McCallum was not on Hagler's level but his durability and professionalism and defensive skill would allow him to make a decent showing. A wide decision for Hagler but a good fight nonetheless. The reason McCallum didn't get big paydays with "Fab 4" is because he just lacked the charisma inside and outside the ring. He was a quiet man. He was able and exciting enough at times to be fondly remembered nowadays though.
Hagler UD. He pushes Mike back and forces him to move more than he's used to. McCallum had success, as most do, when opponents actually showed adverse reactions to his punches. That's the problem I see here. Hagler didn't have adverse reactions to punches. McCallum's options begin to dissipate pretty quickly with that realization.
McCallum-Hagler was the fight the world was crying out for in 1986.....i remember as a 10 yr old kid my father coming home having been made redundant from his roadsweeping job worried how he was going to put food on the table with 2 little ones to feed...."yeah but will hagler fight mccallum" my mother asked.......
I agree with what everyone says on here. I think Marvin outpoints him since Mike is not going to brawl he is going to sharp shoot and slowly try to land his body punching and combination, but Marvin's strength and longer jab will make the difference..In a pretty grueling fight.
I think Hagler hurts McCallum over 15 and wins clearly on points...i think his slashing attack will get through....mccallum wasnt cute in a Duran sense...lets not forget McCallum had to box at his best to stay even with Herol Graham and lost to kalambay...yes he was a boxing master....but Hagler was a grandmaster...McCallum cant hurt Hagler....because no one could....i think the only fight thats closer is 1987 Hagler...and Marvin wins that too.
For what would be a competitive fight at times, there is a pretty unanimous outcome here. Mike could defuse a lesser fighter like Toney but Marvin just had too much coming and refused to fight the other man's fight... usually on any level for any amount of time. Mike runs out of tricks and must fight Marvin's fight. And Marvin wins Marvin's fight.
Good post. That’s a key point about Hagler always winning “his kind of fight”. The part of the fight where it’s down to “who wants it more” was never going to be won by anyone else but Marvin. That’s a pity for McCallum because I think the strongest part of McCallums game was picking off a desperate guy. The harder they tried, the harder he hit them. But they had to commit to a desperate attack to bring that out of Mike. However, Mike’s not going to want to make Marvin desperate because that was where Hagler was most dangerous.
The one fight that was like that that I can remember was the Watson one. The other notable wins such as Kalule, McCrory, Curry, Jackson, Collins (who actually had his only small success when he started to pressure Mike), Graham and Kalambay weren't like that. I don't think his game was dependent on that at all. Hagler is a level or two above in terms of greatness at MW, no doubt. But many of the guys he beat were mainly rough and strong, without great boxing skills. Minter was a good boxer and he went right through him, but Vito, Hamsho, Roldan - even Mugabi - weren't very refined. Durand and Leonard were, and they were also his most difficult opponents. I think Mike has a pretty good shot here. He was stylistically fairly close to MW Duran, but bigger and more active. You could of course go the other way and say that Hagler was better than guys that ran Mike close or even beat him, but they weren't stylistically that similar to Marvin. I think this would be a great fight, that much I can say. As for who wins, let's just say that I'm less convinced of a Hagler win than just about anyone who's posted so far.
Hagler by dec. He's physically stronger and more powerful than Mike was at 160 lbs. Both are versatile. Both have great chins and stamina.but I think Haglers advantage in strength and power will be the difference.
The way I see it is that McCallum potentially could not get out of his own way when it comes to a fight with any of the 'fab four' (five if you include Benitez). Problem is that his career got off to a late start, not turning pro until 1981 at age 24. Always wondered what might have happened if he instead turned pro following the 1976 Olympics. Instead of waiting until 1984 to win his first title, I can see him fighting for the JMW crown early as 1980, so when SRL makes the move to 154 in June of 1981, perhaps he is facing McCallum instead of Ayub Kalule. It is also not outside the realm of possibility that in this scenario showdowns with Hearns and Benitez become reality around the same time frame. As for Hagler, McCallum missed the boat by not moving to middleweight until 1988. Imagine, however, if by the mid eighties he makes the move to 160, then in 1986 Hagler might be fighting McCallum instead of Mugabi. I see a close, hard fought contest with Hagler winning by close UD.
It was mostly timing and weight classes why he never got a fight with them, except for Duran. He was Duran’s mandatory at 154, Duran got stripped because he elected to fight Hearns, which caused McCallum to fallout with Emanuel Steward. I see both sides of the argument, but logically, Steward was right. No way Duran or his management is going to choose to take a high risk/low reward fight against Mike when a multi-million payday against Hearns awaited.
