How good was the Bodysnatcher? Seems he is underrated and underappreciated by a lot of the boxing public. Does he get the recognition he deserves, ya think? :confused:
Printable View
How good was the Bodysnatcher? Seems he is underrated and underappreciated by a lot of the boxing public. Does he get the recognition he deserves, ya think? :confused:
Put Mike in any era and he would have been around world class.
A truely great modern fighter.
One of my favourite fighters of all time , McCallum is so underrated,
a truly great fighter,and how can anyone forget the Curry KO. Class.
I wanted Curry to win but Mike was quality, he beat Herol Graham too. I hated the fucker but watched him and slowly appreciated what a great fighter he was when he revenged against Kalamaby. He was a great technical fighter and I still think he beat Toney the first 2 fights.Quote:
Originally Posted by roberto duran legend
He does now but didn't at the time. Kalue, Harding, are two underrated fights i enjoy. McCallum was having alot of trouble vs Kalue before he caught up with him a pretty good scrap.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beanflicker
And the Harding fight was a great exhibition of boxing by McCallum, in probably his last real good performance. Harding with his Margarito like style kept it close and competitive in a very good fight.
Everyone always mentions Toney, Jackson, Curry, fights. But i find them two fights to be closet classics in a great career.
Mike beating Harding at light heavy (think it was short notice) was one of his best achievements. That was a truly good performance. His body shots were wicked and he schooled Michael Watson and would have done the same to Benn and Eubanks.
Always a tricky one to judge, but I think I'd insert him as the best Light Middleweight.
The martinez of his era! Overshadowed by the 3 big guns. But a GREAT fighter none the less. Why he was fighting at LHW/CW is anyones guess!
Cotto, floyd and mayweather! Sergio martinez.
Hearns, duran and leonard! Mcallum.
Actually a very nice comparison there.Quote:
Originally Posted by THE PHILOSOPHER
I think I heard an interview by him before- he just fought where he was natural. Never worried about physical training too much, just skills and speed.
He was old by the time he was fighting light heavy - light middle and middle weight was his prime.Quote:
Originally Posted by DonnyActually a very nice comparison there.Quote:
Originally Posted by THE PHILOSOPHER
I think I heard an interview by him before- he just fought where he was natural. Never worried about physical training too much, just skills and speed.
A beast of a fighter. Never really got his dues because he missed out on the fab four. He'd have beaten Hearns and Duran for me, and Hagler could have been fight of the decade.
Well Its all about primes, and weight divisions really,I loved watching McCallum
but he wouldnt beat Hagler, or a lightweight Duran you cheeky bugger;)
I heard McCallum used to be able to counter Hearns's jab in sparring with those famous body shots, he also beat a poor man's Hearns in Milton McCrory. I think he'd be too tough for Hearns in the end, i also think he'd beat Duran who was too up and down above Lightweight.
Hagler/McCallum would be a close one too hard for me to call, i think Leonard would beat McCallum though. And my reason's are because a prime McCallum lost handily to Sumbu Kalmabay who used movement and a good jab to beat him, i think Leonard has similar qualties and does those things a bit better than Kalambay.
Very, I think the additional body mass was an effect of age as opposed to physical development.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
You know I think you're point has a lot of validity. I think anything over 160lbs and MccCallum wasn't himself. That may sound like a cop out for a fighter I am admittedly very fond of, but I actually believe it too ;D
Mike would beat Duran at light middle and middleweight.Quote:
Originally Posted by roberto duran legend
I think he would have beaten Leonard at middlewight too.
Leonard done things a bit better than Kalambay, are you fucking serious :vd:Quote:
Originally Posted by ICB
Why wouldn't i be serious ?Quote:
Originally Posted by roberto duran legendLeonard done things a bit better than Kalambay, are you fucking serious :vd:Quote:
Originally Posted by ICB
Leonard was not that great at middleweight, no way would he have lived with decent middleweights at the time, Hagler screwed his fight up with Leonard. There was a reason Leonard never fought Nunn and the others at the time, because they would have beaten him.Quote:
Originally Posted by ICBWhy wouldn't i be serious ?Quote:
Originally Posted by roberto duran legendLeonard done things a bit better than Kalambay, are you fucking serious :vd:Quote:
Originally Posted by ICB
How good was Mike? Roy Jones upped his percentage of body punches after they met and said he knew why then why he was called,"The body snatcher!"
yes he is very underrated imo. I once mentioned him an a roy jones discussion as one of his victories...the "guy" I was debating with called McCallum a "bum" "who "..etc......I stopped the discussion right there...no need in even going on with those types.Quote:
Originally Posted by roberto duran legend
reply2: yes he called mike a bum. lol. can you believe that? Then he goes on about how virgil hill was a nobody..etc. I simply just stopped talking his sheer ignorance about the sport was enough for me.
Got some cool quotes from a "Best I've Fought" article with James Toney. James gives Mccallum big respect.
Best fighter: Mike McCallum -- That’s an easy choice, right off the top of my head it’s the Body Snatcher. He was the best fighter I fought at middleweight, super middleweight and cruiserweight. Out of all the fighters I fought, I respect him the most because he made me think about everything I tried to do. Before McCallum I was just runnin’ in on everyone, but he made me slow down and think for the first time.
Best Boxer: McCallum -- Yup, it’s him again. It’s between McCallum and Michael Nunn, but I gotta go with McCallum because he was a master boxer who wasn’t afraid to stand his ground. Nunn was mostly fast. I admit that he outboxed me for about nine rounds, but my body shots slowed him down. I told him during the fight ‘I’m gonna catch you!’ And I did.
Best defense: McCallum: He was right there in front of me, but I had a hard time hitting him with clean punches. I basically came into my own by fighting him. I learned how to be elusive without running around the ring by fighting Mike McCallum three times.
Best jab: McCallum: Mike’s jab was like a piston. There were other guys I fought who had good jabs, like Nunn and Jones, but they just had speed and they just flicked it. Mike popped that jab with authority. He was an old-school fighter.
Smartest: McCallum: Come on, who do you think it is? Who’s the one fighter I truly respect? You got it, the Body Snatcher, Mike McCallum. I fought my share of boxers who thought they were clever like Roy Jones, Michael Nunn, Montell Griffin, and Reggie Johnson, but they were all scared to really fight. McCallum boxed, he fought, he defended, and he didn’t run all over the ring. He could do all that because he was smart.
That is a lot of respect from Toney although I think that has also to do with Toney hating Roy Jones and possibly Nunn.
As I said I thought Mike beat Toney but Hagler and the US audience had Toney winning against McCallum when they met.
Yeah Toney is a strange cat. I was surprised to see him list Merqui Sosa as the hardest P4P puncher he faced.
I know that Toney said the hardest he has ever been hit was by Barclay, but he did not show it to him.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beanflicker
As a fan of the craft (and James Toney), I gotta take my hat off to him for the Barkley fight.
That was a virtuoso performance that brought the sweet science to the level of fine art imo. What a horrific ass-whipping.
Agreed that was a beautiful beating if ever there was one and Toney’s finest. I was afraid for him because Barkley looked scary and fully motivated.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beanflicker
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beanflicker
I think his problem was that he was a late developer.
He won his first world title at 28. He didn't come into focus until 1986 when he beat Julian Jackson by that time he was 30.
The marquee names in the middleweight division were Hagler - Hearns - Leonard - Duran
In 86 - Hagler was getting ready for his super fight with Leonard in 87 and bowed out after that. Leonard was lining up his super fight with Hagler and then moved up to Light heavyweight. Hearns was coming of a loss against Hagler in 85 and McCallum would have been viewed as too dangerous a fighter to come back against. Duran took two years out of the ring after Hearns nearly took his head off in 1984. Duran came back in 1986 and again McCallum would have been seen as too dangerous type of fighter to come back against.
For whatever reason he never fought the awesome foursome. Therein lies his problem. However when you look at the list of guys he has beaten Don Curry, Steve Collins, Sumbu Kalambay (2nd time), Michael Watson, Herol Graham he has not done too badly. Also it must remembered that even though Don Curry was his biggest win, he was getting outclassed up until that point. I think his biggest problem was that straight after his Curry win, he goes to Italy and gets beaten by Sumbu Kalambay in 88.
Sometimes as fighter, it pays to run your mouth after his Curry win. He should have been saying
"American fighters are bums. Hagler is overrated. He will blind Leonard if they fight. Duran is a has been. Hearns is chinny"
Why after beating Curry, when he was undefeated (32-0) and at the peak of his powers and marketability, he and his team felt the need to take a backward step and go to the backwaters in Italy, a notoriously hard place to get a win and fight some unknown guy I will never know.
Also he fought James Toney 3 times (2 losses, 1 draw) and Roy Jones blatantly said that, out of respect that he had for McCallum, he didn't want to hurt him so he let McCallum hear the final bell when they fought in 96. Also his style of fighting wasn't the most exciting either. Plus he was not promoted by Don King or Bob Arum or any of the major boxing big hitters.
My opinion is, that I don't think McCallum was under-rated. He is rated where is his. A very good fighter but not the Jedi you think he is. I think a prime Hagler - Leonard - Duran or Hearns would have ran him out of the ring.
It was not McCallums style to bad mouth people. He moved up probably because he could not make the light middle limit any longer. Mike was a quality fighter which you could watch all day as his punches were perfect and his body shots brutal. No one did it better.