Who do you rank higher between two of my all-time favourites: McCallum or Nelson?

Its close but i think Mike had a better skill set and was the better all around fighter and the more effective fighter of the two ,he seemed to always have an answer no matter what style he was facing.

Resume is also close,both had great success in their primary weight classes,Nelson at feather and Mike at jr middle but i think McCallum moved up in weight better and had more success at other weights than Nelson,i also give the edge in competition to McCallum who for me has a deeper resume than Nelson.

both showed great longevity and both were great fighters,McCallum is my choice for the reasons i stated but i wont argue with anyone who picks Nelson cause its close either way.

 

Marquez better than McCallum? Come on.. Marquez couldn't beat Chris John. He fought everyone at the right time.

 

I'd answer "Nelson" to every question here.

In terms of ability, he was a much more explosive puncher P4P. As for achievements, his best wins were Gomez, Fenech, and Ruelas, which I'd say is a better set of wins than Curry, Kalambay, and Harding (McCallum's best). He also won two of his titles from legit qualified titleholders (Gomez and Ruelas), whereas McCallum's titles were all vacant or "interim" titles.

I think the only argument you could make that could complicate these matters is that McCallum arguably should've won one of his fights with Toney (I actually thought so as well); however, not everyone shares that same opinion, and regardless, a debatable decision is a kinda shaky thing to rest an argument on.

 

they should not be in the same bracket. nelson has better wins and better overall ability

 

In someway this was the best even comparison I have seen yet on ESB. These guys are both top rated. The advantage I see in Nelson which I do not see in McCallum is that Nelson fought everyone he could have fought with the exclusion of McGuigan, and McCallum never had a chance to fight the 4 legends of the 1980s Hagler/Hearns/Duran and Leonard. So in a way it is easier to place Nelson than McCallum. Mike will always have the regret of not fighting any of the top 4 guys, but Nelson can sit back and know he fought them all.

 

Azumah wins this one. Azumah was a legend of the 80s and McCallum was not. Azumah was in the class of Hagler and Hearns and McCallum came up short.

 

What about McCallums win over Jackson?

 

1. Both were about the same as far as impressiveness/effectiveness goes in their respective primes, but Nelson became a little more inconsistent in his old age. Mike was more skilled, Nelson was more beastly.

2. I edge towards Mike as far as resume and accomplishments goes, but there's not much in it (I thought he won the second Toney fight, so I'm adding some points for him there in the resume stakes).

I have both guys separated by only a few spots in my p4p rankings.

 

Gomez was damaged goods when Nelson beat him.he'd lost his balance, reflexes and speed.Ready to be taken by a good challenger.

I'd rate the likes of Martinez and Villasana over him as a win.

 

Very comparable ... both terrific fighters ... nice choices ...

 

I think McCallum was a notch better overall and more consistent.

Nelson more physically gifted and a better puncher, but i still tend to favour Mike.