Mike McCallum vs. Marvin Hagler.

I'd rate Minter above Graham and Watson.

 

McCallum UD too skilled, too smart, too much of a ring general for Hagler.

You'd be wrong though

 

Hagler

 

Hagler UD. Too much of everything. Whatever Mike does, Hagler can answer it, however the opposite is not true.

As for this fictional garbage about McCallum being the bigger man, it is as stupid as saying Corrales was bigger than Canelo. Taller yes, but bigger, not a hope in hell.

 

McCallum is taller and bigger than Hagler not sure how you people can't see that. Hagler was a small MW. Hagler looked small in the ring with Scypion. McCallum is at least as big as Scypion

 

Hagler on points.....close fight

 

Lets try to sort out this nonsense shall we?

Here is Hagler / Mugabi 1987.

[url]https://youtu.be/ttRrZZAwAZ0?t=1012[/url]

Here is McCallum / Kalambay 1988

[url]https://youtu.be/DyddUYE0mGQ?t=89[/url]

You look, then tell us who has the bigger, chest, biceps, shoulders, legs, forearms out of the 2.atsch

 

Hagler was an extremely strong MW. In his prime he was unstoppable and would have run right over McCallum. McCallum doesn't have as impressive of a record at MW as Hagler who destroyed many fighters and would have beat Ray Leonard if Leonard actually boxed.

 

Marvin

 

Hagler started out slow normally fighting with his body squared up to his opponents and was open to body shots from his opponents early. McCallum would be able to take advantage of this flaw in his armor and was smart enough to attack the body without being countered. He could gain an early advantage on Hagler and could take some early by doing so. I believe that as the fight goes on though Marvin starts to press the action more and wrap up more late rounds in typical Hagler fashion to get the decision.

 

my countryman would whoop Haglers butt Foxy :deal

its clear he was the bigger man, anyone that would claim otherwise would have to be a complete moron,,,not just partial Foxy, "complete" ,,,,

The body snatcher takes his body and then a decision :good

 

Hagler has bigger arms and legs. Also has a bigger neck. Their torso is about the same. MM has a small waist but its still wider than Hagler who had a tiny waist(which BTW is a sign of a great athlete).
MM has bigger hands and feet. I think you confuse being more muscular for being bigger

Also you mentioned Canelo he's about the same size as Hagler

Collins was every bit as strong as Hagler and also much bigger than Hagler and he tried to run over MM and failed miserably. Oh and outside of Hearns who are these impressive MWs Hagler beat? Hamsho and Vito are his next best wins(both small MWs like Hagler) and they aren't as good as Kalambay, Watson, Graham and Collins.

And if a small and tired Leonard was able to out smart and out speed Hagler. Kalambay would of dominated Hagler. Kalambay was bigger/stronger/faster could actually box 3 minutes a round not just in spurts unlike Leonard at that point.

 

Hamsho, Minter, Obelmejias, Sibson were all good middleweights.
They'd give the likes of Watson, Graham and Toney stiff competition.
I'm not even sure how Hearns would do against Hagler's middleweight opposition. I know he beat Roldan, but he could lose to a guy like that too.

 

It's kind of irrelevant who "the bigger man" of McCallum and Hagler is.
Size wise they were in an ordinary range as middleweights, nothing extreme. They were well suited to 158 or 160 pounds.
Hagler I believe was shorter than his listed height. I think he's 5'8 at the most, but his arms are extraordinarily long.
None of that really matters.

 

Hamsho is actually good but should not be an ATG's 2nd best win. Minter is solid nothing special but worthy of being mentioned on a resume. Fully Obel and Sibson were nobodies, lets not even talk about Mugabi who was a certified bum