Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

mike mccallum vs bernard hopkins

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    Originally posted by Sugar Adam Ali View Post
    I thought about this alot and i say mccallum by a slight edge,,,

    I dont think hopkins ever dealt with really good top level boxers,,,

    just look at his loses: jones, taylor, calzaghe, dawson,, all pretty good boxers,,

    There isnt alot of wins vs good boxers: johnson in 97, faded joppy 03, winky up in weight 07,,,,

    hopkins is not as good when he cant set the pace,, the guys that beat him all have in common is that they never let hopkins set the pace,, I think mccallum can do the same to hopkins and win a very slim close split decision

    this fight would look alot like the fantastic fights between toney and mccallum
    Nice post! I would agree with this. Alot if Hopkins victories were guys he could indeed control in the ring with pace and footwork. Mccallum saw better comp for sure. Aklthough for what it is worth Bernard did a pretty good job against Jones even in the loss.

    Comment


    • #12
      McCallum was one of my all time favorites, Bernard Hopkins not so much. But if they fought I would bet on Hopkins. He'd figure out a way to frustrate McCallum and win a decision.

      Comment


      • #13
        Dead Even

        Comment


        • #14
          Hopkins has trouble with guys that are active and throw a lot of punches. Not just now that he is almost 50 but even back when he was closer to his physical prime.

          He is just very stingy with his punches so he can be outworked.

          I don't know enough about McCallum to say if he is the type who could win that way. Wasn't he more of a ****er who placed his shots well?

          Comment


          • #15
            Originally posted by ShoulderRoll View Post
            Hopkins has trouble with guys that are active and throw a lot of punches. Not just now that he is almost 50 but even back when he was closer to his physical prime.

            He is just very stingy with his punches so he can be outworked.

            I don't know enough about McCallum to say if he is the type who could win that way. Wasn't he more of a ****er who placed his shots well?
            Mccallum wasnt just a ****er,, he was a very good boxer-puncher with great body attack,, good chin, good stamina, nice jab. He really was an all around great fighter with no real weakness

            Hopkins didnt just have trouble with high volume punchers, calzaghe was about the only guy that threw alot and outworked him with volume..

            roy jones was very gunshy in their encounter but still outpointed hopkins,
            robert allen in the first fight was having success vs hopkins by dictating the pace and wouldnt allow hopkins a comfort zone, hence why i always thought hopkins weaseled out of that fight and regrouped and changed the gameplan in the rematch
            jermain taylor and chad dawson werent very active punchers, it was their jab that kept hopkins honest, and they wouldnt allow him to slow down the pace to a hopkins crawl and get picked apart. They both did a good job of using the jab to control hopkins and force him out of his comfort zone, and when hopkins is out of his comfort zone, his punch output plummets, he will still land an occassional hard clean shot, but he only throws like 25 punches a round in situations like this..
            Taylor, jones, dawson didnt beat him with their own high volume, it was that hopkins wasnt comfortable, his output drops and they were all able to outpoint him..

            I think mccallum would do the same thing, hopkins wouldnt be able to lure mccallum into his traps like he has done to tito, tarver, pavlik, pascal etc.. Mccallum would use his own jab to keep hopkins honest, hopkins would move alot but not land anything significant as a result. This would allow mccallum to outpoint him by the slimmest of margins..

            this fight would pretty much always be a split decision or a draw,, everytime

            Comment


            • #16
              I've got to give it to The Body Snatcher. I think he is all around a better fighter than Hopkins in his prime. His jab is better and his inside game is several times more advanced. I'd say it would be a UD in Mccallum's favor or a TKO. I don't see BHOP getting a lot of leverage outside of doing so while moving backwards and he doesn't have enough power to get to Mccallum's chin. I do see Mike getting tagged quite a bit but just can't see him not coming out on top.

              Comment


              • #17
                I lean towards Hopkins but it would be close and it would definitely go the distance.

                Comment


                • #18
                  Originally posted by Sugar Adam Ali View Post
                  Mccallum wasnt just a ****er,, he was a very good boxer-puncher with great body attack,, good chin, good stamina, nice jab. He really was an all around great fighter with no real weakness

                  Hopkins didnt just have trouble with high volume punchers, calzaghe was about the only guy that threw alot and outworked him with volume..

                  roy jones was very gunshy in their encounter but still outpointed hopkins,
                  robert allen in the first fight was having success vs hopkins by dictating the pace and wouldnt allow hopkins a comfort zone, hence why i always thought hopkins weaseled out of that fight and regrouped and changed the gameplan in the rematch
                  jermain taylor and chad dawson werent very active punchers, it was their jab that kept hopkins honest, and they wouldnt allow him to slow down the pace to a hopkins crawl and get picked apart. They both did a good job of using the jab to control hopkins and force him out of his comfort zone, and when hopkins is out of his comfort zone, his punch output plummets, he will still land an occassional hard clean shot, but he only throws like 25 punches a round in situations like this..
                  Taylor, jones, dawson didnt beat him with their own high volume, it was that hopkins wasnt comfortable, his output drops and they were all able to outpoint him..

                  I think mccallum would do the same thing, hopkins wouldnt be able to lure mccallum into his traps like he has done to tito, tarver, pavlik, pascal etc.. Mccallum would use his own jab to keep hopkins honest, hopkins would move alot but not land anything significant as a result. This would allow mccallum to outpoint him by the slimmest of margins..

                  this fight would pretty much always be a split decision or a draw,, everytime
                  Taylor and Calzaghe fought Bhop after BHop had slowed down. A prime BHop would have stopped Taylor and outpointed Joe C..

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    split decision either way but I'd tend to favor mccallum. I think mccallum is a very overlooked fighter. The guy in his prime was proper p4p material.

                    Hopkins on the other hand almost always came up short against the best of the best unless he was fighting smaller men like oscar and tito. Hopkins has always struck me as consistently very, very good but rarely absolutely amazing .. especially when the opponent can really box and isn't the smaller man.

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Originally posted by miamike View Post
                      Taylor and Calzaghe fought Bhop after BHop had slowed down. A prime BHop would have stopped Taylor and outpointed Joe C..
                      Thanks for stating the obvious... My point being is that hopkins doesnt fare well vs other top level boxers...If you look at hopkins resume in his prime it is virtually devoid of any good boxers except for roy, and hopkins lost by a wide margin... In his whole career he doesnt have one legit win over a really good pure boxer.. There is no evidence in hopkins career to suggest that he could beat a boxer like mccallum... If prime hopkins is getting dropped by mercado, and feasting off the likes of joe lispey, then i dont think you can claim that prime hopkins deals well with boxers

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP