Oliver McCall what happened to him

h2h2 of course, jeez!
apart from leon, now that's a particularly weak pick, and he was picking on a parkinsons victim himself.

but not in terms of acheivements.

 

Apparently he had drug/mental issues throughout his career. There was an episode where he was arrested for throwing Christmas Trees shortly before the Lewis rematch. He basically had a breakdown in the fight. Some revisionists have said the breakdown happened because Lewis was frustrating him. At the time, it was apparent something was wrong with him at the first bell. Nobody had seen anything like it. He stood there and let Lewis have free swings at him and showed the fighting spirit of a Peace Protestor or 1600's Philadelphia Quaker. Still, Lewis couldn't hurt him.

 

Oliver McCall beat Lennox Lewis, Larry Holmes, Henry Akinwande, Bruce Seldon, Oleg Maskaev, Francesco Damiani ... who were, had or would be world or "paper" champions.

He beat most of the usual suspects in Fres Oquendo, Jesse Ferguson, Darroll Wilson.

He lost controversial split decisions to former heavyweight beltholder Tony Tucker and future cruiserweight champion Orlin Norris (I thought he beat Tucker but I didn't see the Norris fight). He had a mental breakdown against Lewis.

He lost actual decisions to future champ Buster Douglas and Frank Bruno, who took McCall's title (but Oliver had Bruno out on his feet and holding on for dear life at the end).

During McCall's heyday, the only guy I remember actually clearly beating Oliver - where viewers went, "Yeah, McCall got beat" - was against Buster Douglas. (You could probably add Bruno, too, but his fans were sweating more than McCall's were at the end of that one.)

I'm a huge Lennox Lewis fan, but Lewis didn't beat up McCall in either fight.

About the only common opponent Klitschko and McCall had was Davarryll Williamson ... and neither McCall nor Klitschko looked very good. (Klitschko was down in that fight, too.)

Six of McCall's losses came when he was well into his forties. People around here give Ezzard Charles a pass for every loss he had after he turned 34. McCall was still fighting at 49.

I mean, McCall had 73 fights ... and who really "whipped" him ever?

He was pretty damn good all things considered.

He'll never be rated above Wlad, because of Wlad's title run, but it's not trolling to say he beat better fighters than Wlad did ... because arguably he DID!

Lewis and Holmes are among the top 10 best heavyweights ever.

Who was the best guy Wlad beat? Where would Wlad's best opponent be rated all-time? Not very high on anyone's all-time list, that's for sure. I mean, people complain about Walcott and Louis being old on Marciano's record. But Wlad didn't even beat any great old fighters. Just a lot of mediocre guys (from an all-time perspective).

 

*coughhestrollingyoucough*

 

This is a lot of name listing.. Holmes was 45 years old and hadn't beaten a serious opponent in years.. Yeah he is a top 10 ATG great, but let's not pretend that McCall fought the Holmes who schooled C00ney.. And what's more some people even felt McCall lost to that 45 year old man... Seldon was never anything special. He got beat in one round by Bowe months after he lost to Ollie, and later beaten by an aged Tubbs. Ferguson had fought exactly one time within a three year period going in against McCall and was 5-5 in his last 10 fights. I saw that fight on ESPN and frankly it was a boring affair that could have gone either way..Maskaev had SIX pro fights when he fought McCall. Damiani was past it as well. I agree that some of his defeats were close and iffy, but he still lost to Norris, Douglas, and an aged Tucker legitimately. The only thing that I've consistently agreed on here is that McCall's win over Lewis was the "single" best win between the two men, but from there Wlad kills him on depth, accomplishments, legacy and just about everything else.

 

:| frickin baby quit crying so much be a man and accept your 4th class life

 

Here we go with the "everyone wasn't at their absolute best" deal again.

Yes, Holmes wasn't prime. But Holmes was still a viable heavyweight. He beat Ferguson, Ribalta, Martin and all the usual suspects, and he beat Ray Mercer (who had just vacated the WBO belt to fight Holmes) and, frankly, if Holyfield's cut man wasn't an all-timer, Holmes could've easily snagged the world title because the ref ruled Evander's cut due to a punch (even though it wasn't).

I'm not saying Holmes was prime, because he wasn't. But Lennox Lewis was right there.

And Wlad never beat anyone in close to Holmes' or Lewis' orbit.

That's the point. For every Seldon and Damiani on McCall's record, Wlad's beaten four of his own Seldon's and Damiani's.

The problem is Wlad doesn't have any Lennox Lewis or Larry Holmes guys to go with them on his.

So, at some point, beating 20 Damiani types trumps beating Lewis and Holmes and a couple Damiani types.

But bragging about Wlad's "depth" is kind of weak. Yes, he has INCREDIBLE depth at beating mediocre fighters.

Davarryll Williamson fought them both in back to back fights (McCall was 39 and Wlad was 28 with Emanuel Steward) and Wlad got floored and couldn't make it halfway through the fight with his cut.

Wlad will always be rated above McCall. Nobody's arguing that. People value records and titles more than the quality of wins.

But Oliver McCall fought 73 times, and nobody really "whipped" him. Wlad got whipped and left in a heap two or three times against lesser comp.

It is what it is. Quantity over quality.

But, head-to-head, with both McCall and Wlad in their early 30s, I wouldn't make a wager on that. McCall's chin was too strong and his power too good for Wlad to simply walk over.

 

Kind of an important detail.

The Mercer fight was three years prior to facing McCall and Martin, Ferguson, Ribalta, etc had been reduced to journeyman level by that point. Who WASN'T beating those guys at the time? BTW, I'm still not sold on McCall deserving the decision against even THAT version of Larry.

Holyfield won every round of that fight and did in on cruise control.. At times he was evening toying with Holmes. The only thing Larry did as you say was open a cut on Evander that wasn't even caused by a punch.. This was years before he even met McCall.

Yes the Lewis fight was a huge win which I've already credited him for several times. But Lennox showed marked improvement by 1997 with Manny in his corner.. It was still a great win but not a perfected Lewis.

Which Holmes are we talking about? The Holmes of 1979? If that's the case then I agree completely. No Wlad victims in orbit there. The Holmes of 1995? I'd pick Bryd, Chagaev, Povetkin and possibly a few other Wlad victims to beat that version..

He's beaten better opponents than those guys. I'm not even sure that Seldon or that faded version of Damiani were better than Eddie Chambers or Calvin Brock whom Wlad dominated with ease.

No the problem is, McCall has lost 14 times in his career and has less than a fraction of Wlad's wins against rated contenders.. Indecisively decisioning an ancient Holmes who hadn't done jack in years isn't worth anything to me..I'll give him Lennox Lewis as the crown jewel between the two resumes, but I don't rank one fighter higher than another on the basis of ONE signature win UNLESS the two resumes are close enough to warrant doing so, which it isn't in this case.. Wlad has been the lineal champ for more than 6 years and hanging around the top of his division for more like 15 years. He's beaten plenty of ranked contenders, title holders, former olympians and while none of them trump beating Lewis, there are a ton of them who trump Oliver's #2's and #3's.

No.. Beating Povetkin, Haye, Chambers, Byrd, Chagaev, Brock, Peter and several others were all better than beating a 45 year old Holmes and a 35 year old Damiani, neither of whom had done anything of note in years.. And "collectively" beating such a list of men to go along with a dominant title reign, numerous defenses, far less defeats and longevity at the top of a weight class can definitely trump the feat of beating ONE big named opponent ( Lewis. )

What's even weaker than that is hinging on this logic that beating fighters in "name" alone is the be all end all without looking at the specific details and circumstances of the fights themselves, and to furthermore completely ignore other criteria.. I like to look at the WHOLE picture where as you seem to gaze at the one part which catches your eye.

The flip side of that is Wlad is 39 NOW and still the defending world champion.. McCall was fighting guys like Vernon Woodard and Dennis Mckinney at that age.

actually this debate started with Boxed Ears who DOES argue that McCall should rank higher...And I concur that he has at least ONE win that trumps all of Wlad's others. But so does Buster Douglas.. So does Leon Spinks and possibly a few other men we can think of.. I don't think these men have better resumes because there are more things to consider.

He's never been legitimately stopped in the conventional fashion, true. But he's been soundly outboxed on points and against lesser men than Corrie Sanders or Lamon Brewster. And his break down in the Lewis rematch was pretty pathetic.

Not in every instance. But in this case you have one fighter who is arguably a top 10-15 ATG being compared to a man who barely makes top 100.

I wouldn't bank on Wlad ever scoring a knockout. But a solid one sided decision is certainly plausible. I can't see McCall getting in there to really do anything meaningful, especially against the Wlad from 2005 onward.

 

Well, you could argue the same regarding Wlad. Look at what he has been able to do with his obvious flaws.

 

For a man who is supposedly so chinny and easy to spark, it sure is strange that nobody's managed to do it nearly 12 years.

 

McCall was a very good fighter that could have been a legend his chin was awesome he was Tyson Chief spar mate never off his feet lewis and Bruno hit him with everything they had and couldn't hurt him he could hit hard and move and had good stamina look at what he did during his career when most of the time he wasn't even training properly lots of the guys he beat would be world champs today guys like damiani not just WBO as he was .Mccall unfortunately never had the discipline to match his physical giftsThe opposite is now the case with the HWs

 

Are you suggesting Boxed Ears might stoop to trolling ?

You can't be serious, Magoo. :-(

Me too.

I feel your pain, your indignation. :verysad

 

You shouldn't take Boxed Ears words seriously, he's just having fun as always

 

Apparently reading isn't your thing either. So unless Wladimir Klitschko is from Chicago, Illinois then he wouldn't be the icon of my country.

 

McCall was considered a Journeyman; Wlad had his up and downs for a five/six year period but was always a contender. And is now far more consistent than the Atomic Bull ever was.