Hagler vs Monzon

[raylawpc]

.....which is my point about Hagler meeting Monzon in real time too early in his career.....could have been a career changer for a guy given to dark moods. I also don't think Hagler had Briscoe's power though he was faster.

In 1977, Carlos would have manhandled the unranked up-and-coming Hagler. Prime v. prime would have been a great fight.

[BoxBuzz]

.....which is my point about Hagler meeting Monzon in real time too early in his career.....could have been a career changer for a guy given to dark moods. I also don't think Hagler had Briscoe's power though he was faster.

In 1977, Carlos would have manhandled the unranked up-and-coming Hagler. Prime v. prime would have been a great fight.

No disagreement whatsoever. Honestly I sometimes just feel compelled to offer counterpoints to an assertion here and there to keep things on an even keel.

I often do not bring tactics and specific skill observations into my discussions because there are others here such as yourself that do such a better job of it. I do like to chime in on the makeup of fighters psyche's. A subject that sometimes gets too little attention in the war of words between those who want to split hairs in regards to the enormously abundant skill inventories these guys possess. Monzon may simply be the best in my life time in the cool under pressure category. IMHO.

I feel the best tend to often be rather equally skilled, but not all are equally gifted with that "something extra". That absolute focus. With these two guys even that is a hair splitting conversation. But like baseball, it can make for a good and lively debate. It think the chasm in a Tyson Vs Ali debate is much wider on this subject. One had a rather brittle mental state and the others was made of Kevlar.

[Seamus]

Another advantage I see for Hagler is the fact that Monzon never faced a quality southpaw in his career. In fact, looking at his record it appears he never fought any southpaws, but I leave the final word on that to someone like Martin Sosa Cameron.

Never fighting a quality southpaw, and then facing quite possibly the best ever would be one formidable task.

[giacomino]

Another advantage I see for Hagler is the fact that Monzon never faced a quality southpaw in his career. In fact, looking at his record it appears he never fought any southpaws, but I leave the final word on that to someone like Martin Sosa Cameron.

Never fighting a quality southpaw, and then facing quite possibly the best ever would be one formidable task.

Others have brought up that point, and there is a possibility it would be an advantage for Hagler. But, as others have also said, Monzon had the kind of right hand that could potentially neutralize that advantage. I can see it both making Hagler more effective on offense and vulnerable on defense (which might have made for a more entertaining fight)
Re: never having fought a southpaw. I am not an expert on Argentine boxing in the 1960s, but I find it hard to believe he didn't come across any southpaws in his 100 fights and 15-plus years in boxing. Certainly he didn't defend against any. But the records of many if not most of the fighters he took on before becoming champion don't list whether they were orthodox or southpaws, so it's hard to say. You're right, maybe Martin can enlighten us on the issue

[BoxBuzz]

I seem to remember the Southpaw Boxers Union boycotting Monzon because he was not OSHA compliant, it was believed that his sort of roughhousing would subject their members to an unacceptable degree of risk and abuse.

[pringle]

Wepner - Ali

[BoxBuzz]

Pringle! Eureka! These two moments are clearly resonant! In both cases the pics show that both Monzon and Ali are clearly in serious danger and on the verge of complete collapse. In fact Ali literally did collapse. Based on these frames it's clear that both men were brutally defeated at the hands of their tormentors. One can only surmise why the BoxRec record does not accurately reflect both of these fights as losses. There is obviously some collusion going on. granberry has been right all along!

[I Feel Fine]

No pictures of Roldan's devastating knockdown of Hagler, Pringle? Ali and Hagler were never the same after those crushing knockdowns; you wonder how these weaklings lasted so long in the sport.
I've seen Monzon-Briscoe II twice, had Monzon winning both times. Good fight.

[pringle]

No pictures of Roldan's devastating knockdown of Hagler, Pringle? Ali and Hagler were never the same after those crushing knockdowns; you wonder how these weaklings lasted so long in the sport.
I've seen Monzon-Briscoe II twice, had Monzon winning both times. Good fight.

Man, I know you're trying real hard to make a point here, but for the life of me I don't know what it is....

[I Feel Fine]

Probably because you've never seen the fights. You're just here to interrupt a good thread.

[raylawpc]

Another advantage I see for Hagler is the fact that Monzon never faced a quality southpaw in his career. In fact, looking at his record it appears he never fought any southpaws, but I leave the final word on that to someone like Martin Sosa Cameron.

Never fighting a quality southpaw, and then facing quite possibly the best ever would be one formidable task.

That's true, but he certainly had the tools to trouble a southpaw. Just because he never had to do it, doesn't mean he couldn't. But I understand your point. Prime v. prime this would have been one heck of a fight. I would have favored Monzon, but I can see Hagler winning it because he, too, was a great, great fighter.

(And, Pringle, I thought you made a great point with your Ali-Wepner pix. A single photo does not and cannot tell the story of a 15-round fight.)

[pringle]

Probably because you've never seen the fights. You're just here to interrupt a good thread.

Don't get cross with me because you are too challenged to grasp the relevance of the picture. Everyone else in the thread gets it, but not you. You're not even intelligent enough to hide the fact you don't understand it.
If you can't understand the picture at a glance, I doubt that any amount of explaining will help. Sad, very very sad.

[pringle]

Another advantage I see for Hagler is the fact that Monzon never faced a quality southpaw in his career. In fact, looking at his record it appears he never fought any southpaws, but I leave the final word on that to someone like Martin Sosa Cameron.

Never fighting a quality southpaw, and then facing quite possibly the best ever would be one formidable task.

That's true, but he certainly had the tools to trouble a southpaw. Just because he never had to do it, doesn't mean he couldn't. But I understand your point. Prime v. prime this would have been one heck of a fight. I would have favored Monzon, but I can see Hagler winning it because he, too, was a great, great fighter.

(And, Pringle, I thought you made a great point with your Ali-Wepner pix. A single photo does not and cannot tell the story of a 15-round fight.)

Thank you You are a very intelligent and wonderful gentleman.

[raylawpc]

I wonder if I can bookmark this page . . .

[BoxBuzz]

Though he often speaks highly of others, Pringle himself is neither wonderful nor intelligent, nor the least bit attractive, nor would he claim to be, he is an understated, workin' joe, a man of modest means....an "everyman" if you will.

What he has demonstrated here however, is nothing short of remarkable, he has stumbled independently upon the theory of relativity without reading a single book by Einstein or Hawkings....ok well maybe a few books by them but that's all.

Anyway...good show from our own Joe Sixpack... the silent philosopher and intellectual philanthropist, Mr Punch Pringle.

I would suggest a ticker tape parade, but I believe his ticker is in need of all the tape that can be salvaged.

[raylawpc]

Another advantage I see for Hagler is the fact that Monzon never faced a quality southpaw in his career. In fact, looking at his record it appears he never fought any southpaws, but I leave the final word on that to someone like Martin Sosa Cameron.

Never fighting a quality southpaw, and then facing quite possibly the best ever would be one formidable task.

Others have brought up that point, and there is a possibility it would be an advantage for Hagler. But, as others have also said, Monzon had the kind of right hand that could potentially neutralize that advantage. I can see it both making Hagler more effective on offense and vulnerable on defense (which might have made for a more entertaining fight)
Re: never having fought a southpaw. I am not an expert on Argentine boxing in the 1960s, but I find it hard to believe he didn't come across any southpaws in his 100 fights and 15-plus years in boxing. Certainly he didn't defend against any. But the records of many if not most of the fighters he took on before becoming champion don't list whether they were orthodox or southpaws, so it's hard to say. You're right, maybe Martin can enlighten us on the issue

I actually think its possible Monzon never met a southpaw. I don't know about in South America, but in the USA until the late 1970s, being a southpaw carried a certain stigma. There was a fear that you couldn't get fights if you were a southpaw.

In the early 70s, every lefty I knew converted to a right hand stance. My friend Kelly Burden (Brian Kelly) was left handed, but always fought orthodox. He told me that his first manager, Marv Jensen, told him he would never get any fights if he fought southpaw. In fact, I think Kelly told me that one of the Fullmer brothers was left handed, but fought orthodox (I could be wrong on that). When Kelly challenged Bob Foster, we thought about going lefty on Foster in the hope it might confuse him, but ultimately decided against it since Kelly had never fought as a southpaw, and his lack of experience from the port side would probably hurt him more than the element of surprise would help him.

I can count on one hand the times one of my guys fought a southpaw - (In fact, having written that, I can't recall a specific instance when one of my guys fought a lefty but I remember training with a couple of guys who were going to fight a southpaw because I specifically remember talking about foot positioning and working on throwing a straight right.)

So I think its possible that Monzon might never have fought a southpaw, even in 100 fights. But I hold to my assertion that Monzon had the perfect style to beat a southpaw.

[giacomino]

Another advantage I see for Hagler is the fact that Monzon never faced a quality southpaw in his career. In fact, looking at his record it appears he never fought any southpaws, but I leave the final word on that to someone like Martin Sosa Cameron.

Never fighting a quality southpaw, and then facing quite possibly the best ever would be one formidable task.

Others have brought up that point, and there is a possibility it would be an advantage for Hagler. But, as others have also said, Monzon had the kind of right hand that could potentially neutralize that advantage. I can see it both making Hagler more effective on offense and vulnerable on defense (which might have made for a more entertaining fight)
Re: never having fought a southpaw. I am not an expert on Argentine boxing in the 1960s, but I find it hard to believe he didn't come across any southpaws in his 100 fights and 15-plus years in boxing. Certainly he didn't defend against any. But the records of many if not most of the fighters he took on before becoming champion don't list whether they were orthodox or southpaws, so it's hard to say. You're right, maybe Martin can enlighten us on the issue

I actually think its possible Monzon never met a southpaw. I don't know about in South America, but in the USA until the late 1970s, being a southpaw carried a certain stigma. There was a fear that you couldn't get fights if you were a southpaw.

In the early 70s, every lefty I knew converted to a right hand stance. My friend Kelly Burden (Brian Kelly) was left handed, but always fought orthodox. He told me that his first manager, Marv Jensen, told him he would never get any fights if he fought southpaw. In fact, I think Kelly told me that one of the Fullmer brothers was left handed, but fought orthodox (I could be wrong on that). When Kelly challenged Bob Foster, we thought about going lefty on Foster in the hope it might confuse him, but ultimately decided against it since Kelly had never fought as a southpaw, and his lack of experience from the port side would probably hurt him more than the element of surprise would help him.

I can count on one hand the times one of my guys fought a southpaw - (In fact, having written that, I can't recall a specific instance when one of my guys fought a lefty but I remember training with a couple of guys who were going to fight a southpaw because I specifically remember talking about foot positioning and working on throwing a straight right.)

So I think its possible that Monzon might never have fought a southpaw, even in 100 fights. But I hold to my assertion that Monzon had the perfect style to beat a southpaw.

You might be right about southpaws (and you are definitely right about Monzon's style). There were a few I remember watching in the late 70s, early 80s who were relatively successful besides Hagler, such as Marvin Johnson, Maurice Hope, Alan Minter, Jim Watt and Carlos Maria del Valle Herrera, but there weren't all that many

[raylawpc]

Re: never having fought a southpaw. I am not an expert on Argentine boxing in the 1960s, but I find it hard to believe he didn't come across any southpaws in his 100 fights and 15-plus years in boxing. Certainly he didn't defend against any. But the records of many if not most of the fighters he took on before becoming champion don't list whether they were orthodox or southpaws, so it's hard to say. You're right, maybe Martin can enlighten us on the issue

I actually think its possible Monzon never met a southpaw. I don't know about in South America, but in the USA until the late 1970s, being a southpaw carried a certain stigma. There was a fear that you couldn't get fights if you were a southpaw.

In the early 70s, every lefty I knew converted to a right hand stance. My friend Kelly Burden (Brian Kelly) was left handed, but always fought orthodox. He told me that his first manager, Marv Jensen, told him he would never get any fights if he fought southpaw. In fact, I think Kelly told me that one of the Fullmer brothers was left handed, but fought orthodox (I could be wrong on that). When Kelly challenged Bob Foster, we thought about going lefty on Foster in the hope it might confuse him, but ultimately decided against it since Kelly had never fought as a southpaw, and his lack of experience from the port side would probably hurt him more than the element of surprise would help him.

I can count on one hand the times one of my guys fought a southpaw - (In fact, having written that, I can't recall a specific instance when one of my guys fought a lefty but I remember training with a couple of guys who were going to fight a southpaw because I specifically remember talking about foot positioning and working on throwing a straight right.)

So I think its possible that Monzon might never have fought a southpaw, even in 100 fights. But I hold to my assertion that Monzon had the perfect style to beat a southpaw.

You might be right about southpaws (and you are definitely right about Monzon's style). There were a few I remember watching in the late 70s, early 80s who were relatively successful besides Hagler, such as Marvin Johnson, Maurice Hope, Alan Minter, Jim Watt and Carlos Maria del Valle Herrera, but there weren't all that many

There were a few good southpaw champs in the 60s, but not many: Flash Elorde, Duilio Loi, Vincente Salvidar, and Sandro Lopopolo come to mind. Jimmy Carruthers in the 40s. Lew Tendler (although not a champion), Freddie Miller, Al McCoy, Lou Brouilliard, Johnny Wilson, Tiger Flowers all some to mind from the 20s and 30s. But its hard to think of many more.

[The Great John L]

Let's not forget the terrible trio from the early 80's, Boza-Edwards, Navarrette and Limon. They put on some of the best fights of the past 50 years.

[giacomino]

Let's not forget the terrible trio from the early 80's, Boza-Edwards, Navarrette and Limon. They put on some of the best fights of the past 50 years.

Crap I forgot about those three. Throw in Bobby Chacon (ok, he wasn't a lefty, but WTH) and you had a foursome that loved to just throw and catch leather.
I also forgot another lefty from that era who was impossible to discourage, Jose Luis Ramirez. Dude took the best from Alexis Arguello, Ray Mancini, Edwin Rosario (twice), a prime Hector Camacho, Boza-Edwards, Sweet Pea Whitaker (twice), Julio Cesar Chavez and Juan Martin Coggi over 111 fights. He was only KO'd once, by Ruben Olivares when he was 19 fighting in Sonora.

[I Feel Fine]

Ramirez was very good, underrated. His fight with Arguello was damned close, really could have gone either way. He knocked Arguello down and he was only around 21.
His rematch with Rosario was fight of the year, real nice come back after being dropped. Good fighter.
Hagler's being a southpaw certainly doesn't hurt him, but I don't see it as a deciding factor.

[Seamus]

If Hagler comes in with the attitude of "I have to respect a legend" as he did vs Duran, there's a good chance he loses by decision. But if he's thinking "I'm gonna bust the punk up" there's no way I see him losing.

[Syntax Error]

If Hagler comes in with the attitude of "I have to respect a legend" as he did vs Duran, there's a good chance he loses by decision. But if he's thinking "I'm gonna bust the punk up" there's no way I see him losing.

That's kind of where I'm coming at it from.

Hagler did sometimes pay his greater opponents a little too much respect sometimes

Saying that, I still think he'd have a very tough time with Monzon, he was a big middleweight with all the nous you could ever wish for.

This is arguably one of the toughest hypotheticals to call for me, because they are both so great & I can see either man winning.

[mcentepede]

Gotta appreciate the sense of humor of you guys. Firstly, bring facts to the table if you gonna bash a legend like Carlos Monzon or Marvelous Marvin Hagler. Even my Grandma knows that Carlos Monzon was dropped and was BEATEN by Felipe Camberio early in Monzon's career(she still has the newspaper I think). Monzon was knocked down twice legit she said. Maybe a 3rd, but questionable. Hagler was never knocked down legit. The ref WRONGLY ruled it that vs. Roldan, who actually clubbed and UFC take-down style Hagler, who was surprised and off-balanced because of the dirty move. He got up and is clearly not HURT but ANGRY at the ref and Roldan at the maneuver. He is seen protesting, then proceeds to massacre Roldan over the next few rounds to Ko this fool. Even the ref later admits he wrongly ruled a knock down. This might be over-turned in the future though, if not already. Anyways, Hagler's chin is legendary and basically indestructible...ask Thomas Hearns. So knocking out Hagler is impossible,hurting him is also unlikely. He switches up on you and is basically a counter-puncher who can slug and box with anybody. Get him mad and he busts you up. Carlos Monzon has massacred 3 people...Nino Benvenuti, Mantequilla Napoles and his wife. 2 of those were fighters and 2 were men. That's a fact. Outcome of this match-up is Hagler by a late stoppage because you know he don't trust judges

[BoxBuzz]

Nice first post. And I'd love to hold Monzon's despicable humanity against him as well. But I have to let my sentiment go and give a more real assessment. Which would be far more along the lines of whatever Sugar Ray or (Or Willie Monroe) can sneak out the back door with, Monzon could walk off with from the front porch. If Duran could give him a headache, Monzon would add an upset stomach, and nightmares.

Monzon wins a tough decision.

....and not everybody knows those "facts" you've shared. But it makes little difference prime vs prime. Either COULD win that fight, Monzon would be the better bet. IMHO.