Jaclem wrote:i'll admit i'm i the minority on monzon. many followers whose opinions and knowledge i respect rate him much higher than i do. i thought he was a bit stiff and one dimensional, so i'll have to go with hagler. more mobile...more overall talent...good in all departments, except not quite as strong as some others in this division...but i don't see a need for bulling his opponnent around in this particular fight.
carlos monzons a very decieving guy. hes a lot like marciano. when u watch both on film, they dont look so good. however, too really understand how good monzon was, u really have to study him closesly and his style carefully. Study him carefully and you will realize just how effective carlos monzon was, like the rock.
This post is over 2 years old... surely people should be able to post new threads on a simular topic after such a long time has passed... it seems rather rude to me to lock someones thread just because there was a simular thread 2 years ago, ...then maybe I'm just being oversensitive on their account...
Silkov I'm open minded to anything on that account. It's ultimately just a judgement call. I'll give you my take.
If there is an absolute common thread (such as the case here) I prefer the idea of keeping the information contained if I get to it quick enough. (If there were multiple posts I MAY not have made that move.) However the knowledge of years ago and all the ongoing contributors is fascinating (at least to me) and I saw no harm in consolidating. Especially in the case of an absolute mirrored subject.
Even a subtle spin would have been respected as a new thread. That will be my call on things like this. I hope it's not overly unsettling.
If you notice I was not critical, praised the effort and gave good and clear directions. ...Service with a smile...so to speak. Something I recall had been requested in the past when things dissapeared without an explanation.
I will ALWAYS give info when I go into "Mod Mode".
BoxBuzz wrote:Silkov I'm open minded to anything on that account. It's ultimately just a judgement call. I'll give you my take.
If there is an absolute common thread (such as the case here) I prefer the idea of keeping the information contained if I get to it quick enough. (If there were multiple posts I MAY not have made that move.) However the knowledge of years ago and all the ongoing contributors is fascinating (at least to me) and I saw no harm in consolidating. Especially in the case of an absolute mirrored subject.
Even a subtle spin would have been respected as a new thread. That will be my call on things like this. I hope it's not overly unsettling.
If you notice I was not critical, praised the effort and gave good and clear directions. ...Service with a smile...so to speak. Something I recall had been requested in the past when things dissapeared without an explanation.
I will ALWAYS give info when I go into "Mod Mode".
Fair enough?
I'm not trying to be a grump, just feel that this sort of thing may put some new posters off... I'll try not to be too unsettled by it all...
ringsider wrote:Come on guys....Monzon would stop that southpaw foot in the bucket plodding Hagler in the late rounds on cuts. Hagler was more one dimensional than Monzon. Good middleweights don't get beat by fat welterweights like Hagler did.
What fat welterweight did Hagler lose to? If you mean Leonard I don't know if that's who you are refering to or not, at five ten and one sixty I don't think that would qualify as fat.
Alot of welterweights bumped up to middle weight. If you are going to use that argument, to be consistent you would then have to say Monzon's victory over Emile Griffith is diminished on the same basis givin the fact he was a welterweight at one time.
After carefully thinking it over. I still say Monzon by points. I just don't think there's any middleweight that could beat him in his prime. Hagler wasn't the only one that could adapt to his opponents. Monzon could too, he just had a bit of an unorthodox style, while Hagler's style was beautiful. I still think Monzon would beat him however. Monzon is a bit underrated I think.
I pick Monzon. Actually both of them in their primes were outstanding boxers-punchers, both could put a tremendous pressure on their opponents with a variety of punches, both could withstand anything their opponents could suggest due to overall durability and good chin quaities. However, Monzon lookd more complete, than Hagler, because Carlos was able to move with more ease chosing the right positions for the attack. He also had a better jab establishing his shotgun like right hand. All in all, Monzon had everything to deal with Marvin's pressure and power, he had everything to outbox him. Carlos would have most likely taken a decision.
Monzon without hesitation would beat Hagler. He can outbox him; out punch him; Hagler has a habit of fighting his opponents' fight and against Monzon, it would end badly for him. Monzon was, IMHO, the greatest Middleweight ever. I love Hagler, but not in this matchup.
Jaclem wrote:i'll admit i'm i the minority on monzon. many followers whose opinions and knowledge i respect rate him much higher than i do. i thought he was a bit stiff and one dimensional, so i'll have to go with hagler. more mobile...more overall talent...good in all departments, except not quite as strong as some others in this division...but i don't see a need for bulling his opponnent around in this particular fight.
carlos monzons a very decieving guy. hes a lot like marciano. when u watch both on film, they dont look so good. however, too really understand how good monzon was, u really have to study him closesly and his style carefully. Study him carefully and you will realize just how effective carlos monzon was, like the rock.
IDK< I've seen Monzon during is prime and I've seen him fight off his back foot against some real pressure fighters and do well (especially in his later years). He was able to adjust to his opponent, or just drive the action. He was special. Hagler was great, but not as great as Monzon. IMHO.
oogiebe wrote: ↑16 May 2018, 09:43
Monzon without hesitation would beat Hagler. He can outbox him; out punch him; Hagler has a habit of fighting his opponents' fight and against Monzon, it would end badly for him. Monzon was, IMHO, the greatest Middleweight ever. I love Hagler, but not in this matchup.
oogiebe wrote: ↑16 May 2018, 09:43
Monzon without hesitation would beat Hagler. He can outbox him; out punch him; Hagler has a habit of fighting his opponents' fight and against Monzon, it would end badly for him. Monzon was, IMHO, the greatest Middleweight ever. I love Hagler, but not in this matchup.
BoxBuzz wrote: ↑16 May 2018, 15:29
You know....a real time fight could have happened.
An end of career Monzon....could have taken on a very green Hagler.
Best that it didn't happen since I'd favor Monzon at that time....and that sort of defeat early on for Hagler might have changed his trajectory.
It was interesting to see Hagler in some of those guys' records early in his career. I still think Monzon was just too good for Marvin, no matter how marvelous.
Nile4000 wrote: ↑16 May 2018, 17:39
I will say I can't see Carlos letting Roberto survive to 15 like Marvin did.
Agreed 100%. Duran (whom is my all-time favorite LIGHTWEIGHT) would've gotten KTFO mid rounds. A lot of folks today don't know enough about Monzon to really appreciate his greatness. IMHO.
I'd think this would be a close fight I'm taking hagler by decision but it's such a good match up of two greats that a monzon decision win could be very probable
