Hearns vs McCallum

[Bricks]

There was a fair bit written at the time, about McCallum fighting the big 4 (Hearns, Hagler, Leonard, Duran) and it's odd looking back that he never got to fight any of them. He certainly deserved a few decent paydays at the very least

p . apparently he was a bit of a handful to manage, which may have contributed to his lack of mega fights

Bollox.......Ive got a lot of magazines off the time and there wasn't any kind of clamour for those fights....it was hardly pac-money.....Mccallum had no patience and brushed people up the wrong way, plus he lost his fights at crucial times in his career and he was just a bitter jealous guy.....the fab four had top fights to make with each other which would earn them more money and recognition .....why should they overlook those just to fight mccallum?.......instead of fights there was a real clamour for...like srl-hagler.....hearns-srl..........Mccallum was always upper B list not A list........the fact when he did get his big opportunities to fight a A list type ...like james Toney or Jones he failed...was no surprise to me.....he had been outboxed by a shot don curry.....eeked out a win over herol graham....lost clearly to sumbu kalambay......he wasn't quite in the class of the fab four but yes it is unfair that somewhere along the line he didn't get at least 1 fight with these guys....if it had been duran in 86 or beyond he wins on points but it wouldn't be easy......tommy after 93 he could take ....before that he gets beaten......srl in 1991 instead of Norris yeah mike beats him .....but the moaning this ffucking guy does overclouds all that.....ffs he was a 3 time world champ.....he had the duvas behind him....he got fights with curry,mcrory,toney, jones jnr the last of which was a blatant payday.....he will go down as an ATG BUT...the fact is MIke had not done enough at certain crucial time frames to make a fight with the fab four a superfight. Should he have got at least 1 fight with them......YES....if it were today the fights would be made as there are a lack of stars today.....but back in the 80s there were lots of stars.....Yes he should have had his mandatory fight with duran in 1984 but mike should see it as he got a far easier fight with Mannion...up against duran of hagler and cuevas vintage he loses to imo....a title fight with duran in 1984 wouldn't have given him a big payday either....and recognition? well laing had already beaten roberto it would have been no more recognition than robbie sims got

[SaadOffTheDeck]

There was a fair bit written at the time, about McCallum fighting the big 4 (Hearns, Hagler, Leonard, Duran) and it's odd looking back that he never got to fight any of them. He certainly deserved a few decent paydays at the very least

p . apparently he was a bit of a handful to manage, which may have contributed to his lack of mega fights

Bollox.......Ive got a lot of magazines off the time and there wasn't any kind of clamour for those fights....it was hardly pac-money.....Mccallum had no patience and brushed people up the wrong way, plushe lost his fights at key times and he was just a bitter jealous guy.....the fab four had top fights to make with each other which would earn them more money and recognition why overlook those just to fight mccallum?.......fights there was a real clamour for...like srl-hagler.....hearns-srl..........Mccallum was always upper B list not A list........the fact when he did get his big opportunities to fight a A list type ...like james Toney or Jones he failed...was no surprise to me.....he had been outboxed by a shot don curry.....eeked out a win over herol graham....lost to sumbu kalambay......he wasn't quite in the class of the fab four but yes it is unfair that somewhere along the line he didn't get at least 1 fight with these guys....if it had been duran in 86 or beyond he wins on points but it wouldn't be easy......tommy after 93 he could take before that he gets beaten......srl in 1991 instead of Norris yeah mike beats him .....but the moaning the ffucking guy does overclouds all that.....ffs he was a 3 time world champ.....he had the duvas behind him....he got fights with curry,toney, jones jnr the last of which was a blatant payday.....he will go down as an ATG BUT...the fact is MIke had not done enough at certain crucial time frames to make a fight with the fab four a superfight. Should he have got at least 1 fight with them......YES....if it were today the fights would be made as there are a lack of stars today.....but back in the 80s there were lots of stars.....Yes he should have had his mandatory fight with duran in 1984 but mike should see it as he got a far easier fight with Mannion...a title fight would duran in 1984 wouldn't have given him a big payday....recognition? well laing had already beaten roberto

That myth has carried ridiculous ground through the years. There were no articles clamoring for those fights. Mike himself never mentioned Hagler's name, he could have gotten that fight simply by moving up. If Duran would have fought his mandatory against Mike instead of dropping the belt to unify with Hearns the only people on earth that would have been happy would be Mike and his friends and family.

[elmersalsa]

Throughout the majority of their careers I would've favored Hearns by Decision. McCallum might've been able to take him if they'd fought in say 1993 or 1994 because I figure he'd have had more left than Tommy at that point and probably been able to take him, but as long as Tommy is at or near his best he outboxes McCallum almost every time.

I don't know if he outboxes The Body Snatcher, but, I don't rule out a Hitman's win possibility here. Both to me, were extraordinary boxers. It's a difficult pick for me. But, one thing I agree: Both of them were the very best top 2 of the 154lbs class. If someone wants to put McCallum first or the Hitman as #1 154pounder, I would not had a problem with that.

[elmersalsa]

The great Mike McCallum came little late for the party.

[cfang]

A crazy post this. Hearns was better than McCallum. Kal sees one vid with mike mcC waffling on and thinks there was clamour for a hagler/mcC fight. I remember it at the time - zero interest from anyone. Hearns was a legendary fighter McCallum a very very good one. Hearns would beat him 4/5 times at any stage up til the early 90s when mike may have more left. Tommy was a fabulous fighter and would be a handful for anyone ever at welter, lt middle, middle, super and lt heavy.

154... McCallum KO's Hearns in 3...

160... McCallum KO's Hearns in 3...

168... McCallum wins UD over Hearns

175... McCallum win UD over Hearns

Barkley also beat Hearns at 175. Hearns looked good against fluffy hitter Virgil Hill -- but a better puncher, Barkley, outpointed him. Hearns hated punchers

[Kalan]

A HANDFUL??? ... Hearns got a handful of knuckles from Iran Barkley---who knocked him down 3 X and knocked him out... I guess those weren't lucky shots because he connected consistently enough to beat Hearns twice... and knock Hearns out when he was 29 years old.

Toney pounded and stopped Barkley with little effort---a couple of fights after he polished Hearns off for the 2nd time ... but Toney couldn't hurt McCallum in their draw when McCallum was 35 years old... Hearns ducked Toney and McCallum.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Yet Nunn stopped kalambay with one punch and McCallum couldn't hurt him. Nunn couldn't hurt Barkley but hearns did. I guess all we can get from that is Nunn and hearns punched harder than McCallum!

[bollox]

There was a fair bit written at the time, about McCallum fighting the big 4 (Hearns, Hagler, Leonard, Duran) and it's odd looking back that he never got to fight any of them. He certainly deserved a few decent paydays at the very least

p . apparently he was a bit of a handful to manage, which may have contributed to his lack of mega fights

Bollox.......Ive got a lot of magazines off the time and there wasn't any kind of clamour for those fights....it was hardly pac-money.....Mccallum had no patience and brushed people up the wrong way, plushe lost his fights at key times and he was just a bitter jealous guy.....the fab four had top fights to make with each other which would earn them more money and recognition why overlook those just to fight mccallum?.......fights there was a real clamour for...like srl-hagler.....hearns-srl..........Mccallum was always upper B list not A list........the fact when he did get his big opportunities to fight a A list type ...like james Toney or Jones he failed...was no surprise to me.....he had been outboxed by a shot don curry.....eeked out a win over herol graham....lost to sumbu kalambay......he wasn't quite in the class of the fab four but yes it is unfair that somewhere along the line he didn't get at least 1 fight with these guys....if it had been duran in 86 or beyond he wins on points but it wouldn't be easy......tommy after 93 he could take before that he gets beaten......srl in 1991 instead of Norris yeah mike beats him .....but the moaning the ffucking guy does overclouds all that.....ffs he was a 3 time world champ.....he had the duvas behind him....he got fights with curry,toney, jones jnr the last of which was a blatant payday.....he will go down as an ATG BUT...the fact is MIke had not done enough at certain crucial time frames to make a fight with the fab four a superfight. Should he have got at least 1 fight with them......YES....if it were today the fights would be made as there are a lack of stars today.....but back in the 80s there were lots of stars.....Yes he should have had his mandatory fight with duran in 1984 but mike should see it as he got a far easier fight with Mannion...a title fight would duran in 1984 wouldn't have given him a big payday....recognition? well laing had already beaten roberto

I hear what you're saying and agree with most of it. It's important to note though, most of his losses were at the end of his career

p.s I had a coupe of hundred 80's boxing mags stashed at my mum's. Then I went overseas for a couple of years and when I came back, found she'd thrown every single one of them all out

[Kalan]

Yet Nunn stopped kalambay with one punch and McCallum couldn't hurt him. Nunn couldn't hurt Barkley but hearns did. I guess all we can get from that is Nunn and hearns punched harder than McCallum!

Nunn landed the best punch of his life on Kalambay.. He's the only fighter to ever KO him.. It was a great shot and he was really fired up.. But he didn't show up for the Barkley fight. I remember thinking "Are Nunn and Barkely best buddies?? They don't want to fight"... They call those off nights.. When you're on, you throw a no-hitter with 20 strikeouts or a basketball player scores 100 points.. Some nights you're feeling it.. Other nights it's all you can do to drag yourself out there... The only thing I can say is Barkley couldn't hurt Nunn and he knocked Hearns down 3 times and beat him twice.

Nunn and McCallum never fought either -- but Toney knocked Nunn out and he could never put a dent in McCallum.

[hhaehre]

When you're on, you throw a no-hitter with 20 strikeouts or a basketball player scores 100 points..

No basketball player ever scored 100 points in a professional game

[hhaehre]

Yet Nunn stopped kalambay with one punch and McCallum couldn't hurt him. Nunn couldn't hurt Barkley but hearns did. I guess all we can get from that is Nunn and hearns punched harder than McCallum!

How about this one: Tiozzo beats McCallum, Hill beats Tiozzo, Hearns beats Hill. So, as dictated by Kalan-logic, Hearns beats McCallum.

Also since Hill knocked Tiozzo out without being dropped himself but McCallum failed to knock Tiozzo out while being dropped on his ass by the french fighter one can conclude that Hill is a better puncher than McCallum and has the superior chin.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Yet Nunn stopped kalambay with one punch and McCallum couldn't hurt him. Nunn couldn't hurt Barkley but hearns did. I guess all we can get from that is Nunn and hearns punched harder than McCallum!

How about this one: Tiozzo beats McCallum, Hill beats Tiozzo, Hearns beats Hill. So, as dictated by Kalan-logic, Hearns beats McCallum.

Also since Hill knocked Tiozzo out without being dropped himself but McCallum failed to knock Tiozzo out while being dropped on his ass by the french fighter one can conclude that Hill is a better puncher than McCallum and has the superior chin.

McCallum lacked the confidence and courage to move up and challenge himself. When asked about hagler Mike once said, "why would I fight him? I can't win. I'll just stay safe at 54 and wait for him to go away."

[elmersalsa]

Yet Nunn stopped kalambay with one punch and McCallum couldn't hurt him. Nunn couldn't hurt Barkley but hearns did. I guess all we can get from that is Nunn and hearns punched harder than McCallum!

How about this one: Tiozzo beats McCallum, Hill beats Tiozzo, Hearns beats Hill. So, as dictated by Kalan-logic, Hearns beats McCallum.

Also since Hill knocked Tiozzo out without being dropped himself but McCallum failed to knock Tiozzo out while being dropped on his ass by the french fighter one can conclude that Hill is a better puncher than McCallum and has the superior chin.

McCallum lacked the confidence and courage to move up and challenge himself. When asked about hagler Mike once said, "why would I fight him? I can't win. I'll just stay safe at 54 and wait for him to go away."

Did McCallum ever said that?

[SaadOffTheDeck]

How about this one: Tiozzo beats McCallum, Hill beats Tiozzo, Hearns beats Hill. So, as dictated by Kalan-logic, Hearns beats McCallum.

Also since Hill knocked Tiozzo out without being dropped himself but McCallum failed to knock Tiozzo out while being dropped on his ass by the french fighter one can conclude that Hill is a better puncher than McCallum and has the superior chin.

McCallum lacked the confidence and courage to move up and challenge himself. When asked about hagler Mike once said, "why would I fight him? I can't win. I'll just stay safe at 54 and wait for him to go away."

Did McCallum ever said that?

No, just an example of Kalan's BS. He never pursued a fight with Marvin, but Mike had no fear of anyone.

[Bricks]

There was a fair bit written at the time, about McCallum fighting the big 4 (Hearns, Hagler, Leonard, Duran) and it's odd looking back that he never got to fight any of them. He certainly deserved a few decent paydays at the very least

p . apparently he was a bit of a handful to manage, which may have contributed to his lack of mega fights

Bollox.......Ive got a lot of magazines off the time and there wasn't any kind of clamour for those fights....it was hardly pac-money.....Mccallum had no patience and brushed people up the wrong way, plushe lost his fights at key times and he was just a bitter jealous guy.....the fab four had top fights to make with each other which would earn them more money and recognition why overlook those just to fight mccallum?.......fights there was a real clamour for...like srl-hagler.....hearns-srl..........Mccallum was always upper B list not A list........the fact when he did get his big opportunities to fight a A list type ...like james Toney or Jones he failed...was no surprise to me.....he had been outboxed by a shot don curry.....eeked out a win over herol graham....lost to sumbu kalambay......he wasn't quite in the class of the fab four but yes it is unfair that somewhere along the line he didn't get at least 1 fight with these guys....if it had been duran in 86 or beyond he wins on points but it wouldn't be easy......tommy after 93 he could take before that he gets beaten......srl in 1991 instead of Norris yeah mike beats him .....but the moaning the ffucking guy does overclouds all that.....ffs he was a 3 time world champ.....he had the duvas behind him....he got fights with curry,toney, jones jnr the last of which was a blatant payday.....he will go down as an ATG BUT...the fact is MIke had not done enough at certain crucial time frames to make a fight with the fab four a superfight. Should he have got at least 1 fight with them......YES....if it were today the fights would be made as there are a lack of stars today.....but back in the 80s there were lots of stars.....Yes he should have had his mandatory fight with duran in 1984 but mike should see it as he got a far easier fight with Mannion...a title fight would duran in 1984 wouldn't have given him a big payday....recognition? well laing had already beaten roberto

That myth has carried ridiculous ground through the years. There were no articles clamoring for those fights. Mike himself never mentioned Hagler's name, he could have gotten that fight simply by moving up. If Duran would have fought his mandatory against Mike instead of dropping the belt to unify with Hearns the only people on earth that would have been happy would be Mike and his friends and family.

Leave it to you to put it best saad :-)

[Bricks]

There was a fair bit written at the time, about McCallum fighting the big 4 (Hearns, Hagler, Leonard, Duran) and it's odd looking back that he never got to fight any of them. He certainly deserved a few decent paydays at the very least

p . apparently he was a bit of a handful to manage, which may have contributed to his lack of mega fights

Bollox.......Ive got a lot of magazines off the time and there wasn't any kind of clamour for those fights....it was hardly pac-money.....Mccallum had no patience and brushed people up the wrong way, plushe lost his fights at key times and he was just a bitter jealous guy.....the fab four had top fights to make with each other which would earn them more money and recognition why overlook those just to fight mccallum?.......fights there was a real clamour for...like srl-hagler.....hearns-srl..........Mccallum was always upper B list not A list........the fact when he did get his big opportunities to fight a A list type ...like james Toney or Jones he failed...was no surprise to me.....he had been outboxed by a shot don curry.....eeked out a win over herol graham....lost to sumbu kalambay......he wasn't quite in the class of the fab four but yes it is unfair that somewhere along the line he didn't get at least 1 fight with these guys....if it had been duran in 86 or beyond he wins on points but it wouldn't be easy......tommy after 93 he could take before that he gets beaten......srl in 1991 instead of Norris yeah mike beats him .....but the moaning the ffucking guy does overclouds all that.....ffs he was a 3 time world champ.....he had the duvas behind him....he got fights with curry,toney, jones jnr the last of which was a blatant payday.....he will go down as an ATG BUT...the fact is MIke had not done enough at certain crucial time frames to make a fight with the fab four a superfight. Should he have got at least 1 fight with them......YES....if it were today the fights would be made as there are a lack of stars today.....but back in the 80s there were lots of stars.....Yes he should have had his mandatory fight with duran in 1984 but mike should see it as he got a far easier fight with Mannion...a title fight would duran in 1984 wouldn't have given him a big payday....recognition? well laing had already beaten roberto

I hear what you're saying and agree with most of it. It's important to note though, most of his losses were at the end of his career

p.s I had a coupe of hundred 80's boxing mags stashed at my mum's. Then I went overseas for a couple of years and when I came back, found she'd thrown every single one of them all out

80"s boxing magazines were great werent they i read my first one as a ten year old in 1986.i was already a huge boxing fan and had been sent to the local aba 3 years prior so i loved boxing as a kid.but the magazines covered the american scene which was v glamorous to us in the uk.buying ko magazine and world boxing was a great feeling .plus itv were covering all the us fights ,they covered all of mccallums fights.

Id disagree tho mccallums loss to kalambay was at the peak of his career ....the first two toney fights too...

[Kalan]

When you're on, you throw a no-hitter with 20 strikeouts or a basketball player scores 100 points..

No basketball player ever scored 100 points in a professional game

You've been living under a rock for 54 years. Newsflash...Wilt Chamberlain did it.

[BoxBuzz]

did you just get punked?

[Kalan]

McCallum wasn't an American. He was a road warrior by necessity and he was never given those opportunities. He certainly pursued a Hagler fight harder than he did a James Toney fight -- and pursued fights with Leonard, Hearns, and Duran. They were scared of getting their asses beaten in.

[BoxBuzz]

So, just for the record....you would predict McCallum would have beaten Hagler? How about Monzon?

[hhaehre]

When you're on, you throw a no-hitter with 20 strikeouts or a basketball player scores 100 points..

No basketball player ever scored 100 points in a professional game

You've been living under a rock for 54 years. Newsflash...Wilt Chamberlain did it.

[Syntax Error]

I wonder if Mike McCallum could have beaten Wilt Chamberlain?

[Kalan]

Different weight divisions Einstein

[gilgamesh]

I wonder if Mike McCallum could have beaten Wilt Chamberlain?

He would've

[BoxBuzz]

Different weight divisions Einstein

Henry Armstrong? He managed several weight divisions as I recall..........he was probably able to move up because he led with his chin.