Playing the Devil's Advocate for the Great Mike McCallum?

Ambling Alp II
Super Middleweight
Posts: 15182
Joined: 04 Nov 2012, 18:31

Re: Playing the Devil's Advocate for the Great Mike McCallum?

Post by Ambling Alp II »

No that's wrong. They were all contenders for several years while Moore and Griffith were champions. They never fought them. Moore and Griffith did not "clean out the division.
Ambling Alp II
Super Middleweight
Posts: 15182
Joined: 04 Nov 2012, 18:31

Re: Playing the Devil's Advocate for the Great Mike McCallum?

Post by Ambling Alp II »

The excuse for Hagler not fighting Mike McCallum in 1985 or 1986? For starters McCallum had never beat a middleweight before, and literally nobody was talking about this as a potential fight.
elmersalsa
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 15708
Joined: 02 Feb 2003, 03:50

Re: Playing the Devil's Advocate for the Great Mike McCallum?

Post by elmersalsa »

Ambling Alp II wrote: 20 Nov 2019, 11:38 The excuse for Hagler not fighting Mike McCallum in 1985 or 1986? For starters McCallum had never beat a middleweight before, and literally nobody was talking about this as a potential fight.
Mike McCallum was the established WBA World Jr Middleweight Champion, then. The fight could have been made. He called Marvelous.
jas80s
Cruiserweight
Posts: 572
Joined: 15 Oct 2010, 20:55

Re: Playing the Devil's Advocate for the Great Mike McCallum?

Post by jas80s »

Isn't this pretty much impossible to know without knowing the economic specifics of any negotiations?

If McCallum was demanding 50/50 splits for example, isn't that kind of a non-starter for making a fight? On the other hand, if there was record of McCallum agreeing to take very little money just to get a shot at any of the four and they still passed? Then, maybe there would be something to talk about.

Does anyone know of a credible source regarding how the money was to be split? My guess is, that has a lot to do with this, not just how good the fighters were.
Noxy
Super Middleweight
Posts: 6825
Joined: 02 Jun 2013, 10:57

Re: Playing the Devil's Advocate for the Great Mike McCallum?

Post by Noxy »

Does anyone actually remember this fight being talked about at the time? I don’t. Everyone wanted a crack at Hagler and McCallum wasn‘t first in line.
elmersalsa
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 15708
Joined: 02 Feb 2003, 03:50

Re: Playing the Devil's Advocate for the Great Mike McCallum?

Post by elmersalsa »

jas80s wrote: 20 Nov 2019, 14:25 Isn't this pretty much impossible to know without knowing the economic specifics of any negotiations?

If McCallum was demanding 50/50 splits for example, isn't that kind of a non-starter for making a fight? On the other hand, if there was record of McCallum agreeing to take very little money just to get a shot at any of the four and they still passed? Then, maybe there would be something to talk about.

Does anyone know of a credible source regarding how the money was to be split? My guess is, that has a lot to do with this, not just how good the fighters were.
You got a point there.

I don't think that Mike McCallum wanted as the same amount of money that the Fab 4 were making if there were a fight. They, the Fab 4, were THE ESTABLISHED SUPERSTARS of the 80s. But, The Body Snatcher by 1985 and 1986 was making noise when he stopped hard punching KO artist Julian "The Hawk" Jackson. It's not that the Jamaican won the fight. The thing was how he won. Very convincingly. He opened a lot of observers' eyes that he was a force to be reckoned with.

Did the Fab 4 didn't notice that? I think they did. Did they ignored him? Well, that's where the question lands.
Ambling Alp II
Super Middleweight
Posts: 15182
Joined: 04 Nov 2012, 18:31

Re: Playing the Devil's Advocate for the Great Mike McCallum?

Post by Ambling Alp II »

You act like all there is to scheduling a fight is one guy calling another on the phone.

McCallum : "Hey Marvin, how about fighting me in April?"
Marvin: "No Mike, I am scared of you." You are so good you could give Sumbu Kalambay a close fight. "

McCallum: "How about fighting me Ray?"
Don't you want to try to avenge your brother's loss in the amateurs:
Ray: "Yes I would like to avenge that important fight. My brothers amateur defeat is all that I can think about. However, you are just to good. I bet you could even give Herol Graham a close fight.

That isn't how it is done at all.

They don't actually talk to each other. Their managers talk to promoters. Both guys have to be free. They have to agree to financial terms, where and when the fight is schedule etc.


McCallum was not anyone's radar for a mega fight. Stop pretending that he was.
elmersalsa
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 15708
Joined: 02 Feb 2003, 03:50

Re: Playing the Devil's Advocate for the Great Mike McCallum?

Post by elmersalsa »

Ambling Alp II wrote: 20 Nov 2019, 16:49 You act like all there is to scheduling a fight is one guy calling another on the phone.

McCallum : "Hey Marvin, how about fighting me in April?"
Marvin: "No Mike, I am scared of you." You are so good you could give Sumbu Kalambay a close fight. "

McCallum: "How about fighting me Ray?"
Don't you want to try to avenge your brother's loss in the amateurs:
Ray: "Yes I would like to avenge that important fight. My brothers amateur defeat is all that I can think about. However, you are just to good. I bet you could even give Herol Graham a close fight.

That isn't how it is done at all.

They don't actually talk to each other. Their managers talk to promoters. Both guys have to be free. They have to agree to financial terms, where and when the fight is schedule etc.


McCallum was not anyone's radar for a mega fight. Stop pretending that he was.
I think that he was in the radar, but was ignored. That Julian Jackson knockout opened a lot of speculations. The man showed skills as good as the Fab 4. I wouldn't be surprised back then if he would have beaten Duran, Leonard and Hearns. The one that would have given him the most problems would have been Marvelous because maybe The Body Snatcher would have had problems at 160lbs without making some tune up fights there.
Onetimeonly
Super Featherweight
Posts: 11584
Joined: 16 Oct 2018, 06:28

Re: Playing the Devil's Advocate for the Great Mike McCallum?

Post by Onetimeonly »

Noxy wrote: 20 Nov 2019, 14:40 Does anyone actually remember this fight being talked about at the time? I don’t. Everyone wanted a crack at Hagler and McCallum wasn‘t first in line.
Mike wanted nothing to do with Marvin. He moved up right after hagler retired. None of these fights were talked about until years later on the internet. Mike was only known to diehards and he was Duran's mandatory when he fought hearns. We all would have been pissed if he fought mike instead
Cojimar 1946
Super Welterweight
Posts: 1704
Joined: 01 Mar 2015, 05:00

Re: Playing the Devil's Advocate for the Great Mike McCallum?

Post by Cojimar 1946 »

Ambling Alp II wrote: 20 Nov 2019, 11:37 No that's wrong. They were all contenders for several years while Moore and Griffith were champions. They never fought them. Moore and Griffith did not "clean out the division.
These guys consistently lost when they tried stepping up in class. I'm not sure its even fair to characterize some of them as contenders. If you are consistently losing to guys who lost to Moore and Griffith its not clear they have much reason to fight them.

Regardless, both guys managed to fit in a huge number of fights with good opponents in very short periods of time.

In 1960 alone for example Emile Griffith fought the following:
Denny Moyer
Gasper Ortega
Jorge Fernandez
Florentino Fernandez
Luis Rodriguez


There are guys that can go 3-4 years without fighting that many quality opponents and Griffith did it in one.
Imagine Hearns fighting Duran, McCallum, Julian Jackson, and Marvin Hagler all in one year. Griffith actually did stuff like that.
Ambling Alp II
Super Middleweight
Posts: 15182
Joined: 04 Nov 2012, 18:31

Re: Playing the Devil's Advocate for the Great Mike McCallum?

Post by Ambling Alp II »

I agree Moore and Griffith were great fighters. They fought a lot of quality of opponents. They usually won. (Though Griffith got the benefit of the doubt by the judges about a billion times.)

My main point is that Griffith and Moore did not "clean out the division". Nobody ever does.
The guys that I mentioned were not all time greats. But they were good fighters. And they were contenders for several years. And Moore and Griffith probably would have beaten. them. But they didn't.

Hearns didn't beat as many quality fighters as them. However, this is a guy that fought Benitez, Duran, Leonard, and Hagler. Not to mention people like Cuevas, Hill, several other solid fighters. Of all the people to rip for not fighting someone, it's silly to pick on Thomas Hearns.

Say you are the champ. You want to beat all the top 10 contenders. Let's say, somehow, someway, you managed to schedule 5 of them in a year, then 5 the next year. You beat them all. (This has never been close to happening, btw.)

You have now "cleaned out he division", right? No. There are now new fighters who are now contenders. If you retire, then it's why didn't you fight the new guys?
AntonioMartin
Middleweight
Posts: 1690
Joined: 22 Feb 2014, 13:19

Re: Playing the Devil's Advocate for the Great Mike McCallum?

Post by AntonioMartin »

I don't think he has being ducked...they were going where the money was the "fab 4".

Hagler would have beaten McCallum on points. As far as the others its a tossup with Leonard and Hearns but if Robbie Sims defeated Duran at 160 so could McCallum.
AntonioMartin
Middleweight
Posts: 1690
Joined: 22 Feb 2014, 13:19

Re: Playing the Devil's Advocate for the Great Mike McCallum?

Post by AntonioMartin »

Ambling Alp II wrote: 20 Nov 2019, 16:49 You act like all there is to scheduling a fight is one guy calling another on the phone.
.
Scott Frank might tell you that is how it's done... :lol:
elmersalsa
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 15708
Joined: 02 Feb 2003, 03:50

Re: Playing the Devil's Advocate for the Great Mike McCallum?

Post by elmersalsa »

AntonioMartin wrote: 21 Nov 2019, 06:54 I don't think he has being ducked...they were going where the money was the "fab 4".

Hagler would have beaten McCallum on points. As far as the others its a tossup with Leonard and Hearns but if Robbie Sims defeated Duran at 160 so could McCallum.
Marvelous didn't fight the whole 1985 after fighting Thomas Hearns. What was he looking for after beating Tommy?
Resting?
Calculating retirement?
Waiting for a call from Sugar Ray or Donald Curry?
Or just staying away from The Body Snatcher?.
elmersalsa
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 15708
Joined: 02 Feb 2003, 03:50

Re: Playing the Devil's Advocate for the Great Mike McCallum?

Post by elmersalsa »

And in 1986, after beating John "The Beast" Mugabi, Marvelous went into hibernating for a whole year. He could have fought McCallum in 1986.

Or was he resting?
Waiting for a call from Sugar Ray or Donald Curry?
A Hearns rematch in the works?
Or avoiding the Jamaican again?
BroughtonRulesRefuge
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2773
Joined: 16 Dec 2008, 06:55

Re: Playing the Devil's Advocate for the Great Mike McCallum?

Post by BroughtonRulesRefuge »

AntonioMartin wrote: 21 Nov 2019, 06:54 I don't think he has being ducked...they were going where the money was the "fab 4".

Hagler would have beaten McCallum on points. As far as the others its a tossup with Leonard and Hearns but if Robbie Sims defeated Duran at 160 so could McCallum.
- Sims won a stinker political decision running from a Lightwt still in his no mas disgrace,

Elmo knows better but can't resist digging dirt on a moribund topic.

Was Snatch ever popular with Jamaicans as their first champ? Seems to be competing with Holmes and Lewis as the most colossal bore living always jealous he wasn't a big star.

He quit Manny and then spends the rest of his life moaning about him and Hearns-not a champion!

Teenage Tony Ayala had the boxing world by the tail, not Snatch who had the perfect fighter to make a name. Too light in the loafers then for Torito?

When he stepped up to prime fighters he could do nothing with Collins and Herol painted a masterpiece on him only to be robbed. What, snatch dodged the rematch?

Hearns in the middle of making his name at higher wts, Marv at the end of his waiting for his sugar payday who was in the middle of multiple retirement parties.

That snatch was eminently forgettable in a golden era save for a few diehard fans obviously still sears his psyche. Needs some shrink wrap therapy or at least to wear a muzzle for his interviews.
AntonioMartin
Middleweight
Posts: 1690
Joined: 22 Feb 2014, 13:19

Re: Playing the Devil's Advocate for the Great Mike McCallum?

Post by AntonioMartin »

elmersalsa wrote: 21 Nov 2019, 09:07
AntonioMartin wrote: 21 Nov 2019, 06:54 I don't think he has being ducked...they were going where the money was the "fab 4".

Hagler would have beaten McCallum on points. As far as the others its a tossup with Leonard and Hearns but if Robbie Sims defeated Duran at 160 so could McCallum.
Or just staying away from The Body Snatcher?.
Hagler never stayed away from anyone.
elmersalsa
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 15708
Joined: 02 Feb 2003, 03:50

Re: Playing the Devil's Advocate for the Great Mike McCallum?

Post by elmersalsa »

AntonioMartin wrote: 21 Nov 2019, 10:26
elmersalsa wrote: 21 Nov 2019, 09:07

Or just staying away from The Body Snatcher?.
Hagler never stayed away from anyone.
Could be. There's always somebody out there to avoid. But, only 2 fights in 2 years wasn't Marvelous like. McCallum could have been in there in those 2 years.
Ambling Alp II
Super Middleweight
Posts: 15182
Joined: 04 Nov 2012, 18:31

Re: Playing the Devil's Advocate for the Great Mike McCallum?

Post by Ambling Alp II »

Nobody thought he was worth avoiding. He was just one of many fighters. He never stood out at all. You are pretend that he did, but he didn't. He was one of three WBS jr middleweight champions at the time. Nothing more. Ring didn't have him as their top Jr. Middle in 1985 or 1986. Literally nobody was calling for this fight.

But you are ignoring this and just saying what you want to say without any foundation. Again.
Flump
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2702
Joined: 14 May 2006, 14:11

Re: Playing the Devil's Advocate for the Great Mike McCallum?

Post by Flump »

I remember the era well and you could count on the fingers of a snake how many people were calling for McCallum to fight any of the fab 4. (And besides by this time Duran was seen as well beyond his best). The first time he got any widespread attention was when he laid out Curry. And even then people were saying it was a lucky shot as he was being outboxed.

Absolute fantasy to think he was in the mix for a superfight in 84, 85, 86 or 87, he wasn't a big enough name, good as he was.
elmersalsa
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 15708
Joined: 02 Feb 2003, 03:50

Re: Playing the Devil's Advocate for the Great Mike McCallum?

Post by elmersalsa »

Ambling Alp II wrote: 21 Nov 2019, 11:54 Nobody thought he was worth avoiding. He was just one of many fighters. He never stood out at all. You are pretend that he did, but he didn't. He was one of three WBS jr middleweight champions at the time. Nothing more. Ring didn't have him as their top Jr. Middle in 1985 or 1986. Literally nobody was calling for this fight.

But you are ignoring this and just saying what you want to say without any foundation. Again.
Just because your life was around Sugar Ray Leonard it doesn't mean that Mike McCallum didn't stood out. He was in National TV many times on the major networks. There wasn't no cable nor satellite dish like there's now.

McCallum was an extraordinary fighter. How great? We could only know if he fought the Fab 4 and the great Wilfred Benitez.
Ambling Alp II
Super Middleweight
Posts: 15182
Joined: 04 Nov 2012, 18:31

Re: Playing the Devil's Advocate for the Great Mike McCallum?

Post by Ambling Alp II »

I don't talk about Leonard all the time. I discuss other guys all the time.
MCCallum was an extraordinary fighter. Good enough to give Herol Graham, Sumbu Kalambay (the guy Nunn stopped in round) and even James Toney competitive fights. He was just as good as some other guys. And you have zero proof that they ducked him.

You really think he was on the same level as Leonard, Hearns, Duran , and Hagler? Good for you. Stick to that position. I predict that you will contradict yourself with this position and then not understand why people will think that. We shall see.
elmersalsa
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 15708
Joined: 02 Feb 2003, 03:50

Re: Playing the Devil's Advocate for the Great Mike McCallum?

Post by elmersalsa »

Ambling Alp II wrote: 21 Nov 2019, 14:47 I don't talk about Leonard all the time. I discuss other guys all the time.
MCCallum was an extraordinary fighter. Good enough to give Herol Graham, Sumbu Kalambay (the guy Nunn stopped in round) and even James Toney competitive fights. He was just as good as some other guys. And you have zero proof that they ducked him.

You really think he was on the same level as Leonard, Hearns, Duran , and Hagler? Good for you. Stick to that position. I predict that you will contradict yourself with this position and then not understand why people will think that. We shall see.
The Fab 4 were not the only extraordinary fighters of the 80s decade. There were also extraordinary fighters like Salvador Sanchez, Eusebio Pedroza, Mike McCallum, Hector "Macho" Camacho, Wilfredo Gomez, Larry Holmes, Mike Tyson, etc in that decade alone.

The Body Snatcher in his weight class did extraordinary and extremely great. He was bad ass. And going up in weight class, he also did great at old age.

But, he was there in the Fab 4's noses. That they chose to fight other fighters, that was on them, not McCallum's.
Ambling Alp II
Super Middleweight
Posts: 15182
Joined: 04 Nov 2012, 18:31

Re: Playing the Devil's Advocate for the Great Mike McCallum?

Post by Ambling Alp II »

Nobody said there weren't other extraordinary fighters. People have just argued that McCallum isn't on the same level as the four mentioned, and that they didn't duck him. That's all.
Wee Tommy
Heavyweight
Heavyweight

Re: Playing the Devil's Advocate for the Great Mike McCallum?

Post by Wee Tommy »

elmersalsa wrote: 20 Nov 2019, 07:38
Ambling Alp II wrote: 19 Nov 2019, 12:12
Moore never fought Paul Andrews, Erich Schoeppner, Chic Calderwood, or Doug Jones.

Griffith never fought Curtis Cokes, Luis Fredrico Thompson, or Willie Ludick.
Marvelous could have fight McCallum by 1985 or '86. Marvelous fought twice in 2 years.

What is the excuse for that?
He was drinking and partying enjoying his new wealth.
Post Reply