how would you rate Mike McCallum

A brilliant fighter for me .. He Ko'd Curry, beat Michael Watson, beat Herol Graham .. He was a great technician who always fought away from home .. If he was around today from LM to M, he would clean up. Thats not saying much but i wouldnt give Paul Williams any chance in beating Mike McCallum .. The Bodysnatcher was a high class operator

 

Hearns, Leonard, Duran, & Hagler never fought him....and he was available.....so you can draw you own conclusions.

I rate him as potentionally great...kinda like the "mid-forties" welters & MW's that didn't get a shot at the title when Robinson was around.

 

Great, underrated fighter. Great technician who maybe didn't do any one thing great but did everything good. I think he'd get his share of votes as the greatest JM ever.

 

He's hard to figure IMO.

Very accomplished fighter, but his record is somewhat shaky in his biggest fights.

He scored impressive upsets against Curry and Harding, but in between he was badly outboxed by Kalambay and fell short twice against Toney, and also lost important fights to Tiozzo and Jones (albeit definitely past his prime then). Outside of Harding and Curry, his biggest wins were probably over Jackson, Collins, and Watson - all very notable, but all of them were still only prospects on the way up at that time. Two of his titles were won in "vacant" title fights rather than from reigning established champions.

I know there's other factors here as well. Some people will say he was deprived of other big fights (ie: Duran, Hearns, Leonard) that would've shown the extent of his ability, some people say the big fights he had came too late, or perhaps he spent too long as an amateur to ever reach his full potential as a pro. Personally, I also thought he was robbed in the 2nd fight with Toney, as did some other people.

Still, what he did is what he left us to judge him by, and IMO it's hard to figure how he compares to other fighters based on that.

 

Yeah, he is somewhat polarizing, for the reasons I stated in my post.

 

He was a good HOF fighter, but not great. His career had the good wins but the losses also. He was good but I always thought a little overrated.

 

Mike cannot be greatest Junior Middleweight ever because of Thomas Hearns. Hearns at that time and weight was quicker than Mike and more experienced. A lot of people judge the post Hagler-Hearns, but Hearns at 154 in 1984 was awesome.. Lightning handspeed and power and a decent chin at the weight.

 

Lovely technical fighter with a very good record.

Thought he was badly jobbed in the 2nd Toney fight and every one on general forum goes on about JT as if he's the second coming!

Did feel he was a little bit fortunate against Graham and Kalambay put on a masterclass against him.

 

same bracket as calzaghe

 

I personally rate Tommy #1 at the weight but I've seen Mccallum placed in the 1 spot by some. He's at least in the conversation.

 

Hearns and McCallum are definitely the candidates for number 1 spot at 154 for me

 

Very good post.

 

Great. Top 80 OAT, maybe top 70. Strong resume, great skillset. I'm a big fan. I think he is generally underrated because he wasn't as glamorous or high-profile as other fighters of his era.