Hearns vs McCallum

[Kalan]

Armstrong outgrew the featherweight division. Let that title go... He was able to move up from lightweight to welter because he faced light hitters... When he faced a real Welterweight in Robinson, he fought the suckiest and most dreary fight any fan ever sat through...

Armstrong was a fair puncher with a strong chin, little boxing skill, and good endurance.. He fought like Joe Frazier, absorbing more punches than the average man could throw -- but if and when he met a real good boxer-puncher he was dead meat. There were 30 fights he didn't win. He did a tremendous amount of pushing, shoving, and butting and he was disqualified twice for fouling -- although he generally had friendly referees.. Pushing with your head shoulders and forearms are fouls and Armstrong did that constantly. He didn't have a jab and couldn't box or counter from range.

Anybody who was a great boxer-puncher would beat Armstrong - and that includes Edwin Valero.. Armstrong had an 83% winning ratio and a 56% KO ratio.. Not bad, but not great.. Valero had a 100% winning ratio and a 100% KO ratio... Watch Valero's fights and Armstrong's fights... Ask yourself who has the better footwork... who landed the cleaner, harder, faster punches... and who did the most butting, pushing, fouling, brawling, and less effective boxing and punching.

[gilgamesh]

Armstrong outgrew the featherweight division. Let that title go... He was able to move up from lightweight to welter because he faced light hitters... When he faced a real Welterweight in Robinson, he fought the suckiest and most dreary fight any fan ever sat through...

Armstrong was a fair puncher with a strong chin, little boxing skill, and good endurance.. He fought like Joe Frazier, absorbing more punches than the average man could throw -- but if and when he met a real good boxer-puncher he was dead meat. There were 30 fights he didn't win. He did a tremendous amount of pushing, shoving, and butting and he was disqualified twice for fouling -- although he generally had friendly referees.. Pushing with your head shoulders and forearms are fouls and Armstrong did that constantly. He didn't have a jab and couldn't box or counter from range.

Anybody who was a great boxer-puncher would beat Armstrong - and that includes Edwin Valero.. Armstrong had an 83% winning ratio and a 56% KO ratio.. Not bad, but not great.. Valero had a 100% winning ratio and a 100% KO ratio... Watch Valero's fights and Armstrong's fights... Ask yourself who has the better footwork... who landed the cleaner, harder, faster punches... and who did the most butting, pushing, fouling, brawling, and less effective boxing and punching.

Valero shouldn't even be mentioned in the same sentence as Armstrong. There's not a single great fighter from Boxing's past, present or future that Valero beats. He's a legend in your mind. In the real world he was a very hittable boxer/puncher with a gawdy record that really never fought nobody. He fought 2 good opponents, and the best fighter he ever beat (Demarco) ain't all that great, and has been beaten handily by lots of fighters. Including suck ass Broner.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Valero shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath with O'Grady, Paul or kenty.

[elmersalsa]

I can't believe someone as Edwin Valero would be considered an all time great fighter like the likes of Kalan, who in my estimation, knows about boxing. I think it's way odd.

[gilgamesh]

I can't believe someone as Edwin Valero would be considered an all time great fighter like the likes of Kalan, who in my estimation, knows about boxing. I think it's way odd.

Kalan knows some things about Boxing, but as far as who he thinks is great he's often delusional as hell. Anthony Joshua is also the #1 Heavyweight of all time to him, and George Foreman or Joe Frazier are bums in his opinion. The craziest nonsense I've ever heard on a Boxing forum has come from that guy.

Valero is P4P all time Top 10 in Kalan's mind by the way. In spite of the fact that he's not even one of the 150 best of all time in his own weight class.

[Syntax Error]

Different weight divisions Einstein

Well, Einstein Sr, what about a catchweight contest?

[Syntax Error]

I wonder if Mike McCallum could have beaten Wilt Chamberlain?

He would've

I think so too.

It's McCallum's body attack that would have caused Chamberlain to 'wilt' towards the end!

I think that's the reason why Chamberlain ducked McCallum.

[elmersalsa]

I can't believe someone as Edwin Valero would be considered an all time great fighter like the likes of Kalan, who in my estimation, knows about boxing. I think it's way odd.

Kalan knows some things about Boxing, but as far as who he thinks is great he's often delusional as hell. Anthony Joshua is also the #1 Heavyweight of all time to him, and George Foreman or Joe Frazier are bums in his opinion. The craziest nonsense I've ever heard on a Boxing forum has come from that guy.

Valero is P4P all time Top 10 in Kalan's mind by the way. In spite of the fact that he's not even one of the 150 best of all time in his own weight class.

Yeah, Kalan has said some weird stuff. Does he do it on purpose? Maybe. Some stuff that he has said are way far from the truth. Remarkable ourageous quotes!

But aside of that, I think he knows his boxing history. It may be some. But some is better than not knowing nothing at all.

[gilgamesh]

I can't believe someone as Edwin Valero would be considered an all time great fighter like the likes of Kalan, who in my estimation, knows about boxing. I think it's way odd.

Kalan knows some things about Boxing, but as far as who he thinks is great he's often delusional as hell. Anthony Joshua is also the #1 Heavyweight of all time to him, and George Foreman or Joe Frazier are bums in his opinion. The craziest nonsense I've ever heard on a Boxing forum has come from that guy.

Valero is P4P all time Top 10 in Kalan's mind by the way. In spite of the fact that he's not even one of the 150 best of all time in his own weight class.

Yeah, Kalan has said some weird stuff. Does he do it on purpose? Maybe. Some stuff that he has said are way far from the truth. Remarkable ourageous quotes!

But aside of that, I think he knows his boxing history. It may be some. But some is better than not knowing nothing at all.

If your knowledge of Boxing history leads you to the conclusion that Joshua is the #1 Heavyweight of all time, Valero is P4P All Time Top 10, and Wilt Chamberlain beats Ali...I'd consider that a waste of your life because you never learned anything about the sport in all your years of watching it. It'd be like if you've been watching NBA since the 1960's and you think the best all time players are Jason Collins and Luol Deng and you think the Local High School Basketball team could win the NBA Finals

[BoxBuzz]

I like the give and take here, but unlike many of you, I don't question Kalan's integrity, when it comes to the question "does he believe what he says".


i think he does believe when he says it. And sometimes it's contradictory, but he can usually put those in context, and sensibly rationalize.


So, I'm astonished at some of his opinions, and sometimes I worry when we agree....as we sometimes do.

I think he puts all of his faith in the fundamentals. If you have them, then it's always going to work. Monzon is a case where that holds true.

Some of the trainers that have come and gone from this forum shared a lot of his doctrine.....so I try to listen without prejudice.

I wonder how dempseyfire and Kalan would interact.....he was a contributor who had a pretty good assessment ability for the fundamentals, and had a recognition of those who could afford to take liberties with the fundamentals and suffer little in the way of fallout. Valero seems an exception as a fighter that I would expect Kalan to champion, ....I don't see him as fundamental boxer....I saw him as a puncher in his weight class. Maybe with some swarming options at his command. But not a great ring general....he had never been tested on that. At least to my eye.

And questioning Armstrong makes me think Kalan's Dad had a real estate deal go bad that somehow involved Hank's family. Or maybe they called in the mortgage on his house, so he's nursing a vendetta.

But I do think he correctly recognizes the potential greatness of Joshua....be interesting to see how that pans out. Problem with potential is that that's all that it is....until it's developed. And that takes commitment and diligence.....and time......MORE than six months...believe it or not.


As far as McCallum beating Hearns....it's possible, and it's possible it would end up a stoppage with Hearns smirking.......In my opinion If it was McCallum that walked into the ring instead of Hagler than night, I think Tommy would not have fractured his hand on Mike's head, and McCallum would have had an all expense paid vacation to dream land that night.

Inversely if Mike would have showed up as Tommy's replacement, I think Hagler would have beaten up on him all night long, won the decision and sent Mike to the Hospital.


But that's just my opinion.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

I'd bet that kalans training experience consists of fight night career mode on his Xbox in his mommy's basement. That's how he's amassed 100's of pupils. He's either a troll, child, senile or a moron. It can only be one.

[Kalan]

Kalan knows some things about Boxing, but as far as who he thinks is great he's often delusional as hell. Anthony Joshua is also the #1 Heavyweight of all time to him, and George Foreman or Joe Frazier are bums in his opinion. The craziest nonsense I've ever heard on a Boxing forum has come from that guy.

Valero is P4P all time Top 10 in Kalan's mind by the way. In spite of the fact that he's not even one of the 150 best of all time in his own weight class.

Yeah, Kalan has said some weird stuff. Does he do it on purpose? Maybe. Some stuff that he has said are way far from the truth. Remarkable ourageous quotes!

But aside of that, I think he knows his boxing history. It may be some. But some is better than not knowing nothing at all.

If your knowledge of Boxing history leads you to the conclusion that Joshua is the #1 Heavyweight of all time, Valero is P4P All Time Top 10, and Wilt Chamberlain beats Ali...I'd consider that a waste of your life because you never learned anything about the sport in all your years of watching it. It'd be like if you've been watching NBA since the 1960's and you think the best all time players are Jason Collins and Luol Deng and you think the Local High School Basketball team could win the NBA Finals

You challenged me to pick 7 fights and I beat your picks... because you picked Trout to beat Jermall Charlo of all things lol... Now you know Wladimir is 40 years old and already lost to Fury -- but you're picking him again. Good luck with that one.

And you're a damned LIAR gilgamesh.. I never said Foreman and Frazier were bums... Valero was a 2-division World Champion who NEVER lost or drew a fight...or ever failed to KO an opponent.. That might have something to do with his boxing and punching ability.. There were 30 fights that Armstrong DIDN'T win despite fighting scores of horrendous cherry-picks.. He lost twice by DQ and was a habitual head-butter, pusher, and fouler.. And just maybe he HAD to fight like that because he couldn't box or punch that well.

[Bricks]

I'd bet that kalans training experience consists of fight night career mode on his Xbox in his mommy's basement. That's how he's amassed 100's of pupils. He's either a troll, child, senile or a moron. It can only be one.

Id have to agree with this entirely.

And I fail to see the fuss about kalan and his opinions.There is nothing revelatory about him and no insight in him. He's just an everyday idiot on youtube proclaiming Mike Tyson as the greatest of all time. I wonder if he is.......boxbuzz's alter ego ....someone who trolls to get a reaction from this small group of older regulars and hence site traffic...... I jest just kidding....

[Counter-puncher]

I

I wonder how dempseyfire and Kalan would interact.....he was a contributor who had a pretty good assessment ability for the fundamentals, and had a recognition of those who could afford to take liberties with the fundamentals and suffer little in the way of fallout. Valero seems an exception as a fighter that I would expect Kalan to champion, ....I don't see him as fundamental boxer....I saw him as a puncher in his weight class. Maybe with some swarming options at his command. But not a great ring general....he had never been tested on that. At least to my eye.

.

the crock that he peddles on Valero is up there with his worst, he talks of Valero's good defence FFS. dude's chin was way up in the air to be hit even by someone of the quality (or lack of it) of someone like Mosquera, who put Valero on the canvas two or three times IIRC

[BoxBuzz]

I'd bet that kalans training experience consists of fight night career mode on his Xbox in his mommy's basement. That's how he's amassed 100's of pupils. He's either a troll, child, senile or a moron. It can only be one.

Id have to agree with this entirely.

And I fail to see the fuss about kalan and his opinions.There is nothing revelatory about him and no insight in him. He's just an everyday idiot on youtube proclaiming Mike Tyson as the greatest of all time. I wonder if he is.......boxbuzz's alter ego ....someone who trolls to get a reaction from this small group of older regulars and hence site traffic...... I jest just kidding....

Hey, that hurts........I know my open mindedness can be construed in some odd ways, but I work with folks with brain injuries.....so when I see odd judgments, I spend little time being judgmental, and more time being concerned. lol.

And I get very curious when I see information which is available to all, which is typically leading most people to main street, and at the same time leading a few stragglers to the edge of town. The stragglers are far more interesting to my way of thinking.

I'm not one to question the sincerity of odd conclusions.....but I will challenge them.

[Counter-puncher]

i mean shit just imagine what he'd say about any fighter he didn't champion, being knocked down by a shitty fighter like Mosquera, he'd use it to denigrate their entire career

[Kalan]

Armstrong outgrew the featherweight division. Let that title go... He was able to move up from lightweight to welter because he faced light hitters... When he faced a real Welterweight in Robinson, he fought the suckiest and most dreary fight any fan ever sat through...

Armstrong was a fair puncher with a strong chin, little boxing skill, and good endurance.. He fought like Joe Frazier, absorbing more punches than the average man could throw -- but if and when he met a real good boxer-puncher he was dead meat. There were 30 fights he didn't win. He did a tremendous amount of pushing, shoving, and butting and he was disqualified twice for fouling -- although he generally had friendly referees.. Pushing with your head shoulders and forearms are fouls and Armstrong did that constantly. He didn't have a jab and couldn't box or counter from range.

Anybody who was a great boxer-puncher would beat Armstrong - and that includes Edwin Valero.. Armstrong had an 83% winning ratio and a 56% KO ratio.. Not bad, but not great.. Valero had a 100% winning ratio and a 100% KO ratio... Watch Valero's fights and Armstrong's fights... Ask yourself who has the better footwork... who landed the cleaner, harder, faster punches... and who did the most butting, pushing, fouling, brawling, and less effective boxing and punching.

Valero shouldn't even be mentioned in the same sentence as Armstrong. There's not a single great fighter from Boxing's past, present or future that Valero beats. He's a legend in your mind. In the real world he was a very hittable boxer/puncher with a gawdy record that really never fought nobody. He fought 2 good opponents, and the best fighter he ever beat (Demarco) ain't all that great, and has been beaten handily by lots of fighters. Including suck ass Broner.

You don't deal well with facts... Armstrong lost 21 times... Many of the guys who beat Armstrong were unknown and had numerous defeats on their records to guys who were never heard from before or since... Ray Robinson is the most famous boxer on Armstrong's record and Armstrong lost every round and stunk the joint out with his lack of effort... Beau Jack beat Armstrong by UD in an easy matchup for him... Ruben Shank was comparatively green with only 18 wins, but he beat Armstrong by UD... Joe Conde had 17 previous defeats and was an extremely light hitter, yet he knocked Armstrong down and beat him unanimously... Fritzie Zivic beat Armstrong by UD and several months later knocked him out. Zivic had numerous previous defeats on his record, including losing 12 or 13 at one stretch... Armstrong lost twice by DQ and was a habitual fouler.

All those defeats were a product of Armstrong leading with his head and absorbing numerous punches... He pushed and shoved with his head, shoulders, forearms and gloves for leverage... and just generally walked into punches while being very easy to hit... But lets just sweep all those facts under the rug like they never happened, because we're just here to perpetuate fan exploitation and myths.

[Bricks]

I would argue kalans viewpoints are of a main street variety......there being two mainstreets.....one the knowledgable advocate who enhances debate into a rich tapestry...often has differing views too......than the other main street is the youtube type troll who is just plain dumb,frequently outrageous,who lowers the level of debate with strong protestations such as norris beat a peak srl, henry armstrong was shite...joshua is the atg hw...

Our friend falls into the latter.his type are ten a penny on youtube.

The kind of maverick you describe is more akin to a il duce...