Hagler vs Monzon

[raylawpc]

Well if you know then that's that, I guess.

However as much as you want to tout speed, I think you may want to analyze accuracy and give a bit more credit where it's due.

For as much as you say "speed" is the issue, I think you may just want to think about for as "slow" as you say Monzon was, he also seemed to have this rather remarkable accuracy statistic even against quicksilver opponents. I'm not sure it's the dynamic problem you imagine it to be.


But if you "know" then it's already settled.

Monzon was fast enough against Griffith, Licata, Bouttier, Napoles, etc.

It's pretty fundamental that one of the tools needed to beat a southpaw is a straight right hand, and knowing how to use it. And nobody in the middleweight division had a better right than Carlos Monzon.

Well yes, but that was Griffith-balding, still hanging around Griffith, not Roy Jones. Poor comparison.

Licata? Please!!!

Napoles, coming apart at the seams

Now I have just gone over to Youtube to view the videos and from what I saw, Monzon seemed to have a way of making his opponent move the way he wanted them to and further controlled the opponent's actions (limiting) by tying him up. Dont know whether it would work on someone of Hagler's take charge southpaw style or Jones the way he drives in the right hand. But I doubt it

In the early 1970s, Emile was still considered a formidable middleweight contender, not the still hanging around Griffith that you describe. Look at his record from 1968 through the second Monzon fight: His only losses besides Monzon were a hometown decision to Kitten Hayward - which he avenged - a loss to ATG Jose Napoles (when he was weakened making the weight), and a questionable DQ to Bouttier. He beat Dick Tiger, Kitten Hayward, Armando Muniz, Ernie Lopez (twice), previously undefeated Tom Bogs, among others.

If Napoles was "coming apart at the seams" it was the Monzon fight that took it out of him. Before that, he had cleaned out the welterweight division.

Regarding Tony Licata, Jones and Hagler were both better fighters than Licata - no debate there - but he was certainly their equal in the area of speed and quickness. Licata had a reputation as an excellent defensive fighter, but Monzon just took him apart.

[BoxBuzz]

Monzon had an absurd ability to "slowly" (if you will) predict just where an opponent would be at the moment of impact. His radar was uncanny. Like a computer he seemed to calculate the physics of moving objects, track the trajectory and compute an intersection point in time and space.

However you want to characterize his speed, he seemed to more than make up for it with that bit of radar of his. He was perhaps the most calculating fighter I have ever witnessed and completely unflappable. And ready to change and execute a new plan as if that was the plan from the beginning. A ring general in every sense of the word.

I think the more interesting fight rather than Marvin would have been a crossing of paths with Bob Foster. Hearns at MW would have been another notched opponent for Carlos.

This according to my grey matter of course.

[raylawpc]

Monzon had an absurd ability to "slowly" (if you will) predict just where an opponent would be at the moment of impact. His radar was uncanny. Like a computer he seemed to calculate the physics of moving objects, track the trajectory and compute an intersection point in time and space.

However you want to characterize his speed, he seemed to more than make up for it with that bit of radar of his. He was perhaps the most calculating fighter I have ever witnessed and completely unflappable. And ready to change and execute a new plan as if that was the plan from the beginning. A ring general in every sense of the word.

I think the more interesting fight rather than Marvin would have been a crossing of paths with Bob Foster. Hearns at MW would have been another notched opponent for Carlos.

This according to my grey matter of course.

One of the things that made Monzon great was his ability to use his size to his advantage, and that would have been lost against Foster. But it would have been interesting to see how Carlos would have tried to adapt to fighting a truly bigger man. Buzz, I don't remember anyone seriously proposing that match-up back in the early 1970s, do you?

[Roco]

I feel Hagler would take over the middle rounds and up the intensity and out hussle Monzon. I don't see Monzon been slick enough to avoid exchanges and I feel Hagler would be getting the better of the exchanges by the middle rounds.

Hagler UD.

[dagosd2000]

Scanning the forum. A good thread. I have Monzon on tape fighting Briscoe in the two fights in Argentina. Bennie was backing him up. In one of the rounds he really had Carlos hurt. Bennie had a style a lot like Hagler. Considering Marvin came from the wrong side and was a better fighter than Briscoe,I'll pick Marvin by KO in the late rounds.

[BoxBuzz]

Scanning the forum. A good thread. I have Monzon on tape fighting Briscoe in the two fights in Argentina. Bennie was backing him up. In one of the rounds he really had Carlos hurt. Bennie had a style a lot like Hagler. Considering Marvin came from the wrong side and was a better fighter than Briscoe,I'll pick Marvin by KO in the late rounds.

The idea that Marvin is somehow going to KO Monzon made me laugh so hard soda went up my nose. Honestly! No offense it just seems that far fetched for me to imagine it personally. He could not beat Sugar Ray, He could not KO Duran, he loses to Willy the worm, struggles with Vito and yet KO's Monzon? IMHO It's fuzzy math! Based on the Hearns performance and how well he always did in rematches I suppose I can't blame folks for imagining it could happen. I'm just not one of those folks.

[raylawpc]

Scanning the forum. A good thread. I have Monzon on tape fighting Briscoe in the two fights in Argentina. Bennie was backing him up. In one of the rounds he really had Carlos hurt. Bennie had a style a lot like Hagler. Considering Marvin came from the wrong side and was a better fighter than Briscoe,I'll pick Marvin by KO in the late rounds.

Can't agree this time Roger. I don't think Briscoe was "backing [Monzon] up," just as I don't think Basilio was backing up Gene Fullmer in their two fights. Monzon chose to back up as part of his strategy, just as he chose to back up against Jose Napoles while giving the welterweight champ a sound drubbing and winning by TKO. I've never seen the first Briscoe-Monzon fight, but in the second, I only gave Briscoe two or three rounds at the most. It was a dominating performance by Monzon.

[bennie]

[BoxBuzz]

Interesting moment in time bennie! Can you give context? As is often the case the next moment in time can change the entire perspective.

There is a split second in time in the second Ali Frazier fight where Joe looks to be in this sort of trouble but I have been told over and over again to read nothing into that moment because Joe was never really off his game though Joe lost that fight. This pic has much in common with that.

A picture says a thousand words. But as is always the case a typical fight contains hundreds of thousands if not more of such single frame moments. You also have to give Monzon credit for having recuperative powers along the lines of Ali.

But few frames ever caught on camera, contain either Joe Frazier or Carlos Monzon seemingly in trouble. (Sans the Foreman fights regarding Frazier) Bennie had to be deflated that this did not spell the end of his days work. He didnt' even parlay that moment into a KD.

[raylawpc]

Interesting moment in time bennie! Can you give context? As is often the case the next moment in time can change the entire perspective.

There is a split second in time in the second Ali Frazier fight where Joe looks to be in this sort of trouble but I have been told over and over again to read nothing into that moment because Joe was never really off his game though Joe lost that fight. This pic has much in common with that.

A picture says a thousand words. But as is always the case a typical fight contains hundreds of thousands if not more of such single frame moments. You also have to give Monzon credit for having recuperative powers along the lines of Ali.

But few frames ever caught on camera, contain either Joe Frazier or Carlos Monzon seemingly in trouble. (Sans the Foreman fights regarding Frazier) Bennie had to be deflated that this did not spell the end of his days work. He didnt' even parlay that moment into a KD.

That was the ninth round. The scorecards read:

judge: Raúl Amadeo 150-139 | judge: Hector Caumont 149-139 | judge: Jorge Alvin 149-143

UPI had it (by rounds) 10-1-4 Monzon.

At the end of the fight, Monzon was unmarked. According to the UPI, Briscoe's nose was bloodied and his right eye badly swollen. AP reported that he bled from the mouth and a cut eye.

The UPI quoted Briscoe as saying, "Monzon is a great champion. He clearly won.

[BoxBuzz]

I'm of the opinion that Bennie had more firepower in a single shot than Marvin.

Wasn't Bennie another bad seed like Monzon? What I mean by that is that he would be just as comfortable giving out a beating in or out of the ring?

[Elton John]

he's in trouble all right. he's got that look - hands are completely down and slumped against the corner ringpost, turned sideways. I'd be interested in how it looks on film. Nevertheless, he got into trouble as he would find himself in against hagler, the man who stopped Hitman Hearns in 3.

Hagler was never hurt, even by the most massive of punchers like Roldan, Hart, and Mugabi. I remember the uppercut by Mugabi that landed on a rapidly aging Hagler and its as tho it had no effect.

It might take some time to close the distance and some work but Marvin with his faster hands, would certainly pile up the points before wearing down King Carlos. Once Monzon would try to cover the head, MH would drive in shots to those fearfull exposed ribs because nobody has ever gone to Monzon's body before. If you notice from the films, everybody aims for his head which has never been an easy target.

Marvin on the other hand, was not such as they. It would be Marvin's sharp right jab over Monzon's lazy left and Hagler's crisp short left hook beating him to it on the inside.

No contest.

Marvin as you know, did very well against tall fighters and I can't see how a man with nine draws and those slow hands can possibly compete the greatest middleweight of all.

[BoxBuzz]

E.J. I think you just blew a few I.C. chips with that bit of logic. Better check your main frame.

[BoxBuzz]

Is this Monzon's handiwork?

[BoxBuzz]

Valdez vs Hagler would be a competitive fight. Monzon vs Hagler...not so much.

[Elton John]

E.J. I think you just blew a few I.C. chips with that bit of logic. Better check your main frame.

I'm sorry but I can't see Hagler failing to beat a man with nine draws on his record and you don't seem to have the will to dispute any of it so before you tell me that anything is wrong with my logic, you have to tell me WHAT is wrong with my logic. Are we clear?

[Elton John]

Is this Monzon's handiwork?

Rodrigo always was a face first fighter

[BoxBuzz]

I would begin by saying you exaggerate the speed, issue, you then seem to discount the accuracy of Monzon and his uncanny ring generalship. You clearly see and identify every skill that Hagler has as if myopic on the subject and seem to discount most of the Monzon inventory. Almost the "anti ringsider" on this ....(you may recall he felt Marvin was decidedly wanting and a bit of a lucky southpaw "plodder". I would not agree with that assessment either.

Your description of Marvin however is perfect for the believer.

I will offer that I don't see Monzon on the losing end of a Leonard, or Monroe face off. I also don't see him having the kinds of trouble Marvin had with Vito or Roberto. Partly because he was a fight engineer that could blueprint in real time like no one who has ever entered the ring, IMHO. It appeared to me that he often showed something new. You mention Marvin would be different than any Monzon opponent, and would deliver a body attack like he never experienced, something you say Monzon never had to contend with, but you don't seem reflective on why that is so.

I have to wonder if it might have been a difficult task.

You mention that Hagler did well with tall fighters, Did you also notice that Monzon did pretty well with fighter's Marvin size? If so you didn't mention it.

I know you believe that Hagler is the best MW of all time. I simply don't share that opinion. But I enjoyed your analysis, and probably should not have taken issue with you the way I did. I disagree, but I'll drop the disagreeable act at this point.

[Elton John]

I would begin by saying you exaggerate the speed, issue, you then seem to discount the accuracy of Monzon and his uncanny ring generalship. You clearly see and identify every skill that Hagler has as if myopic on the subject and seem to discount most of the Monzon inventory. Almost the "anti ringsider" on this ....(you may recall he felt Marvin was decidedly wanting and a bit of a lucky southpaw "plodder". I would not agree with that assessment either.

Your description of Marvin however is perfect for the believer.

I will offer that I don't see Monzon on the losing end of a Leonard, or Monroe face off. I also don't see him having the kinds of trouble Marvin had with Vito or Roberto. Partly because he was a fight engineer that could blueprint in real time like no one who has ever entered the ring, IMHO. It appeared to me that he often showed something new. You mention Marvin would be different than any Monzon opponent, and would deliver a body attack like he never experienced, something you say Monzon never had to contend with, but you don't seem reflective on why that is so.

I have to wonder if it might have been a difficult task.

You mention that Hagler did well with tall fighters, Did you also notice that Monzon did pretty well with fighter's Marvin size? If so you didn't mention it.

I know you believe that Hagler is the best MW of all time. I simply don't share that opinion. But I enjoyed your analysis, and probably should not have taken issue with you the way I did. I disagree, but I'll drop the disagreeable act at this point.

What do you want me to do, lie and tell you Hagler wasnt at the end of his career or not even ranked top 10 at 160 when he lost? You do realize that it is common for fighters to lose their last fight; Ali, Louis, Robinson.

Should I just overlook nine draws? I understand two draws but NINE??

Even in that photo you can clearly see that Monzon was out of it but who knows? maybe he would have lasted with marvin. In any case, I'd like to see the film of what happened

[bennie]

I've grown up knowing that Briscoe really hurt Monzon and deserved a title rematch (Monzon gave everyone else a rematch), particularly as he held Monzon to an earlier draw in Argentina.

[BoxBuzz]

You do realize that it is common for fighters to lose their last fight; Ali, Louis, Robinson.

Yes, and remarkably Monzon does not fall in that catagory, putting in a good days work upon his finale.

[raylawpc]

I would begin by saying you exaggerate the speed, issue, you then seem to discount the accuracy of Monzon and his uncanny ring generalship. You clearly see and identify every skill that Hagler has as if myopic on the subject and seem to discount most of the Monzon inventory. Almost the "anti ringsider" on this ....(you may recall he felt Marvin was decidedly wanting and a bit of a lucky southpaw "plodder". I would not agree with that assessment either.

Your description of Marvin however is perfect for the believer.

I will offer that I don't see Monzon on the losing end of a Leonard, or Monroe face off. I also don't see him having the kinds of trouble Marvin had with Vito or Roberto. Partly because he was a fight engineer that could blueprint in real time like no one who has ever entered the ring, IMHO. It appeared to me that he often showed something new. You mention Marvin would be different than any Monzon opponent, and would deliver a body attack like he never experienced, something you say Monzon never had to contend with, but you don't seem reflective on why that is so.

I have to wonder if it might have been a difficult task.

You mention that Hagler did well with tall fighters, Did you also notice that Monzon did pretty well with fighter's Marvin size? If so you didn't mention it.

I know you believe that Hagler is the best MW of all time. I simply don't share that opinion. But I enjoyed your analysis, and probably should not have taken issue with you the way I did. I disagree, but I'll drop the disagreeable act at this point.

What do you want me to do, lie and tell you Hagler wasnt at the end of his career or not even ranked top 10 at 160 when he lost? You do realize that it is common for fighters to lose their last fight; Ali, Louis, Robinson.

Should I just overlook nine draws? I understand two draws but NINE??

Even in that photo you can clearly see that Monzon was out of it but who knows? maybe he would have lasted with marvin. In any case, I'd like to see the film of what happened

If you look at the records of many South American fighters from the same era, particularly Argentinian fighters, they have many draws on their records. That's just the way things were done down there.

The fight is available on youtube, including the 9th round.

[raylawpc]

I've grown up knowing that Briscoe really hurt Monzon and deserved a title rematch (Monzon gave everyone else a rematch), particularly as he held Monzon to an earlier draw in Argentina.

bennie, having seen the fight on tape, and based on everything I've read about it, Monzon dominated the fight. There is no doubt that Monzon was hurt at the end of the 9th, but that was for a fleeting moment. Indeed, if memory serves, Monzon went on the attack in the tenth and took the fight to Briscoe. As I recall, I personally scored only two rounds for Briscoe - three at the most. I did not personally believe that Briscoe's performance screamed for a rematch.

The failure to secure a rematch may have been as much a question of timing as anything else. In 1973, Briscoe lost to Valdez in a NABF championship match, and Valdez became the top contender. The WBC stripped Monzon for defending against Napoles instead of Valdez. In May 1974, Briscoe lost to Valdez for the vacant title, and then dropped a decision to Emile Griffith. I suppose Monzon could have fought Bennie in 1975, but Monzon chose to give other guys a chance. If memory serves, those guys were ranked higher than Briscoe at that time. By 1976, Monzon and Valdez were locked in their struggle for supremacy.

[BoxBuzz]

After reviewing the ninth round, I have to say the bigger story is about bounce back and not about being in trouble. But wow what great give and take! I think the world of Briscoe....that was one very serious fight, IMHO.

[bennie]

Is this Monzon's handiwork?

Rodrigo always was a face first fighter

Harsh words. Valdez was a dynamite fighter who dropped Monzon and was the only man ever to stop Briscoe.