2007-12-11 05:35:51 · 3 answers · asked by zebbie g 2 in Sports ➔ Boxing
Very interesting fight and I believe that it would also be a very close one. Starling was a good boxer and a great defensive fighter. McCallum was known as "The Body Snatcher" for good reason as he was a great body puncher. McCallum has the height and reach advantage here and Starling was a great counter puncher. This fight would have a lot of twists and turns throughout with the last few rounds being the decisive in the outcome. I have McCallum by a split decision here.
2007-12-11 06:19:02 · answer #1 · answered by toughguy2 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Ooh, now this is a very beautiful dream fight that I'd never envisioned before. Great deal. Starling would probably take it by UD on the basis that his skill set was a lot tighter than McCallum's. I was one who questioned McCallum's true heart when he failed and absolutely refused to ever rematch with Donald Curry after his very opportune and fortunate KO of same. McCallum always promoted himself as "parallel to Hearns, Leonard and Hagler," but interestingly never actually pursued a fight with any of them. Starling would apply as bad a whuppin' on The Bodysnatcher as any other real champion of the day.
2007-12-12 10:31:41 · answer #2 · answered by forevr_man 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
marlon starling was underratted. he clowned away fights against curry, bumphis, 2nd breland fight. i think he would score upset over mccallum
2007-12-13 19:28:40 · answer #3 · answered by mike c 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋