Mike McCallum vs. Marvin Hagler.

Hagler by decision.

 

Marvin could box as well as fight and do both consistently, or Alternate between the two, and not in a crude manner, but very smoothly, I cant help but feel that Mike's skills are going to be drawn upon to keep him from getting overwhelmed, in short a defensive fight with perhaps a few rallies thrown in to test the water, but i think Mike would soon find these waters Shark Infested, it was noticeable in the second Toney fight that when he tried to Fight with James, he got Rattled and had to slip back to Boxing, Likewise with Marvin whats he going to do, Look to Body-Snatch Marvin with that Left Hook and Marvin might show him some Real 'Burke & Hare' particularly with the counter right, Given Marvins parth of destruction through the Middleweights, i think Mike would have to settle for a clear but Honourable Points Defeat.

 

Spot on as far as I'm concerned.

 

Hagler TKO McCallum

 

McCallum's size is the difference I think he's able to control the fight from the outside

 

idk if mccallum can keep hagler on the outside. i think he can beat ray leonard though

 

Prime for prime at Middleweight, Hagler by decision. If they had actually fought in 1987 or 1988, let' say Hagler/Leonard never happened, it's possible Mike could win a close decision.

 

Seconded...:good

 

nope

 

Marvin Hagler UD

 

Hagler by UD

 

It's funny because McCallum is probably more popular now than when he was fighting.
Mike had excellent longevity and was a tough nut well into the veteran stage of his career. He aged really well.
It would have been interesting to see he things would have panned out had the 'fab 4' invited him to their private party.

But anyway...I'd pick Hagler by decision. Mike was really good but at middleweight Hagler was simply better.

 

While Hagler has the clearly superior resume at MW, I actually think that McCallum proved himself against a higher calibre of opposition. He beat a still very good version of Kalamaby and I think he beat Toney in the rematch (the first was a toss up). Hearns is the only one of Hagler's victims that I think has an argument for being as good at MW as those two.

I also think there's an argument to be made that Graham and Watson was at least as good as anyone Hagler beat bar perhaps Hearns and Mugabi.

And stylistically there's also the thing that Hagler didn't really convince against slick counter punchers.

Taking these things into consideration, I'm a bit surprised that most here goes for Hagler. I have no problem seeing McCallum win a decision here.

 

He was 36 years old fighting a prime and well conditioned James Toney .. not the fairest scale guys .. I thin McCallum would have been far and away the toughest fight of Hagler's career ..