Mike McCallum - Best I've faced

Decent article here on Ring Website: http://ringtv.craveonline.com/blog/168053-best-ive-faced-mike-mccallum Interestingly he describes Herol Graham as the best boxer he faced, Michael Watson as the strongest, and finally Steve Collins with the best chin.

Decent praise.

I love these, cheers. The others I know of:

Oscar http://www.ringtv.com/blog/1007/de_la_hoya_blog_the_best_i_fought/
Hatton http://ringtv.craveonline.com/blog/127665-best-ive-faced-ricky-hatton
Dundee http://ringtv.craveonline.com/blog/124373-angelo-dundee-the-best-ive-trained
Morales http://ringtv.craveonline.com/blog/124261-erik-morales-best-ive-faced
Toney http://ringtv.craveonline.com/blog/121861-james-toney-the-best-i-faced
Palomino http://ringtv.craveonline.com/blog/125097-carlos-palomino-the-best-i-faced
Mosley http://ringtv.craveonline.com/blog/124327-shane-mosley-best-ive-faced

Interesting read

Forget about Williams and Margarito claiming to be avoided, McCallum was a man so good and so feared no one wanted to face him and in the cases of Duran, Hearns and Leonard I think with good reason, he'd have beaten all 3 at the time.

He wants to make his mind up...

It was Donald Curry the last time somebody asked him.....

No doubt it'll be Julian Jackson's turn next.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:He wants to make his mind up...

It was Donald Curry the last time somebody asked him.....

No doubt it'll be Julian Jackson's turn next.

Thought you might bring that one up, Truss!

When in England say Graham etc....

Very pc is our Mike!

wasn't roy jones described by mccallum by the best of his era and now he is not even the best mccallum has fought

Maybe he suffers from amnesia!!!!

Herol Graham though..jeez.

He did say he was old for the Jones fight so couldn't judge it properly

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Interesting read

Forget about Williams and Margarito claiming to be avoided, McCallum was a man so good and so feared no one wanted to face him and in the cases of Duran, Hearns and Leonard I think with good reason, he'd have beaten all 3 at the time.

I always find this similar to the claims Leonard ducked Pryor.

"Yeah I was so sh!t scared of McCallum I went and fought that pu$$y pushover Hagler instead!"


Saying they ducked McCalum has just become one of those shots people take at former greats, same as people seem to call Dempsey a ducker for no other reason than for the sake of it.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:When in England say Graham etc....

Very pc is our Mike!

It was an American magazine written by an American journalist. Dipstick.

John Bloody Wayne wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Interesting read

Forget about Williams and Margarito claiming to be avoided, McCallum was a man so good and so feared no one wanted to face him and in the cases of Duran, Hearns and Leonard I think with good reason, he'd have beaten all 3 at the time.

I always find this similar to the claims Leonard ducked Pryor.

"Yeah I was so sh!t scared of McCallum I went and fought that pu$$y pushover Hagler instead!"


Saying they ducked McCalum has just become one of those shots people take at former greats, same as people seem to call Dempsey a ducker for no other reason than for the sake of it.

Other than the fact none of them wanted anything to do with him you may have a point but Hagler brought more money to the table, McCallum brought a probable loss and not much else

i think he just wanted to give his dues to the different fighters he fought. He's probably been asked who the best fighter was countless times... here he was tactful enough to name check a bunch of different different fighters who presented him with different problems.

Bit of a sweeping statement from ghosty... suggesting 3 all time greats avoided the bodysnatcher. None were exactly in their prime when he became a viable opponent, and none of whose records suggest they were duckers!

And he was never tv friendly unfortunately. I suspect had Mike been born american, british or mexican he would have been the box office draw his talents merited.

While I am always a bit reluctant to brand anyone a 'ducker', particularly great fighters like the ones we're discussing, I do think that there is a very legitimate case for Duran and Hearns clearly avoiding McCallum, or at the very least not fancying a match up with him, shall we say.

Leonard is a bit more of a fanciful claim. Hagler, absolutely no way on God's green earth did he avoid 'The Bodysnatcher.'

As I've said before, Duran clearly avoided McCallum, giving up the WBA crown rather than facing him. Yes, there was a risk/reward element, but I don't think that anyone seriously believes that Duran wanted any part of Mike, however many tickets he could have sold.

In the case of Hearns, it was not Tommy who didn't want to fight Mike, but Manny Steward, who had, of course, seen plenty of both fighters at the Kronk and presumably knew which way the wind blew there. It wasn't a duck, since both held titles at the time, in any case, but Mike was a newbie on the title block and Tommy was turning his attention to Hagler, so there was a fairly brief window in which the fight could have happened.

Leonard certainly didn't duck Mike - he gave up his title at 154 well before the Jamaican was number one contender and made his first retirement when McCallum was barely a twinkle in anyone's eye. When Leonard came back, it was to collect titles at heavier weights. No duck there at all.

Here's how i see it. Unfortunately boxing is a business. Taking a fight against a risky up and coming fighter that no-one has really heard of? No-one does it if there are bigger money alternatives. Had Mike proved himself the dominant fighter at the weight and there was a public clamour for a fight, my view is they'd all have taken it... because thats what their records show. I'm struggling with the thought that Duran was fearful of McCallum, but not of hagler and hearns who he took as his next two fights after giving up the belt?

McCallum says he used to beat hearns up in the gym. Apparently Manny steward didn't want the fight but hearns did... so hearns, who knew what the gymwork with mccallum was like, still would have taken the fight. Now i know Tommy's no rocket scientist but it suggests he thought he could give an account of himself.

Moving on, when did Mike really become the man at light middle, after jackson? After McCrory? After curry?

Which of our potential duckers were active then. Leonard had fought twice in 5 years, duran was completely in the wilderness and a forgotten man fighting beach bums for beer money after the hearns fight.... and hearns was at middleweight.

So Mike goes up to middle where perhaps that fight could have happened... and loses to kalambay? Before we know it, tommy's fighting at light heavy and mike is mixing it with the middles of a different generation. I guess Duran came out of the wilderness with the Barkley win at middle, so something could have happened thereafter, but duran went straight up in weight again.

So other than Duran giving his belt up and then fighting two atg's, I don't see where McCallum was ducked by my personal definition. I realise there have been countless threads on what constitutes ducking. To me there has to have been a big clamour or justification for the fight and plenty of opportunity for it to happen. With McCallum and the fighters named, i see small window, limited justification until too late, and no clamour.

Though Captain, i'm guessing you know more background on duran mccallum?

Good post milky, especially "Had Mike proved himself the dominant fighter at the weight and there was a public clamour for a fight, my view is they'd all have taken it... because thats what their records show"

Mike was #1 contender for Duran's belt NOT Hearns' and was nowhere near as known as either man at the time, it's only in hindsight we know he's SO great.

Hearns didn't fight him because he didn't have a belt and didn't need to and didn't bring much $ to the table, whereas Duran was the WBA champ and Hearns v Duran made the big money because Duran was already a legend.

As for Duran ducking him, could anything McCallum dished out be worse than what Hearns gave him? That's like jumping out off the path of a bus and into the path of a train. Add to the fact that it's Hearns and Duran we're talking about. Two guys who'd probably jump in with Vitali tomorrow if you gave them a fair slice of the paycheck and a duck seems pretty unlikely.

Bomber beat him imo, outsmarted him and played with him for 12 rounds, McCallum was beaten to the punch and baffled, i was baffled Graham lost as well.

Young_Towzer wrote:Bomber beat him imo, outsmarted him and played with him for 12 rounds, McCallum was beaten to the punch and baffled, i was baffled Graham lost as well.

Not sure that Graham can have any complaints; he threw that fight away with the point deduction and by the way his workrate dropped in the second half of the fight, which McCallum dominated on the inside. I scored it a draw after the point loss, no complaints with anyone who has it a point either way, but I don't think it was a clear cut win for Bomber and I certainly didn't think the result was baffling.

88Chris05 wrote:

Young_Towzer wrote:Bomber beat him imo, outsmarted him and played with him for 12 rounds, McCallum was beaten to the punch and baffled, i was baffled Graham lost as well.

Not sure that Graham can have any complaints; he threw that fight away with the point deduction and by the way his workrate dropped in the second half of the fight, which McCallum dominated on the inside. I scored it a draw after the point loss, no complaints with anyone who has it a point either way, but I don't think it was a clear cut win for Bomber and I certainly didn't think the result was baffling.

That's your opinion, I thought Bomber won the fight, the point deduction was a bit daft for him to floor him like that but i still thought he won, too fast and tricky.

I love the way Duran, Hearns 'ducked' McCallum but it was fine for Hatton not to fight Witter, who had a title. It's mental that!

Young_Towzer wrote:Bomber beat him imo, outsmarted him and played with him for 12 rounds, McCallum was beaten to the punch and baffled, i was baffled Graham lost as well.

It was close fight towzer, but i can't buy the 'played with him bit'. I was a big graham fan but the truth is he never gave his best in a championship fight... either his game didn't quite work at elite level or he didn't have it between the ears. The Kalambay and McCallum fights suggest the former and the jackson fight for example suggests the latter. It could be a bit of both.

Totally agree with Chris re the McCallum-Graham fight; this was the one that Bomber threw away, rather than the Jackson fight, which could have happened to anyone. Herol just stopped working; if he hadn't been so lazy, McCallum, who was nothing special that night, would never have been able to do what he wanted in the close quarter exchanges after about the seventh.

As for the other points - Duran gave up his belt rather than face McCallum, of that there is no doubt. He wanted the fight at middle with Hagler - more money and so on, and fair enough. When he came back to light-middle, the WBA title was vacant, if memory serves, and it was now that Duran decided to fight Hearns rather than McCallum. Hearns, who was WBC champion, was seen at this stage as a touch vulnerable, having looked very ordinary against Minchillo and Sutherland, and, incredible though it seems at this distance, was thought to represent a more likely opportunity for Duran than McCallum, who was known in the trade already as a really nasty opponent for anyone. More money as well, once again, of course.

When McCallum finally got his shot at the vacant belt and won it, Hearns was still light-middleweight champ, but was casting his eyes over Hagler's crown. McCallum's desire for a unification battle was understandable, as was the Hearns' camp's wish to take on the bigger prize (in every sense). However, after Hagler, Hearns chose to stay at middle, which scuppered the idea that they might meet. This wasn't a duck, so much as a potential fight for comparatively little reward, which Steward was alarmed might not finish well for Tommy.

Oh, and Hatton really ought to have fought Witter, of course. It was only the fact that Witter gave Hatton so little respect that decided Hatton to leave him out in the cold, in my opinion. You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.

I guess hatton-witter belongs on another thread... but there's a definitive duck for me. Again doesn't mean Ricky was running scared, just that his management didn't want to risk their investment without an assured pot of gold.

Witter was his own worst enemy inside and outside of the ring for a guy with obvious talent, but i thought the 'not wanting to give him a pay day' was among the worst of Hatton's seemingly endless list of excuses for not fighting him! imo the real reason was, 'i could lose and that would knacker my future earnings.' Which is probably the fundamental reason behind most duckings.

The ODLH one is interesting. I'd forgotten how many great fighters he's faced.

Chavez
Whittaker
Mayweather
Pacquiou
Mosley
Hopkins


It's funny that Gatti makes his list but not Mayweather.

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:
It's funny that Gatti makes his list but not Mayweather.

yeh, maybe not the most objective. Though i guess for the categories that mayweather would feature strongest in, he also fought sweet p