BoxRec

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑10 May 2025, 19:07 In real life, was McCallum really that good at middleweight ? No. Was Zale ? Yes. Going with Zale.

elmersalsa wrote: ↑13 May 2025, 18:13

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑10 May 2025, 19:07 In real life, was McCallum really that good at middleweight ? No. Was Zale ? Yes. Going with Zale.

Mike McCallum was in a totally different class above Tony Zale.

Expug wrote: ↑13 May 2025, 19:16

elmersalsa wrote: ↑13 May 2025, 18:13

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑10 May 2025, 19:07 In real life, was McCallum really that good at middleweight ? No. Was Zale ? Yes. Going with Zale.

Mike McCallum was in a totally different class above Tony Zale.

Debatable who would win a fight between the two. No way would I say mccallum is in a totally different class at middleweight than Zale.

Expug wrote: ↑13 May 2025, 19:16

elmersalsa wrote: ↑13 May 2025, 18:13

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑10 May 2025, 19:07 In real life, was McCallum really that good at middleweight ? No. Was Zale ? Yes. Going with Zale.

Mike McCallum was in a totally different class above Tony Zale.

Debatable who would win a fight between the two. No way would I say mccallum is in a totally different class at middleweight than Zale.

Expug wrote: ↑15 May 2025, 16:19 Zale was a great body puncher. But it wasn’t that he would wade in face first in “ primitive “ fashion, he’d feint with the jab to get his opponent to lead , he’d throw a right hook to the body and follow with a left hook to the head. It’s what he stretched graziano with. But, he’d do this regularly. He was outstanding T feinting. Nothing “ primitive “ about this. Lot of modern day fighters would love to be able to pull off these punches. That’s why he was the boxing coach at the CYO gym in Chicago where he taught young fighters for years.

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑15 May 2025, 19:29 The primitive comment was ridiculous. Just because he fought 80 years ago doesn't make him primitive. There has been virtually no new boxing skill developed in the last 80 years. Or 100 years for that matter. McCallum on the other hand, was about as good at middleweight as Sumbu Kalambay.

elmersalsa wrote: ↑15 May 2025, 23:03

Expug wrote: ↑15 May 2025, 16:19 Zale was a great body puncher. But it wasn’t that he would wade in face first in “ primitive “ fashion, he’d feint with the jab to get his opponent to lead , he’d throw a right hook to the body and follow with a left hook to the head. It’s what he stretched graziano with. But, he’d do this regularly. He was outstanding T feinting. Nothing “ primitive “ about this. Lot of modern day fighters would love to be able to pull off these punches. That’s why he was the boxing coach at the CYO gym in Chicago where he taught young fighters for years.

That would not work against the great Mike McCallum. He was a different class. Too good and exceptional.

Expug wrote: ↑16 May 2025, 09:59

elmersalsa wrote: ↑15 May 2025, 23:03

Expug wrote: ↑15 May 2025, 16:19 Zale was a great body puncher. But it wasn’t that he would wade in face first in “ primitive “ fashion, he’d feint with the jab to get his opponent to lead , he’d throw a right hook to the body and follow with a left hook to the head. It’s what he stretched graziano with. But, he’d do this regularly. He was outstanding T feinting. Nothing “ primitive “ about this. Lot of modern day fighters would love to be able to pull off these punches. That’s why he was the boxing coach at the CYO gym in Chicago where he taught young fighters for years.

That would not work against the great Mike McCallum. He was a different class. Too good and exceptional.

So maybe you can explain why Zales technique would be primitive and would not work against McCallum. I’m looking for what exactly in your mind would prohibit Tony from landing that combo. I’d like to see you for a change, do a style breakdown of what makes one fighter likely to beat another. Rather than just, fighter A is too big for fighter B or one fighters primitive skills wouldn’t work.

elmersalsa wrote: ↑17 May 2025, 13:08 To answer my man, expug.

I just saw some videos of Tony Zale. I am totally right of what I saw of him. The guy was primitive in boxing skills.... I mean, primitive! OMG! Are we serious?

Look how Zale threw the left hook. He threw it too wide without covering his face with the right hand. That's suicidal against a guy like Mike McCallum.

Zale's defense was his own chin. Everything you threw at at him, he took it. You threw a left jab, he took it. You throw a right lead like Marcel Cerdan did, he took it. You throw a left hook, and an uppercut, Zale's face was there. Against a guy like The Body Snatcher would be a disaster! A total disaster!

No head movement. No inside fighting. Everything he threw was wide and uncoordinated. Too slow for a guy like McCallum.

If he fights McCallum, McCallum would have ducked his wide left and countered with a left hook like he did Donald Curry or throw a straight right on the button. Another way would be if Zale throws that wide left again, McCallum would move his head and throw an uppercut, whether be a left or right one, but it would be a thing of beauty.

McCallum was much more fluid with his punches. More compact. Better inside fighter to wit. And his jab would be on Zale all night long.

There's nothing that Zale would do that indicates me that he would beat someone as good as McCallum. Nothing. If McCallum doesn't knock him out, the decision would be as wide as this post.

And Zale was 5'8". McCallum is 5'11". So he would not have a problem of using his jab against Zale. That jab would be key to set up all the arsenal of punches.

Zale's greatest attributes were his chin, strength, and durability. He was strong as an ox. He had a great deal of heart, will and determination. He had a good left hook, but threw it too wide, and was very aggressive. That's what made him a world champion, but it would not be enough to beat a guy as technically sound as McCallum.

I could see why The 4 Kings of the 80s didn't want nothing with him. Not because they were afraid of him. It was too risky. A loss to him and their stock would have dropped like Wall Street economics. And I would not be surprised if he would have beaten at least 3 of the Kings. Marvelous Marvin Hagler would have been the toughest for him because Marvelous would have been stronger than he in my estimation. But, I would not be surprised if he beats Marvelous, either. The guy was a terrific and exceptional fighter that the American boxing media doesn't give him the credit he deserves.

elmersalsa wrote: ↑17 May 2025, 13:08 To answer my man, expug.

I just saw some videos of Tony Zale. I am totally right of what I saw of him. The guy was primitive in boxing skills.... I mean, primitive! OMG! Are we serious?

Look how Zale threw the left hook. He threw it too wide without covering his face with the right hand. That's suicidal against a guy like Mike McCallum.

Zale's defense was his own chin. Everything you threw at at him, he took it. You threw a left jab, he took it. You throw a right lead like Marcel Cerdan did, he took it. You throw a left hook, and an uppercut, Zale's face was there. Against a guy like The Body Snatcher would be a disaster! A total disaster!

No head movement. No inside fighting. Everything he threw was wide and uncoordinated. Too slow for a guy like McCallum.

If he fights McCallum, McCallum would have ducked his wide left and countered with a left hook like he did Donald Curry or throw a straight right on the button. Another way would be if Zale throws that wide left again, McCallum would move his head and throw an uppercut, whether be a left or right one, but it would be a thing of beauty.

McCallum was much more fluid with his punches. More compact. Better inside fighter to wit. And his jab would be on Zale all night long.

There's nothing that Zale would do that indicates me that he would beat someone as good as McCallum. Nothing. If McCallum doesn't knock him out, the decision would be as wide as this post.

And Zale was 5'8". McCallum is 5'11". So he would not have a problem of using his jab against Zale. That jab would be key to set up all the arsenal of punches.

Zale's greatest attributes were his chin, strength, and durability. He was strong as an ox. He had a great deal of heart, will and determination. He had a good left hook, but threw it too wide, and was very aggressive. That's what made him a world champion, but it would not be enough to beat a guy as technically sound as McCallum.

I could see why The 4 Kings of the 80s didn't want nothing with him. Not because they were afraid of him. It was too risky. A loss to him and their stock would have dropped like Wall Street economics. And I would not be surprised if he would have beaten at least 3 of the Kings. Marvelous Marvin Hagler would have been the toughest for him because Marvelous would have been stronger than he in my estimation. But, I would not be surprised if he beats Marvelous, either. The guy was a terrific and exceptional fighter that the American boxing media doesn't give him the credit he deserves.

Expug wrote: ↑17 May 2025, 13:35

elmersalsa wrote: ↑17 May 2025, 13:08 To answer my man, expug.

I just saw some videos of Tony Zale. I am totally right of what I saw of him. The guy was primitive in boxing skills.... I mean, primitive! OMG! Are we serious?

Look how Zale threw the left hook. He threw it too wide without covering his face with the right hand. That's suicidal against a guy like Mike McCallum.

Zale's defense was his own chin. Everything you threw at at him, he took it. You threw a left jab, he took it. You throw a right lead like Marcel Cerdan did, he took it. You throw a left hook, and an uppercut, Zale's face was there. Against a guy like The Body Snatcher would be a disaster! A total disaster!

No head movement. No inside fighting. Everything he threw was wide and uncoordinated. Too slow for a guy like McCallum.

If he fights McCallum, McCallum would have ducked his wide left and countered with a left hook like he did Donald Curry or throw a straight right on the button. Another way would be if Zale throws that wide left again, McCallum would move his head and throw an uppercut, whether be a left or right one, but it would be a thing of beauty.

McCallum was much more fluid with his punches. More compact. Better inside fighter to wit. And his jab would be on Zale all night long.

There's nothing that Zale would do that indicates me that he would beat someone as good as McCallum. Nothing. If McCallum doesn't knock him out, the decision would be as wide as this post.

And Zale was 5'8". McCallum is 5'11". So he would not have a problem of using his jab against Zale. That jab would be key to set up all the arsenal of punches.

Zale's greatest attributes were his chin, strength, and durability. He was strong as an ox. He had a great deal of heart, will and determination. He had a good left hook, but threw it too wide, and was very aggressive. That's what made him a world champion, but it would not be enough to beat a guy as technically sound as McCallum.

I could see why The 4 Kings of the 80s didn't want nothing with him. Not because they were afraid of him. It was too risky. A loss to him and their stock would have dropped like Wall Street economics. And I would not be surprised if he would have beaten at least 3 of the Kings. Marvelous Marvin Hagler would have been the toughest for him because Marvelous would have been stronger than he in my estimation. But, I would not be surprised if he beats Marvelous, either. The guy was a terrific and exceptional fighter that the American boxing media doesn't give him the credit he deserves.

Well there ya go. Solid analysis. I don’t entirely disagree. McCallum was a terrific fighter and here, you point out some of his strengths. I don’t know about him at middleweight, and I think Zale is a bit cagier than you give him credit for but, good matchup and a tough fight for either.

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑17 May 2025, 17:10 The problem is that yo don't call it like you see it. You just pick your favorite and that's it. If McCallum was so complete, where are the results?
He really did not have than many fights at middleweight.

Lost to Kalambay and had to have the judges bail him out in the rematch.
Judges had to bail him out against Herold Graham.

These guys were good fighters but certainly not legends. Where were all of McCallum's skills in those fights?
Did he really have even one win at middleweight where he so convincing that you think wow, this is a great middleweight? No.

Zales's defense was not that bad and he was way past it in the Cerdan fight that you mentioned.