Hagler jabbed Mugabi silly and beat him down. He did take his share of punishment, especially to the body. I remember Kenny Bayless saying afterwards that both guys pissed blood. Hagler had slowed down some, but his jab looked as good as ever, and he tore Mugabi up on the inside.
How is McCallum overrated? No one has ever called him a top 20 all timer or anything like that. But he was a GREAT fighter, and at his best capable of giving ANY middleweight in history a tough fight, and probably beating any junior middle in history(except maybe Hearns). I'd say the Body Snatcher is rated correctly by most.
NO one should call him a top 20 all timer... hes not even a top 70 all timer I think he barely registers as a GREAT fighter even... the level of opposition and many of his performances against that opposition do not make him an automatic GREAT fighter Junior Middleweight has been a stop over division throughout its history, Its not exactly a big list of pure Junior Middleweights Im a fan of McCallum, I enjoyed watching him and he was skillfull and tough and had a terrific chin but picking him to do anything except lose to Hagler is crazy... he was never in that class
Watch his fight with Micheal Watson and tell me McCallum wasnt a GREAT fighter. Watson was very good, but McCallum took him apart with the class and dominance of a great fighter.
Indeed, easily one of his 2 or three best wins And there's the rub One of his absolute best wins is against a guy who is best known for stopping a young Nigel Benn and losing to Chris Eubank twice, and who never fought or defeated a single other notable fighter McCallum's title reign at 154: Sean Mannion, Luigi Minchillo, David Braxton, Julian Jackson, Said Skouma, McCrory and his defining moment, Curry ... that is an altogether pretty shitty group of title wins right there... Curry was a shell of his former self and still nearly took Mike out... Jackson was pretty green and of course he was flawed to begin with, and McCrory had already been blasted into irrelevancy by Curry a couple of years earlier... those are the BEST wins, the other guys were basically nobodies Later McCallum would lose to Sumbu Kalamby and win a highly controversial decision in the rematch, and his most notable conquests were Watson, Herol Graham (another close call) and Steve friggin' Collins as well as (should have been) two losses to James Toney Then he went up to 175 and beat such luminaries as Randall Yonker and Carl Jones while winning a close one against tough but totally limited Jeff Harding before being clearly defeated by Fabrice Tiozzo, who himself accomplished very little of note otherwise GREAT fighter? my ass Excellent, yes But great???
You're doing Watson a fairly considerable disservice here mind: Watson completely fooled Benn en route to stopping him and lost no more than six rounds in 22.9 total against Eubanks. Both Benn and Eubanks were elite level guys, and Watson schooled both. MTF
I've never thought of Benn as an elite fighter...and especially not early on when he fought Watson. In that fight...Benn didn't look like much more than a slugger who gassed out before the fight was half over. I watched that fight when it happened and I remember thinking...THIS is the fighter I've been hearing so much about?? To his credit, Benn rebounded and became a better fghter over time. But I wouldn't label him an "elite" fighter at the time he fought Watson. And Watson lost twice to Eubanks...once by career ending knockout. So cdogg is correct. Outside of stopping a raw Benn...there are no other significant wins on Watson's resume. He was obviously a good fighter...but one, based on the evidence of his career, that couldn't get it done when it counted at the highest level.
Benn was a year or so away from two of his best wins (De Witt and Barkley) and had KO'd about twenty guys in a row prior to that fight, then Watson made him look stupid. Eubanks lost the first Watson fight by near schooling; Eubanks even KNEW he had lost when the final bell went (he admitted as much years later in a SKY documentary) and the 'result' caused outrage in the UK. That result was a flat out robbery. That Watson didn't get the official result had nothing to do with him 'not getting it done' but more to do with either complete judicial incompetancy or flagrent corruption. Whichever it was, that fight simply cannot be held as a negative against Watson. The second Eubanks fight was an even bigger schooling. Watson simply pummelled Eubanks for ten and nine tenth's rounds. Eubanks won because: a. The ref inexplicably failed to give him a mandatory count after Watson KD him. b. Eubanks connected with the last punch he was likely to throw due to his exhaustion and c. Watson's head whipped off the ropes rather than him simply being KD by the punch which hugely exaccerbated the effect of the KD. Sure, Eubanks got the win, and by 'career ending KO', but that doesn't detract from the fact that Watson was beating the holy shit out of him for almost every second up to that point. For the record, Benn and Eubanks both admitted on an ITV promo, some ten years later, that the best fighter of the three was Watson. This is the 'evidence' upon which you judge a man's career; not the bare statistics. I'm not trying to say that Watson was some kind of all time great or anything, because he wasn't. But he is better that Cdogg and yourself are trying to portray here... MTF
Watson should've won the first Eubank fight. Those judges must've graduated from the Jo Jo Guerra school of scoring.
What am I trying to portray? I am not trying to knock him. I said "Watson was obviously a good fighter." And he was. But he didn't accomplish enough in his career to be considered anything more than that. I am not a fan of his, which you seem to be, and I also have nothing against him. But when you look at his career, including the circumstances, it is good rather than great. And when Watson faced McCallum, a better fighter than Benn AND Eubanks, he was stopped. No controversy or list of excuses...he lost. And it's not like McCallum was running up a string of KOs against good opposition AT 160. There is no shame in a fighter being considered "good". And ultimately...that's what Watson was...a good fighter. It's a shame that his career was ended prematurely...but all we can judge him on is what he actually accomplished.
I always thought Watson was a good, tough, orthodox fighter who did most everything pretty well but had no special attributes or weapons at the highest level, he matched up well against Eubank because of his toughness and workrate
agreed. Watson was a good, solid fighter, but nothing more. I wouldn't consider he or Benn (especially when Michael beat him) truly "elite"
McCrory suddenly became shit because he had one loss on his record. You're ridiculous. You parroted Broadway and now you have to reflect on history in such a fashion as to support your point. Why don't you just wait for Broadway to show up with his explanation of why McCallum is over-rated, and then just submit a post saying that you agree with him. It would probably make for a better case. Yours is crap. And why was Curry all of the suddenly "no good?" Was it because he too, like McCrory, had a loss on his record? What do you work for HBO? Everyone who talks about Curry makes reference to some discrete point in time after which he was a completely different fighter or something. Did it ever occur to you that it could've been a function of the competition he was facing? He fought a hell of a lot better fighters after he lost to Honeyghan than he did before. Do you think that could've accounted for his being a, "shell of himself," as you like to say. And yet, Hagler, in his last fight, slow as molasses, having struggled a year's prior with Mugabi of all people, was not on the decline? At least that's what Broadway likes to claim.
This is hilarious coming from someone who claims that Curry was a brilliant fighter. Cdogg: Here's the rub. Curry's best win was against McCrory.
What's even more hilarious is you commenting on Curry when you barely know anything about him. And while he was Welterweight champion....Curry was a brilliant fighter. Anyone with EYES and WITHOUT an agenda could see that. But then to know about Curry...you would actually have had to watch his fights.
Here's the rub: I've watched plenty of his fights. Here's another rub: His best win was McCrory. Here's the final rub: There's no denying the first two rubs. If we're going to disparage Watson as a fighter by citing his best win as being against a guy who many people don't think very highly of, then why can't the same standard be applied to Curry? There's been plenty of fighters who look brilliant against mediocre competition. Take Mosley. He looked amazing against Shannon Taylor and Antonio Diaz. He'd make comments after those fights like, "I don't get hit very often." And he was being genuinely compared to SRR, with people even noting their stylistic similarities. Then came Forrest. Then came Wright. Then came ODH a second time. And you realize Mosley wasn't half as good as you thought he was. Basically, that's the story of Curry.
Your "Story of Curry" needs some editing. First of all, who are the "many people"?? So far it's just you trying to knock down Curry. And you can keep repeating that tired "rub" line like a parrot all you like. But saying it over and over doesn't make you any less off-base. Marlon Starling (2x), Milton MCCory, Colin Jones are FAR (and I repeat FAR) better than anyone that Mosley defeated in title defenses. Your analogy doesn't work because Curry defeated QUALITY fighters like those in impressive fashion. It is a huge reach (even for you) to try to draw a parallel between Marlon Starling/MIlton McCrory and Shannon Taylor/Antonio Diaz. Even the fighters a step or two below like Roger Stafford & Nino LaRocca were good fighters who were outclassed by Curry. But since you know nothing about them, you will decide (for this discussion) that they are mediocre and/or bums.
Ok. So what's your explanation or theory as to how a brilliant fighter like Curry suddenly hit a wall and as you put it, "looked like dog-shit" against mediocre competition, and never winning another meaningful fight the rest of his career? Do you think the Honeyghan fight ruined him? A guy you've said was destroyed by Starling and Breland? How is it that Curry suddenly turned from being the world's p4p #1 fighter to being a guy who looks good on a fighter's resume but who can't beat anyone decent anymore. Seriously. How do you account for it?
Have you ever seen the fight I am talking about? Here's the problem I have when I am discussing things with you. More often than not, I have seen the fights in question and you have not. I watched Curry from before he was a champion, when he won his first title, through all his defenses, to the unification fight against McCrory, the loss to Honeyghan and his so-so time at 154. How much of that have you seen? Honestly? As for why he hit the wall?? Who knows for sure. I'm not a doctor and I wasn't in Curry's camp, so I don't know all the details. I'm pretty sure his staying at 147 too long and weakening himself to make weight hurt him against Honeyghan. If you have ever watched that fight,it's obvious from the get go that Curry is not quite himself. As for after that...who knows...maybe it was mostly mental...but Curry was never the same fighter at 154 that he was at 147. He showed flashes of his old self in spurts...but never seemed as focused, confident and sharp as he did at 147. And just because I don't know the EXACT reason why Curry slipped so fast, doesn't mean it didn't happen. The evidence that it did happen is right there to see in his performances...including the Jacquot fight...which you are so willing to disregard because it doesn't work in your favor. Have you seen that fight?
Hagler beat Leonard. I think it's the flip argument....people give too many early rounds to SRL because of his shoeshines and movement. Disagree with me....and die. :kick: ::
Oh...and McCallum is one of my favorite fighters, EVER. But at 160, Hagler beats him in a VERY close one. Very close.
Jeez. I've just watched that on Youtube again and that has to be the fastest and most vicious left hook I've seen in a long while. Even in slow motion it's difficult to follow. Then when McCrory gets up, one single right hand devastates him. Talk about clinical. That's an undefeated fellow champion he did that to as well. Probably one of the most emphatic and dominating high-level ko's I've ever seen. :bears:
