Who is greater at Light Middleweight? Mike McCallum or Terry Norris

[scorpio83]

Who is greater at the Light Middleweight between Mike McCallum or Terry Norris? In my opinion, "The Bodysnatcher" Mike McCallum is the greater Light Middleweight fighter because other than being undefeated at that division, he was difficult to beat. Also, he is a great technician with his iron chin. What is your opinion?

[littlepug]

Norris was a fun flawed bundle of violent energy, Mccallum on the other hand was more measured, a master of his craft with better scalps to his name at the weight

[East End]

Hard to say which of them carried the most power. McCallum's left hook that floored Don Curry is legendary but Norris's first round demolition of John Mugabe was also pretty awesome. I would say McCallum had the better all round skill set though.

[gilgamesh]

I'd give the slight edge to McCallum mainly just for being a craftier, smarter fighter. Terry Norris was definitely the more explosive athlete as the OP mentioned. I very much enjoy watching both fighters, but I'd give the edge to McCallum as far as which one is better.

It's not by an overwhelming margin or anything though. If they had fought it would've been interesting.

[gilgamesh]

I'd say the edge goes to MM, as he had the better all round skills, and definitely the better chin.

I'd say he had the better jab and nobody would question he was the superior body puncher which would go a long way in nullifying or shutting down Norris' greater strengths which his speed and athleticism.

[paddy chavez]

I think Norris was the better light middle weight myself blistering speed and real power I like mcCallum but love Norris . I think mcCallum gets slightly elevated now Im pretty sure he never made the rings top ten fighters of the year in his career yet some claim the fab four ducked him where as Norris was a solid top 3 p4p fighter.

[elmersalsa]

The great Mike McCallum was a complete fighter. He had it all. He was better than Terry Norris.

[scorpio83]

Both McCallum and Norris are both two of the greatest Light Middleweights of all-time. As much I love Norris and his long accomplishment at light middleweight, McCallum had the skills and power along with his iron chin like I said before that made his opponents in his division had a hard time to beat him at 154lbs as McCallum was undefeated at 154lbs.

[elmersalsa]

The great Mike McCallum was a complete fighter. He had it all. He was better than Terry Norris.

Elmer.

When you keep things short and sweet you are well able to hit the nail directly on the head.

Personally, I firmly believe NONE of the fab 4 could have beaten Mike McCallum and certainly none of them could have stopped him. I see him KO'ing both Duran and Hearns, outpointing Hagler comfortably, but with Muricans being highly impressed by nature by such garbage as Barnum & Baileys circus, Leonard being gifted a decision due to being too afraid to engage Mike, and running like a greyhound.

I also believe that The Body Snatcher had the tools to beat any member of the Fab Four. And I am being realistic. He was as good as anyone of them.

[slappy]

McCallum ...

But serious question -- what did Kalambay have that gave McCallum so much trouble?

[elmersalsa]

McCallum ...

But serious question -- what did Kalambay have that gave McCallum so much trouble?

Maybe the Body Snatcher had an OFF NIGHT. That happened even to the very best fighters. He won the rematch, though.

[scorpio83]

McCallum ...

But serious question -- what did Kalambay have that gave McCallum so much trouble?

Maybe the Body Snatcher had an OFF NIGHT. That happened even to the very best fighters. He won the rematch, though.

Maybe McCallum had an off night against Kalambay in their first fight, but he managed to defeat him in their rematch like you said.

[Noxy]

McCallum ...

But serious question -- what did Kalambay have that gave McCallum so much trouble?

Movement, speed, counterpunching

[Counter-puncher]

McCallum ...

But serious question -- what did Kalambay have that gave McCallum so much trouble?

Movement, speed, counterpunching

[elmersalsa]

McCallum ...

But serious question -- what did Kalambay have that gave McCallum so much trouble?

Movement, speed, counterpunching

And why the movement, speed and counterpunching didn't work in the second fight? Was Sumbu Kalambay in an off night?

[Counter-puncher]

Movement, speed, counterpunching

And why the movement, speed and counterpunching didn't work in the second fight? Was Sumbu Kalambay in an off night?

it worked less well as McCallum had better tactics.

even with that, on my card he lost pretty much the last 5 rounds.

[Counter-puncher]

115-114 to kalambay one judges' card, according to the other officials McCallum won by 116-115 and 116-114. the movement and counterpunching still did pretty well.

[elmersalsa]

115-114 to kalambay one judges' card, according to the other officials McCallum won by 116-115 and 116-114. the movement and counterpunching still did pretty well.

But, Sumbu Kalambay still lost. That's the bottom line. I'm glad that the Body Snatcher won the rematch. If no rematch, then, lots of people in here would have believe that he could have never beaten Kalambay.

[Counter-puncher]

115-114 to kalambay one judges' card, according to the other officials McCallum won by 116-115 and 116-114. the movement and counterpunching still did pretty well.

But, Sumbu Kalambay still lost.

having managed to win maybe 16 out of 24 rounds that he shared the ring with McCallum

[elmersalsa]

115-114 to kalambay one judges' card, according to the other officials McCallum won by 116-115 and 116-114. the movement and counterpunching still did pretty well.

But, Sumbu Kalambay still lost.

having managed to win maybe 16 out of 24 rounds that he shared the ring with McCallum

It seems to me that the Body Snatcher was the better fighter.

[Counter-puncher]

But, Sumbu Kalambay still lost.

having managed to win maybe 16 out of 24 rounds that he shared the ring with McCallum

It seems to me that the Body Snatcher was the better fighter.

All in all yes but he had a nightmare style clash with Kalumbay

[elmersalsa]

having managed to win maybe 16 out of 24 rounds that he shared the ring with McCallum

It seems to me that the Body Snatcher was the better fighter.

All in all yes but he had a nightmare style clash with Kalumbay

A third fight decides who was better? Could Sumbu Kalambay had beaten the following guys?:
Roberto Duran
Thomas Hearns
Sugar Ray Leonard
Marvelous
Donald Curry

[scorpio83]

I believed in their rematch, McCallum was out-countering the counter-puncher in Kalambay and that is why McCallum is a great technician in the ring.

[Counter-puncher]

I believed in their rematch, McCallum was out-countering the counter-puncher in Kalambay and that is why McCallum is a great technician in the ring.

not in the later rounds, he wasn't, kalumbay landed some hellacious bombs rds 9-12

by the way I rally sound like I am boosting kalumbay here but IIRC the rounds won, McCallum was landing shots but not a lot of hard clean stuff, the rounds Kalumbay won later on were won with some real heavy quality shots, both hands, head and body.

I'm going to watch this one again tonight I think

[scorpio83]

Thanks for your respectful opinion, Counter-Puncher and I appreciate it.