutely wrong. Cut the Historian gimmick, it doesn't suit you at all. You are an agenda driven revisionist. Mugabi was the #1 contender in both divisions when Hagler returned from his back injury and fought him. Mugabi was the most feared man at the time. I bet you didn't even know Hagler had a back injury...

RING March 1986


[url]Marvin Hagler[/url], Champion

1. [url]John Mugabi[/url]
2. [url]James Shuler[/url]

[url]Thomas Hearns[/url], Champion

1. [url]John Mugabi[/url]
2. [url]Mike McCallum[/url]

 

He Grant has no grasp of historical context, never has, never will.

Hagler had a back injury that kept him out of the ring for most of 85, he was at the end of his career after all and could only afford to fight the highest rated or biggest draws possible.

It boils down to Hearns (JMW Champion), Mugabi (#1 MW & #1 JMW), and Sugar Ray.

 

Some things need to be said here -

McCallum was Duran's mandatory. Steward had Hearns defend his title against Duran which was immensely more profitable and mouth watering than Duran - McCallum would have been. McCallum then got to fight for Durans title which he had been stripped of for fighting Hearns. McCallum was the loser in all this but he was also a bit player at the time and generating zero excitement.

When Hagler fought Mugabi in 86 McCallum had not even beaten Jackson yet and lets get real about that - when McCallum fought Jackson he was a near nobody and had been knocking over an assortment of ordinary opposition. The effort vs McCallum made a few sit up and take notice and it was after this Jackson made a name for himself, not prior. Beating Jackson at the time was merely a blip on the radar. It was actually a full 3 years after the McCallum fight that Jackon knocked out Norris. The Jackson win got bigger and bigger with hindsight only.

So McCallum had basically done nothing when Hagler wound it down. He was never going to get a match with Hagler and nor did he deserve to. When McCallum stepped up to 160 he lost straight away to Kalambay. Marvin was retired at this time.