Mike McCallum vs. Thomas Hearns @ 154lbs.

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by MrMagic, Jul 22, 2009.


  1. MrMagic

    MrMagic Loyal Member Full Member

    39,534
    71
    Oct 28, 2004
  2. Mr Butt

    Mr Butt Boxing Junkie Full Member

    14,678
    183
    May 16, 2009
    i think hearns uses his jab here and punishes mccallum as he tries to get close to work on hearn`s body ,hearns by ud
     
  3. laxpdx

    laxpdx Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,921
    77
    Oct 1, 2006
    Provided Hearns doesn't catch him flush one too many times, McCallum by late TKO, as a result of working Tommy's rib cage.
     
  4. MrMagic

    MrMagic Loyal Member Full Member

    39,534
    71
    Oct 28, 2004
    I agree, we saw what success Milton McCrory had against Mike.. I think Hearns has the better jab than Milton and the more powerful punch.
     
  5. Flea Man

    Flea Man มวยสากล Full Member

    82,426
    1,467
    Sep 7, 2008
  6. PowerPuncher

    PowerPuncher Loyal Member Full Member

    42,723
    269
    Jul 22, 2004
    Tough 1, defense and inside game versus speed, rangyness and jab? McCallum had pretty a decent jab and speed himself. What a shame it never happened
     
  7. he grant

    he grant Historian/Film Maker

    25,452
    9,437
    Jul 15, 2008
    I like Tommy at this weight if he boxes and keeps his head but it could go either way ..
     
  8. JMMisking

    JMMisking Member Full Member

    166
    0
    Jul 18, 2009
    McCallum. He was so tough, so Tommy`s power wouldn`t be such a deciding factor. McCallum I reckon is the most underrated fighters of the 80`s. Anyone know why he didn`t become more famous in an era when there were some brillaint fighters and high-profile fights
     
  9. fists of fury

    fists of fury Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    19,297
    7,047
    Oct 25, 2006
    He lacked charisma and wasn't spectacular as far as styles go. Plus, he didn't endear himself with promoters and he was always deeply suspicious of them.
    Still, he was criminally overlooked. If this fight was at middeweight, I'd maybe have picked him.
    At 154, I don't think I ever saw Hearns look better. He was just scary at 154.

    Hearns would win a close decision here, I think, in a relatively drama-free fight.
     
  10. Titan1

    Titan1 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,700
    2,572
    Oct 18, 2004
    Hearns over McCallum in a tight fifteen rounder, UD.
     
  11. mr. magoo

    mr. magoo VIP Member Full Member

    51,178
    25,426
    Jan 3, 2007
    I'm going with Hearns by decision, but I say this no real conviction. McCallum had a great defense, worked the body better than anyone, had a great chin, decent power and could really box. Probably one of the most avoided fighters of the 1980's.
     
  12. Duodenum

    Duodenum Boxing Junkie Full Member

    11,604
    290
    Apr 18, 2007
    This brings to mind the thread which asks how successful Hearns would have been with Hagler's chin. In that event, The Bodysnatcher could be Tommy's Kryptonite at 154.
     
  13. DINAMITA

    DINAMITA Guest

    I can easily envisage this going either way. Gut feeling: Hearns boxes on the move to a tight decision win.