Hearns & McCallum Sparring

The two greatest light middleweights all time?:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=WS0Boow5mzo&feature=youtu.be

McCallum vs Hagler would have been a fantastic boxing match. Two fights that got away.

Good vid Haz, up all night again trawling youtube? Would have been interesting to see these 2 fight.

Interestingly in the side bar there is an interview with McCallum with his views on the fab four and how they ducked him! With regards to a fight with Hagler it must have been a small window of opportunity for that fight to happen what with mooted fights against Duran, Hearns, Mugabe, Curry & Leonard? Quite possibly all bigger fights name/money wise? How do you see that fight panning out had it happened?

sohotnot wrote:Good vid Haz, up all night again trawling youtube? Would have been interesting to see these 2 fight.

Interestingly in the side bar there is an interview with McCallum with his views on the fab four and how they ducked him! With regards to a fight with Hagler it must have been a small window of opportunity for that fight to happen what with mooted fights against Duran, Hearns, Mugabe, Curry & Leonard? Quite possibly all bigger fights name/money wise? How do you see that fight panning out had it happened?

Na, Steve Forbes tweeted it this morning and it's one I've never seen!

Hagler-McCallum is a tough one to pick. Both were fantastic technicians with rock solid chins. Too close to call for me - whoever gets it right on the night!

As much as it kills me to say it, I think McCallum takes Hearns.

I watched Collins vs McCallum last night. It was a recommended video on youtube. Collins was raw, but very game.

He was one of about 20 guys McCallum said was the best fighter he ever faced...

Depending on what day of the week it was..

The idea that the Fab Four were duckers is laughable. But they did do what everyone does, they followed the money. McCallum was just not as big a name as his ability deserved. High risk relatively low reward.

I've seen the sparring with hearns before, and heard McCallum claim he worked him over in the gym. It's certainly well documented that he felt shafted by manny steward, and there's no doubt that hearns was Manny's favourite. Or is there? Here's Manny's take on it.... http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/showthread.php?t=91955

Mike fell out with most of the teams he ever had, which probably never helped his career. His chip seems a sizeable one, but you can understand it when you see guys you think you can beat earning ten times what you do.

Would McCallum beat hearns? Well he'd probably have to come from behind to do it, but it's a distinct possibility.  A hagler fight would have been a cracker. I don't like his chances against Leonard. I think mcallums struggles came with technicians and Leonard was a tough one. You'd think he'd be too big and too prime for Duran. All very live fights though.

Although a similar age to Leonard and hearns he had a long amateur career, turned pro late, so in reality his career actually peaked at a different time to these guys, which means that the window of opportunity for these 80's super fights were actually pretty slim. It also means he was knocking on a bit by the time his big wins came. The light middle version certainly seemed a faster more destructive force than the middleweight version.

Whichever, a terrific fighter and tough as they come.

He did one of the more interesting, not saying much, 'best I've faced' too... http://ringtv.craveonline.com/news/168053-best-ive-faced-mike-mccallum

... And yes Collins gets a mention truss, for his chin... Which McCallum could neither dent nor miss.

Must have been some punch from Eubank to drop Collins.

I've never really thought much about McCallum facing any of the Fab Four. I did read something once about Steve Collins saying that he was somewhere where Ray Leonard was giving a speech or talking about his career and Leonard said that he wouldn't fight McCallum because it was a fight he could have lost and not earned much money. Like Milky says, McCallum was a high risk, low payday type of opponent.

One of my fantasy fights would have been prime McCallum v peak Hopkins at 160lbs. I think McCallum would nick it on points.

Atila wrote:I've never really thought much about McCallum facing any of the Fab Four. I did read something once about Steve Collins saying that he was somewhere where Ray Leonard was giving a speech or talking about his career and Leonard said that he wouldn't fight McCallum because it was a fight he could have lost and not earned much money. Like Milky says, McCallum was a high risk, low payday type of opponent.

One of my fantasy fights would have been prime McCallum v peak Hopkins at 160lbs. I think McCallum would nick it on points.

Yeah, I'd take MM. Hopkins wouldn't have been able to dog him.

I'm not sure prime mccallum was at 160. I like bhop in that one, the bhop who did for Trinidad is just a touch too sharp a boxer for mccallum in my view. Be interesting, though and a close fight for sure.

Hagler mccallum is the one I'd have most liked to see, followed by mccallum hearns.

Hagler said he'd worked long and hard to get his respect and whilst he did admire McCallum he said Mike would not generate anywhere near the kind of money Marv was looking for at that stage in his career

I'm sure McCallum would have brought in as much money as the unknown foreigner Mugabi....

But I'm not convinced Hagler ducked Mccallum.....would have been a great fight though..

Pickem in 86..

Probably true and I'm sure there was a concern from Hagler over the risk/reward issue

Hopkins vs McCallum?? F..k, that is a tough one. (Bum stuck to the fence)

AdamT wrote:Hopkins vs McCallum?? F..k, that is a tough one. (Bum stuck to the fence)

Jizz dribbled out and acted like glue?

C..t!lol

It seems odd in hindsight, but mugabi's knock out run made him a marketable opponent for hagler. Or Maybe it seemed that way in the uk, as mugabi was a duff fighter.

I'd say it was only post the Jackson win in '86 that mike's profile was really raised... And more so by the curry fight. He went to middle straight after that and lost to kalambay. The hagler ship had sailed into the sunset long before.

Mugabi was just an "opponent"......

Mcguigan was second support for Hearns - Medal on the Triple hitter....He was more marketable than the beast..

Hagler....Hearns v golden boy and WBA/WBC number 1 Shuler.... and the boy next door Richie Sandoval sold the card......

Mugabi's odds were similar to Fury's.......He'd been stuck out in Florida...Plus he'd looked awful against tiny James Rock Green....

My take is Mccallum was keen to stay at 154 back then......and that Hagler sold against anybody.....like Tyson....

A real blue collar hero..

The green fight was a couple of years earlier truss. Mugabi hadn't fought anyone of note, but it's easy enough to sell a guy with the nickname beast... With 25 fights 25 KOs.

Mugabi was 3:1 in the fight... About the same as Leonard against hagler.

As we've discussed many times hagler was scratching for worthwhile opponents as champion but he'd finally become a big ticket fighter and I don't doubt he'd have sold well against anyone at that time.

The primary point was mccallum was a novice (novice champion) who'd beaten no- one of real note when hagler fought mugabi... I don't recall him being pitched as a likely opponent.

Leonard was considered a no hoper..so I don't understand the relevancy..

Leonard's odds shortened nearer the fight, he started off longer odds than mugabi, and will always have a following in any fight to keep the odds in check. 3:1 in a two horse race is firm outsider stuff... It's not buster Douglas.

Whichever, that your best comeback beefy? Ignoring the main points you can't answer and picking up on trivia... You learning from haz?

milkyboy wrote:The green fight was a couple of years earlier truss. Mugabi hadn't fought anyone of note, but it's easy enough to sell a guy with the nickname beast... With 25 fights 25 KOs.

Mugabi was 3:1 in the fight... About the same as Leonard against hagler.

As we've discussed many times hagler was scratching for worthwhile opponents as champion but he'd finally become a big ticket fighter and I don't doubt he'd have sold well against anyone at that time.

The primary point was mccallum was a novice (novice champion) who'd beaten no- one of real note when hagler fought mugabi... I don't recall him being pitched as a likely opponent.

Especially when previously John 'The Beast' Mugabe defeated Frank 'The Animal' Fletcher!

Interestingly I was chatting with a friend a while back that cited Mugabe as one of Haglers great defining wins and why Hagler defeats every fighter in history from 154 - 168.

With regards to McCallum being ducked, as I said before the window of opportunity was very small and he was not really on my radar til he knocked out Curry. Interesting article link, Milky I think posted, yesterday on McCallum's position/situation at the time.

Not sure it was a defining fight soho, he certainly proved his nads again, but I don't think anyone doubted them by then!

It was a good fight I thought. Don't think mugabi was ever the same afterwards.

In hindsight, given what mugabi and mccallum did afterwards, I'm sure most fans would rather hagler had fought McCallum instead. Of course depending on the outcome both McCallum and mugabi might have had very different careers.

Defining wins.............Nope..

Duane Thomas stopped Mugabi in 3 and Norris in 1 soon after..

Hagler was garbage that night.....Look at the 4th round where he gets hit with a lead uppercut..

I don't consider it a defining fight, a career LMW who'd fought nobody? He was using that as to why Hagler would beat anybody 154 - 168. In his opinion there was never a fighter that came after that that would beat him and that includes RJJ, Toney, Hopkins, Nunn, Calzaghe etc. Now whilst I am a Hagler fan, and as has been discussed on here, he didn't have a record filled with atg's or at least genuine MW atg's.

I think you are right with hindsight, but I think also Mugabe took a little out of Hagler, that was a close fight for at least the first 6 rounds. Still don't see Mugabe as an atg LMW.

Leonard Hagler wouldn't have happened..but for John..

Think the Hearns war took a toll on Hagler...

Still think the Nunn that beat Tate beats every middle in history.

McCallum at light middleweight was from the top drawer but I can't see him beating any of the greats at their best at Middleweight, he was too inconsistent and the change to 12 rounds took away one of his greatest assets. In around 87 he would have given a shopworn Hagler a tough night and possibly sneaked a win but pre Hearns I think he loses a fairly wide decision, same against Hopkins who would be far too savvy for him.

At 154lbs i'd make him a warm favourite over Hearns, had the chin to take that right hand whilst the body punching would soften him up for a mid round stoppage around the 8th, Hearn's only real hope is taking him out early which I just don't see happening.

milkyboy wrote:The green fight was a couple of years earlier truss. Mugabi hadn't fought anyone of note, but it's easy enough to sell a guy with the nickname beast... With 25 fights 25 KOs.

Mugabi was 3:1 in the fight... About the same as Leonard against hagler.

As we've discussed many times hagler was scratching for worthwhile opponents as champion but he'd finally become a big ticket fighter and I don't doubt he'd have sold well against anyone at that time.

The primary point was mccallum was a novice (novice champion) who'd beaten no- one of real note when hagler fought mugabi... I don't recall him being pitched as a likely opponent.

He wasn't but when's that ever stopped some of the whacko theories on here!

milkyboy wrote:Leonard's odds shortened nearer the fight, he started off longer odds than mugabi, and will always have a following in any fight to keep the odds in check. 3:1 in a two horse race is firm outsider stuff... It's not buster Douglas.

Whichever, that your best comeback beefy? Ignoring the main points you can't answer and picking up on trivia... You learning from haz?

Jesus, another deluded punter! You got served up in that last debate RC!

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Leonard Hagler wouldn't have happened..but for John..

Think the Hearns war took a toll on Hagler...

Still think the Nunn that beat Tate beats every middle in history.

Nunn didn't like it up him. Hagler didn't actually ship much punishment against Hearns. After the first round, it was one way traffic. It was a long, hard career that caught up with Hagler.

He didn't have it up him......against Tate..

hazharrison wrote:

milkyboy wrote:Leonard's odds shortened nearer the fight, he started off longer odds than mugabi, and will always have a following in any fight to keep the odds in check. 3:1 in a two horse race is firm outsider stuff... It's not buster Douglas.

Whichever, that your best comeback beefy? Ignoring the main points you can't answer and picking up on trivia... You learning from haz?

Jesus, another deluded punter! You got served up in that last debate RC!

Ha Ha fella, you keep on shouting that the earth is flat with your placard and tannoy outside the train station. As long as you believe it, what the rest of the world thinks doesn't matter!

It's beer o'clock. Have a good weekend all.

milkyboy wrote:

hazharrison wrote:

milkyboy wrote:Leonard's odds shortened nearer the fight, he started off longer odds than mugabi, and will always have a following in any fight to keep the odds in check. 3:1 in a two horse race is firm outsider stuff... It's not buster Douglas.

Whichever, that your best comeback beefy? Ignoring the main points you can't answer and picking up on trivia... You learning from haz?

Jesus, another deluded punter! You got served up in that last debate RC!

Ha Ha fella, you  keep on shouting that the earth is flat with your placard and tannoy outside the train station. As long as you believe it, what the rest of the world thinks doesn't matter!

It's beer o'clock. Have a good weekend all.

"Keep on running....."

Shame for McCallum nothing ever came easy.....Bit of an ugly duckling..

Got every ounce out of his talent....Top fighter..

I was shocked when he lost to Kalambay...Then again Kalambay surprised us all..

He was one of the few guys who'd fight Jones when the best part of three divisions wouldn't.

hazharrison wrote:He was one of the few guys who'd fight Jones when the best part of three divisions wouldn't.

Wasn't that at LHW where Jones just treated it like an exhibition fight, just doing enough to keep McCallum at bay? Pretty much a shut out as I recall.

sohotnot wrote:

hazharrison wrote:He was one of the few guys who'd fight Jones when the best part of three divisions wouldn't.

Wasn't that at LHW where Jones just treated it like an exhibition fight, just doing enough to keep McCallum at bay? Pretty much a shut out as I recall.

Yeah, Jones carried him at points. McCallum said something afterwards like: "Forget Leonard, forget Hearns, Jones is a bad boy!"

hazharrison wrote:

sohotnot wrote:

hazharrison wrote:He was one of the few guys who'd fight Jones when the best part of three divisions wouldn't.

Wasn't that at LHW where Jones just treated it like an exhibition fight, just doing enough to keep McCallum at bay? Pretty much a shut out as I recall.

Yeah, Jones carried him at points. McCallum said something afterwards like: "Forget Leonard, forget Hearns, Jones is a bad boy!"

Can't see Coxy agreeing with that statement

milkyboy wrote:It seems odd in hindsight, but mugabi's knock out run made him a marketable opponent for hagler. Or Maybe it seemed that way in the uk, as mugabi was a duff fighter.

I'd say it was only post the Jackson win in '86 that mike's profile was really raised... And more so by the curry fight. He went to middle straight after that and lost to kalambay. The hagler ship had sailed into the sunset long before.

McCallum was criticised prior to the Jackson fight for sitting on a paper title and - effectively - not fighting. MM was hanging on for fights with Curry, Hearns and Mugabi which never came to fruition (obviously he dealt with Curry further down the road). Even MM admitted he'd let himself down by not fighting regularly.

sohotnot wrote:I don't consider it a defining fight, a career LMW who'd fought nobody? He was using that as to why Hagler would beat anybody 154 - 168. In his opinion there was never a fighter that came after that that would beat him and that includes RJJ, Toney, Hopkins, Nunn, Calzaghe etc. Now whilst I am a Hagler fan, and as has been discussed on here, he didn't have a record filled with atg's or at least genuine MW atg's.

I think you are right with hindsight, but I think also Mugabe took a little out of Hagler, that was a close fight for at least the first 6 rounds. Still don't see Mugabe as an atg LMW.

Mugabi wasn't an ATG but he was an absolute wrecking ball when Hagler fought him. Neither Hagler or Mugabi were ever the same after that titanic tussle and so Mugabi ends up like a Fernando Vargas or Jeff Lacey - with people questioning whether he was any good all along.

He was - his performance against Hagler proved that but he took a protracted hiding in that fight (and Hagler copped for one in victory also).

Why did Leonard say he fought Hagler again ??

Oh yes it was because he looked poor against Mugabi.....

But you like Hagler don't you...So Mugabi was a wrecking ball...

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Why did Leonard say he fought Hagler again ??

Oh yes it was because he looked poor against Mugabi.....

But you like Hagler don't you...So Mugabi was a wrecking ball...

It was because - for the first time in a long time - he looked beatable rather than poor. All credit to Mugabi for that.