Winky Wright vs Mike McCallum

**Parody** · 12-07-2006, 06:34 PM

In his prime, Mccallum at light middleweight was a beast, no one would mess with him. McCallum wins this.

**RAESAAD** · 12-07-2006, 06:36 PM

You know if memory serves me McCallum was a very good body puncher............If so I think that is a key with beating Winky.He is open to liver and Kidney shots especially if you get his hands up high by attacking there early........just an observation but I think McCallum could maybe stop Winky with a good body shot or an accumulation of them late.........Or Winky could outbox him and win by UD I suppose too.

**Super_Lightweight** · 12-07-2006, 06:37 PM

Stylistically, how do you see the matchup and how will Winky lose? Do you just see Mike as too strong and too good or what?

**GEOFFHAYES** · 12-07-2006, 06:41 PM

Wright has fought nobody in McCallum's class, other than Mosley and Trinidad who were just not near natural junior-middles and both washed up anyway. Taylor didn't get his jab working, and matched him on athleticism alone, otherwise he'd of taken him.

Although he's not known for it, McCallum could stick and move quite well in his earlier years. He was not running though, just boxing, and if an opponent moved inside McCallum would counter with body shots rather than tying up inside. His style made for great fights with plenty of skilled boxing mixed with sharp punching. Wright ofcourse is a master of the peek-a-boo style, having evolved from his Ali-clone 'running' days earlier in his career. But he's just not in McCallum's class IMO, and McCallum was so naturally gifted and had such an great trainer in Eddie Futch that I'm sure they'd definately find ways to feint Wright out of position and get through his peek-a-boo defense to the head as well as the body. McCallum could do anything shown to him at the first time of asking, he didn't study greats of the past or anything, but he wasn't taught either, just showed and then executed. I'm sure he'd have no problem learning to parry the straight punches from the high guard of Wright while throwing a counter jab and follow-up, and then switching to the body as he did.

**GEOFFHAYES** · 12-07-2006, 06:50 PM

I like Wright but, you know, Ensley 'Bingo' Bingham and Steve Foster Sr are not Mike McCallum with all due respect, and neither is Harry Simon.

Quartey is way past his best too, like 11 years past his best and another blown-up cat.

**Super_Lightweight** · 12-07-2006, 07:02 PM

Yes, but Tito was still pretty good. He certainly had no claim to being washed up, although it can be said that his style did not have a good chance vs Winky's. Wright controlled fighters like Tito and Mosley pretty smoothly, and fought well vs a much younger and stronger guy in Taylor, which leads one to believe he can at least hold his own vs a guy like Mike. I favor Mike as well by the way. Harry Simon was a damned good fighter by all accounts I've seen, on another note. I'd like some footage of him.

**oldgringo** · 12-07-2006, 08:51 PM

Good 154 matchup. Gotta go with MCCallum here. He was one of the most complete fighters the sport has seen in my opinion...he could lead, counter, attack you smartly upstairs and especially downstairs. He was solid defensively and incredible technically.

I see McCallum and Wright jabbing each other in a feel out first round. McCallum starts to touch Wright to the body after sticking the jab. After 7-8 technical rounds McCallum starts gaining the edge...the straight shots start getting in upstairs. I think Mike was just a better fighter than is Wright, although Wright is great himself.

**macman** · 12-08-2006, 06:28 AM

Go for McCallum in this one - I think he was the more complete fighter.

Winky I think is one of the best defensive fighters of all time, with great timing, but think that McCallum will eventually get through Winky's guard.

See this one starting out technical as well, both exchanging jabs & looking for position, but then McCallum start to open around the third.

Winky picks him initially with his great timing, but McCallum was very good at switching from head to body, & he can get a lot of power from a lot of angles.

McCallum's body shots start to take a toll by the 8th or 9th, & Winky gets very reluctant to open himself up to throw punches, & McCallum takes over.

Winky goes the distance if he plays it defensive for the last few rounds & McCallum wins a reasonably close desicion.

If Winky tries to open up back in the last rounds see him going down, but probably still going the distance - very tough, determined guy, which I think a lot of people underestimate about him.

**col Blake** · 12-08-2006, 09:24 AM

Originally posted by Super_Lightweight

Mike McCallum was a wonder. He fought well as a pro even into his forties and nearly beat James Toney (arguably did). He was able to go from 154 lbs to 175 lbs with much success. He had a vicious body assault and good power, plus he was just plainly a smart fighter.

Winky on the other hand has just recently made it to 160 and will probably be there for the remainder unless Calzaghe comes calling. Winky would take a southpaw, supposed advantage, into a fight with McCallum. As I watched Wright-Quartey, I found myself wondering how Wright would do with a beast like Mike on his hands.

Who wins? Let's say the fight is at 154 in both men's primes. 12 rounds.

i feel Mike McCallum dodged a lot of world class fighters in his early days, as did Hopkins. only coming out of the shadows when they had retired.

Winky Wright vs Mike McCallum