I think at his best he was fairly balanced. But definitely made his shots count more, yeah. Not the weight-drained version. And probably not the laborious Howard Eastman version either. But also not the very aggressive 'green' version around the time of the Roy fight. Counter punching ability, veteran tricks and bags of experience at the weight, could fight rough or smooth.The nuanced, 'Executioner' who unified the belts. With a decision win over Keith Holmes. [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m13RWhAljzk[/ame] [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YwzHMmBJ9OY&feature=related[/ame] [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3eK4HZCCLA&feature=related[/ame] [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=edle9KqD_No&feature=related[/ame] This, followed by Tito, were two dominating performances to unify all the belts, and he still had a 12 round engine at the weight. So I'd say 'The Don King Tourney Hop' was the best 160lb Hopkins. McCallum? I haven't seen his fight with Collins, and haven't seen the Graham fight for a while. I scored the 2nd Kalambay fight to Sumbu, though was very impressed with his performance. And twice I felt he did very well against Toney. So I'd have to go with the Watson fight as the best I've seen of him (at 160), McCallum really beat him up, even though I felt Watson punched a bit too much and gave The Body Snatcher too many chances to hit him. At 154 there are only a few guys I would give a shout against him. More often than not I'd favour him to beat Hearns.
Hearns is the guy that commonly gets charged with ducking McCallum. Mike was maybe also the reason that Curry stuck around at 147 for a little too long...
:rofl I know, it's really bad. Reminded me of Golga from the WWF This content is protected Or indeed, a gimp This content is protected
No mate, putting creatine in your shake is a school boy error IMO. It clogs up at the bottom, you're best putting it in water :good
I agree McCallum is so underated and would surely give Hopkins a tough battle, but then again so would Michael Watson and i know for sure Hopkins fans will try to beat me down with a stick. McCallum said personally to Watson that he was relieved that he didnt have to fight him in November 1989 at Alexandra Palace, as Watson was ready and at his sharpest only to get a nose injury to stop the fight happening. When he did fight he had been out the ring for a year had a bout of flu not long before the fight and was told by his promoter that he didnt need a warm up fight even after saying to Hearn that he thought he did. Watson went into the fight far from his best but felt he had to as he might not get another chance. I`m not taking nothing away from McCallum hes one of my favourites and i`m not saying Watson would have won had the fight been on the original date a year earlier, but it would have been a great fight whatever the outcome. Watsons credentials are always beaten back by this loss to McCallum by critics which is very unfair. If McCallum were asked personally i bet he`d say otherwise about Watson.
No, Watson was a quality operator, I don't think that could be denied by anyone. Arguably the most technically proficient from the Benn-Eubank era. Too gung-ho in his fight with The Body Snatcher though IMO. And he livedup to his name, Watson was ****ed from the shots he was taking, McCallum went for quality rather than quantity and got the job done well.
ah Watson wasnt at his sharpest his timing was off hed been out the ring far too long without a warm up fight and said himself that he felt he had to go looking for McCallum to have any chance because he knew he wasnt nowhere near his best, and yes because he went looking he got caught by the body snatchers punches.
Personally i`d give Watson a chance against Hopkins at both middle and super middle. McCallum was so so avoided thats why he dont get the credit he deserves.
I don't know what kinda' credit you're on about really DaveyBoy; outside of being a household name (not many boxers are) he is renowned amongst fans of the sport as one of the best of his era. Which is fair IMO :good