Yes it was a shame McCallum's momentum was stopped before he got that super fight. Both he, Graham and Kalambay were great fighters, but they seemed to knock each other out of contention like the murderers row did to each other
you are right about those 3 being top fighters at that time. I remember that fight McCallum had with Kalambay. I think it was in Italy. Mike and his corner could have orchestrated a better title fight in this country to better follow his Curry win. I think Mike always thought that being good was all which was needed, and that everyone will fight him and he will get all the credit he wanted. He didn't realize that marketing himself and fighting the right opponents at times would have helped his career. Efficiency helps but marketing does also. The Kalambay loss took all the air out of Mike's career or another year, and by the time he got another title shot at 160, Hearns was fighting Leonard at 168 and not in Mike's weight class. The fab four were the key to Mike being remembered more fondly. He has a good place in history, but not fighting those elites will always be what is missing in his career. By the time he fought Toney and Jones, he was seen as the older guy who was slowing down.
Toss up with Jackson & Curry yes. I go with Jackson coz Don had been beaten by Honeyghan 3 fights previous.
I voted for Jackson, Jackson was a feared Middleweight for many years to come after this with a fearsome punch and Mccallum just ate him up!! Curry is a big name but he to me was a smaller fighter moving up and was not at his peak at that slightly bigger weight and like another said Mike landed a perfect KO punch before that Curry was rolling..
when Mike beat Jackson he was barely known. I used to see his name in the boxing magazine with ko 1 ko 2, but against nobodies. He stepped up big against Mike, but he was not ready. Mike beating Julian then is not the same as Mike beating him in 1989.
I will still take that Jackson over the rest of the list, based on what he became and how Mccallum beat him!! Jackson was unbeaten and starching everyone he fought, he was a couple of years from his peak but I would still take him for the reasons I stated in my earlier post and above.. Jackson is currently the leader in the club house :good
well I will say this Julian Jackson's punching power was terrifying. Buster Drayton in round 3. wow. and Terry Norris and so many others.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OhVi7cH-LaQ"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OhVi7cH-LaQ[/ame] Love this one as well!!!!
No votes for the rematches with Kalambay and Toney? I think both of them showed that he was good at adapting.
don't get me wrong he was good, but not the guy in 1989 who stopped Norris. Jackson slowed down a little in pace the next few years and picked better punches. Jackson is one of the only guys who has terrifying power. It is almost scary to watch the guys get hit by him. Solid guys like Drayton.
is that Hamed doing the commentary? It was power but it was more. He found ways to land clean punches with full force. Not at all a lucky punch.
Perhaps. But I think this "he wasn't really at his absolute peak" gets taken to ridicolous levels on this board. It seems every fighter had about 15 minutes when beating them meant anything. He was around 25 and unbeaten over almost 30 pro fights. It wasn't as if he ever settled into an ultra scientific and tactical master like Hopkins. His main assets were already in place. If one just can't settle for that he was in his prime these discussions get pointless.