Who is the greatest middleweight you'd take Sumbu Kalambay to beat?

[Tin_Ribs]

Hey folks

I threw in my first ESB Classic opinion on the recent Conteh thread but this'll be my first thread started, so here goes :!:

Kalambay gets his dues amongst people in the know but seems to have been either somewhat forgotten by the casual observer or dismissed due to the flukey blowout against Nunn. Of the last 25 years or so, few have been his equal as a pure boxer IMHO on ability alone.

So who is the greatest middleweight, either record-wise or H2H, you'd take him to beat?

[Russell]

Hagler! :yep:good

[WhataRock]

I honestly think he could beat Hopkins on his best night. In a fight where scoring shots would be at a premium, I think Sumbu could give Nard at a lot of problems with his style.

Really he is the exact kind of fighter Tiger would loathe fighting..but Im not sure Im brave enough to pick him there.

I think he possibly beats Griffith and Fullmer in the 12 round era.

A very underrated fighter..good thread Tin_Ribs

[Tin_Ribs]

Hagler! :yep:good

Brave call pal but not unreasonable :hey. Hagler was one of the names I first thought of (probably irrationally) along with Dick Tiger. Sumbu would have been an interesting stylistic challenge for Marv no doubt: he may well have pulled it out, especially against the fading version of the mid-eighites. But 15 rounds is long time against Hagler, who was no slouch himself in the skills department in that he was such a balanced and well-rounded fighter.

[Tin_Ribs]

I honestly think he could beat Hopkins on his best night. In a fight where scoring shots would be at a premium, I think Sumbu could give Nard at a lot of problems with his style.

Really he is the exact kind of fighter Tiger would loathe fighting..but Im not sure Im brave enough to pick him there.

I think he possibly beats Griffith and Fullmer in the 12 round era.

A very underrated fighter..good thread Tin_Ribs

Cheers sir, good reply :thumbsup. Agreed on Hopkins; counterpunchers were never his strongest suit if they gave him nothing to feed off. Ditto for Tiger who could be troubled by movers, Giardello and Archer proving this that to a certain extent.

Griffith struggling with LMR supports the notion that Kalambay could pull a fast one over 12 rounds, but Emile was a brilliant 15 round fighter, one of the definitive fighter's in that regard.

[DINAMITA]

Kalambay's win over Mike McCallum is very possibly the greatest boxing performance I've ever seen. It's certainly a live contender for that award. I think on his night he could potentially beat anyone who has ever fought at middleweight, if he really hit that height again. But in general terms, I could see Monzon imposing his game on Sumbu and defeating him most times. Sumbu would give Hagler a torrid evening though. At his peak, Marvin may be marvellous enough to overcome what I'd view as somewhat of a stylistic disadvantage, but I can envisage Kalambay winning that one as often as not.

[cotto20]

I often think why they havent put him in the hall of fame, the guy was a great fighter

[teeto]

I like the names put forth already in Tiger and Griffith in terms of the styles match-up, im also not going to say outright that he'd beat Tiger, who you could see turning it around. But with Giardello's efforts against him, and as has been afforementioned in Rodriguez against Griffith at the lower weight you could see it. But these are great fighters who could win fights regardless of a bad styles match-up.

[teeto]

I would pick Hagler over him personally though, even if he has to come adversity.

[Flea Man]

Ummmm.....he's not a great 'middle' but a great fighter I would pick him to beat at 160 is Leonard............uh, I also think he would be a nightmare for Hopkins...but that Hop would just about prevail.

I'm assuming you guys are on the same wavelength as me; Nunn caught him cold? I also think people are unfair to call Nunn feather-fisted, is that a fair statement?

[Mantequilla]

William Joppy.

Nunn was actually a very underrated bodypuncher.Brutal uppercuts to the body whipped in with great leverage.I thnk his problem was he barely really threw with conviction, rather than being a true featherfist.

[PowerPuncher]

If he's on his best night when Robinson/Hagler/Monzon are not at their best he could make a huge name scalp or 2

[Bill Butcher]

Hey folks

I threw in my first ESB Classic opinion on the recent Conteh thread but this'll be my first thread started, so here goes :!:

Kalambay gets his dues amongst people in the know but seems to have been either somewhat forgotten by the casual observer or dismissed due to the flukey blowout against Nunn. Of the last 25 years or so, few have been his equal as a pure boxer IMHO on ability alone.

So who is the greatest middleweight, either record-wise or H2H, you'd take him to beat?

Michael Nunn..... Oops !

Might have to go with the Robinson that lost to Archer now ;)

[teeto]

Michael Nunn..... Oops !

Might have to go with the Robinson that lost to Archer now ;)
The Robinson that lost to Archer! Not asking for too much stipulations there eh?!

[Minotauro]

Tiger and Toney would be interesting to see him against Hagler.

[My2Sense]

Dick Tiger.

[redrooster]

Knowing the mentality of many posters here they wouldnt hesitate to claim Nunn if Mike hadnt already proved his superiority. so i dont find it surprsing some would actually claim Hagler.

I fins it rather insulting to sell Hagler so cheap

he had his chance to make a move up in the ratings when Marvin was top dog in the sport.

Personally I find his closest match would be someone like Hopkins, a fighter with not too much speed and not much to fear on offense. This goes 12 rounds I believe

[redrooster]

Ummmm.....he's not a great 'middle' but a great fighter I would pick him to beat at 160 is Leonard............uh, I also think he would be a nightmare for Hopkins...but that Hop would just about prevail.

I'm assuming you guys are on the same wavelength as me; Nunn caught him cold? I also think people are unfair to call Nunn feather-fisted, is that a fair statement?


Fleaman, that is the worst excuse you will see-getting caught cold. Fact is, Sumbu would have fared no better in later rounds the way he was caught flush with his head making an audible thud as it struck the canvas.

[TheGreatA]

Kalambay was always somewhat vulnerable in the early rounds. I believe he hit the canvas more than a few times against lesser opposition in the early rounds, Nunn was simply able to take advantage of this.

I do think that had the fight gone to the later rounds, Kalambay would've given Nunn something to think about.

[Mantequilla]

All of those early knockdowns in his career came after the Nunn fight though.Unless you are referring to earlier junior middle fights that i haven't seen that is.

Flash knockdown in the first agaisnt Ashton and down twice in the second against Graham, but he looked a shell of himself in general in those fights and seemed to very much past his prime, with not much in the way of reflexes left.he was always a bit of a slow starter and i think after he lost a couple of steps it did make him vulnerable early, starting slowly cost him the rematch with McCallum as well.

the other two were in the first round against Dell'aquilla, which definitely seemed a direct mental consequence of the Nunn KO, as he seemed to completely freeze up and went down twice, but battled back to dismantle the ordinary Italian in a sort of archie Moore vs Durelle repeat.

I don't know if he was down in any of his early fights, but from the fights i've seen the Nunn knockdown was a first,.Just one of those things, say what you want about Nunn(and i'm no big fan of him at all) but he was extremely fast and threw an uncharacteristic punch of a lifetime.A shame as maybe fi he had let those kind of striaght lefts go consistently instead of the lazy stuff we got in most of his other fights, then he might have been the great fighter he was hyped as.

[TheGreatA]

All of those early knockdowns in his career came after the Nunn fight though.Unless you are referring to earlier junior middle fights that i haven't seen that is.

Flash knockdown in the first agaisnt Ashton and down twice in the second against Graham, but he looked a shell of himself in general in those fights and seemed to very much past his prime, with not much in the way of reflexes left.he was always a bit of a slow starter and i think after he lost a couple of steps it did make him vulnerable early, starting slowly cost him the rematch with McCallum as well.

the other two were in the first round against Dell'aquilla, which definitely seemed a direct mental consequence of the Nunn KO, as he seemed to completely freeze up and went down twice, but battled back to dismantle the ordinary Italian in a sort of archie Moore vs Durelle repeat.

I don't know if he was down in any of his early fights, but from the fights i've seen the Nunn knockdown was a first,.Just one of those things, say what you want about Nunn(and i'm no big fan of him at all) but he was extremely fast and threw an uncharacteristic punch of a lifetime.A shame as maybe fi he had let those kind of striaght lefts go consistently instead of the lazy stuff we got in most of his other fights, then he might have been the great fighter he was hyped as.

You could be right but Kalambay did describe himself as a very slow starter.

[Mantequilla]

I agree he was a slow starter, which definitely became a bit of a liability near the end of his career.

Just that any problems due to it seemed to only arise post Nunn.Before that he was always sharp defensively from the off, but took a round or two to settle into a counterpunching groove.

[Tin_Ribs]

The loss against Nunn, who lacked commitment more than punching power as Mantequilla stated, reminds me of Griffith losing to Carter in that it wouldn't happen again if they fought another 10 times. And I think Kalambay at his best may have boxed circles around Toney.

Good names thrown in though, cheers chaps.

[Dave's Top Ten]

Wow, all I've got to say is Sumbu gets massively overated by you guys. A tricky customer, no doubt, but beating some of the names mentioned here?? NO way.

[Russell]

Wow, all I've got to say is Sumbu gets massively overated by you guys. A tricky customer, no doubt, but beating some of the names mentioned here?? NO way.

And how is someone who throughly schools Mike McCallum overrated, do tell?

[red cobra]

He might get lucky and catch Emile Griffith on an off night and win a narrow decision, but as sure as God made little green apples..Griffith would beat him in the return match. He'd never catch Hagler or Monzon, of course, on an off night and actually BEAT them, but he make the distance with both, and lose.

[red cobra]

I don't think Kalambay would have beaten McCallum in a rematch.

[Tin_Ribs]

I don't think Kalambay would have beaten McCallum in a rematch.

I think he was on the decline by the time of the McCallum rematch coupled with the fact that McCallum fought a more intelligent fight second time around.

I often wonder how he'd have gone on against men like Archer and Dupas, though I haven't seen a massive deal of Dupas.

[WhataRock]

I don't think Kalambay would have beaten McCallum in a rematch.


He arguably did.

I think Mike just had a bit more left physically at that stage. Plus Sumbu was probably suffering mentally still from the Nunn loss.

[red cobra]

I think he was on the decline by the time of the McCallum rematch coupled with the fact that McCallum fought a more intelligent fight second time around.

I often wonder how he'd have gone on against men like Archer and Dupas, though I haven't seen a massive deal of Dupas.
Besides agreeing with you on your first point, I confess to completely forgetting that they DID fight a rematch...maybe I'm just tired, but that may have slipped my mind anyway! I think that Kalambay against either Archer or Dupas would not have been a very fan friendly fight, and they could very well have just cancelled each other out..against either man.

[Mantequilla]

I thought it was clear from the two fights that sumbu would beat McCallum much more often than not.imo he was simply a more talented fighter, though McCallum had a slightly better career(which he wouldn't have had if he had fought at middleweight from the start and actually tried to get his fight with hagler) especially if you can't force him out of his own fight, which McCallum lacked the style or tools to really do.

And i don't think i overrate him at least.I woudln't pick him over Hagler or Monzon for one.Though like the no more accomplished Rodrigo valdez, i'm guessing his rep would have benefited from losing fights with men like htat, aka Buchanan, Dejesus, Winstone and co.

[Sweet Pea]

I don't think Kalambay would have beaten McCallum in a rematch.
They already had a rematch, which was a very highly competitive bout that Kalambay (who was considerably on the slide post-Nunn) still arguably won. I think the first bout, with both pretty much at their peak was a much more telling encounter, and we saw how that one went. McCallum was an excellent technician, but he lacked in other areas (mostly physical; defensive reflexes, footspeed, etc.) that prevented him from becoming one of the truly elite Middles. He'd have always had trouble with the more fleet-footed technical boxers like Kalambay, Archer, Giardello, etc. and I very much doubt he had the tools necessary to beat the Monzon's or Hagler's.

[Dave's Top Ten]

And how is someone who throughly schools Mike McCallum overrated, do tell?

It was a great performance to beat McCallum, and he put together a good string of victories til he got starched by Nunn. Still, the win over Mac, who was coming up from 154 and probably overconfident, and the wins over DeWitt, Barkley et al, doesn't means he beats any of the greats. I really appreciated Kalamby when he was around, but let's not get carried away.

[WhataRock]

It was a great performance to beat McCallum, and he put together a good string of victories til he got starched by Nunn. Still, the win over Mac, who was coming up from 154 and probably overconfident, and the wins over DeWitt, Barkley et al, doesn't means he beats any of the greats. I really appreciated Kalamby when he was around, but let's not get carried away.


Mike is one of my alltime favorite fighters...To me he didnt look like a fighter who was overconfident or underprepared, he just straight up looked clueless. I just cant believe that Mike would have gone over the Italy thinking this fight was in the bag. I really think he was as ready as he could have been but he just lacked the tools to deal with Kalambay..I think the rematch against a physically declining and mentally scarred Sumbu probably reinforces this.

I think at the very least Kalambay is a nuisance to all the the second tier guys, and perhaps a some of the top tier who have trouble with guys like him stylisically.

I made the call he could have beaten Hopkins..But I think Im being a little unfair to Nard to say the least because Im basically basing this on the second Taylor fight..At first glance that was the best fight I could come up with that would possibly show how Sumbu would have approached it tactically.

[Tin_Ribs]

Mike is one of my alltime favorite fighters...To me he didnt look like a fighter who was overconfident or underprepared to me, he just straight up looked clueless. I just cant believe that Mike would have gone over the Italy thinking this fight was in the bag. I really think he was as ready as he could have been but he just lacked the tools to deal with Kalambay..I think the rematch against a physically declining and mentally scarred Sumbu probably reinforces this.

I think at the very least Kalambay is a nuisance to all the the second tier guys, and perhaps a some of the top tier who have trouble with guys like him stylisically.

I made the call he could have beaten Hopkins..But I think Im being a little unfair to Nard to say the least because Im basically basing this on the second Taylor fight..At first glance that was the best fight I could come up with that would possibly show how Sumbu would have approached it tactically.

Mike's a favourite of mine also. I think he was prepared in the first fight but struggled to set himself to throw, following Kalambay around the ring too much and playing his game. McCallum was never at his best against slick movers, though he was better second time around when Sumbu was slipping.

And I reckon that Kalambay was better than anyone Hopkins faced at middle during his reign, with the reverse being true of course. The Hopkins of the first Taylor fight may well have lost to Kalambay, who was clearly better than Taylor in my humble opinion.

[WhataRock]

Mike's a favourite of mine also. I think he was prepared in the first fight but struggled to set himself to throw, following Kalambay around the ring too much and playing his game. McCallum was never at his best against slick movers, though he was better second time around when Sumbu was slipping.

And I reckon that Kalambay was better than anyone Hopkins faced at middle during his reign, with the reverse being true of course. The Hopkins of the first Taylor fight may well have lost to Kalambay, who was clearly better than Taylor in my humble opinion.


where you call home in sheep shagger land Tin?

[Tin_Ribs]

where you call home in sheep shagger land Tin?

:lol: I'm travelling mate, I'm a whinging pom through and through. Working in Whitianga at the moment. Probably gonna grace your sacred land later this year some time if customs don't throw me arse over tit.

[WhataRock]

:lol: I'm travelling mate, I'm a whinging pom through and through. Working in Whitianga at the moment. Probably gonna grace your sacred land later this year some time if customs don't throw me arse over tit.

NZ is an awesome country...cant wait to go back.

Be careful with our Customs..They are hard bastards.

[Tin_Ribs]

NZ is an awesome country...cant wait to go back.

Be careful with our Customs..They are hard bastards.

Aye, it's the dog's bollocks over here alright, amazing landscapes and decent folk (mostly). Bob Fitz learned his trade out here, so we English can't claim him. We still try though, colonialism dies hard.

[red cobra]

They already had a rematch, which was a very highly competitive bout that Kalambay (who was consderably on the slide post-Nunn) still arguably won. I think the first bout, with both pretty much at their peak was a much more telling encounter, and we saw how that one went. McCallum was an excellent technician, but he lacked in other areas (mostly physical; defensive reflexes, footspeed, etc.) that prevented him from becoming one of the truly elite Middles. He'd have always had trouble with the more fleet-footed technical boxers like Kalambay, Archer, Giardello, etc. and I very much doubt he had the tools necessary to beat the Monzon's or Hagler's.
Yeah, I realized right after I made my post that they did have a rematch, and if they had a rubber match I believe that Mike would have won that one too. Mike was a fine second tier champion and I agree that he would never have been able to cope with the flashier boxers you mentioned, and never would have threatened the elite of Monzon and Hagler, but I appreciate McCallum most for his classic, picture book one punch ko of Don Curry. One of the prettiest and most perfect left hooks of all time and one of the very first things I ever taped on the vcr.

[The Funny Man 7]

Yeah, I definitely think the Nunn result was a huge fluke. I'd pick him to beat Gene Fullmer with some confidence, but he would be an underdog against anyone better than that in my mind.

[Mr Butt]

i would say tiger or as above fullmer but hagler and monzon that i just dont see