BoxRec

Graziano, Basilio, Fullmer and LaMotta - or Briscoe, Benvenuti, Griffith and Valdez?

I would take Monzon's crop:

Briscoe KO5 Graziano
Briscoe TKO9 Basilio
Briscoe UD15 Fullmer
LaMotta UD15 Briscoe

(The way to beat Bennie was to outbox him, and none of the guys above could do that. I'll give LaMotta the benefit of the doubt and say he could outwork Briscoe)

Benvenuti TKO9 Graziano
Benvenuti UD15 Basilio
Fullmer UD15 Benvenuti
LaMotta UD15 Benvenuti

(I feel Benvenuti was easily slick enough, tough enough and experienced enough to deal with the limited Graziano and the tough but fairly small Basilio, but he would be troubled by the two best pressure fighters on the list)

Griffith TKO13 Graziano
Griffith UD15 Basilio
Griffith UD15 Fullmer
LaMotta SD15 Griffith

(Griffith was a fantastic fighter. He'd be able to take Graziano's punches and outslick him and the other two. Griffith was able to beat Tiger, and I believe Tiger was slightly superior to the similar Fullmer. I'll say LaMotta can outwork and outmuscle Griffith)

Valdez KO3 Graziano
Valdez TKO6 Basilio
Valdez TKO7 Fullmer
Valdez UD15 LaMotta

(According to The Ring, Valdez was "by far" the hardest hitter of the seventies middleweights. He could quite possibly be the hardest middleweight puncher of all time, and the film backs it up. Valdez wasn't merely a bomber though, but the complete offensive machine, with an iron chin, fast hands, inside skills and combinations. Graziano is too limited and not durable enough, Basilio and Fullmer, while tough, would come straight at Valdez and walk into his punches. Again, I'll be kind to LaMotta and assume he is tough enough to take Valdez' punches, cover up and last the fight. As with Briscoe, the way to beat Valdez was to outbox him, and none of the above could do that)

As a sidenote, I believe Graziano's power is overrated. His right hand was not pure dynamite. It was a very hard punch, but he usually had to land it quite a few times to stop someone. Infact Graziano himself is overrated - he never really did much at middleweight, and doesn't look very impressive at all on film.
Basilio is also overrated. His middleweight legacy stems from his two fights with a past-prime Robinson... He was stopped twice by Fullmer, and lost on points to Pender. Basilio was at his best back down at welterweight a few years before.
Fullmer is slightly overrated too I think. He was a very good middleweight, but not in the same league as some others. He doesn't look that great on film in comparison to Rodrigo Valdez for instance. He didn't do a great deal at middleweight except beat a past prime Robinson and draw with Giardello and Tiger. He was also beaten twice by Tiger, even if he was past his best by that point.

Bar LaMotta, I think the whole of Robinson's era of middleweights is quite overrated as a whole. They were good, and the division was probably deeper than Monzon's, but the best middleweights Robinson beat were not as good as the ones Monzon beat.

I've always thought that a good, slick, experienced fighter would have beaten Robinson at middleweight. Primarily the only good guys he fought were short, stocky pressure fighters. I've watched Luc Van Dam (?) outjab Robinson, so it makes me wonder what would have happened had he been put in there with the likes of a tall, rangy, intelligent Carlos Monzon.

P.S. - I am well aware that Robinson was past his best versus Basilio and Fullmer.

--

I think this is something we all have to look at when rating Robinson and Monzon as middleweights. Monzon smoked, partied and skipped training just like Robinson did in the early fifties, and he also fought past his prime. Yet Monzon dominated his opposition, who I feel were better as a whole, and he did it while defending his title all over the world.

For me, King Carlos is the most accomplished middleweight of all time, with Hagler second and Robinson probably third (Greb fought a lot of his career above middleweight).

Lomatta at his best beats every one monzon ever fought. Besides that, i do agree that King Carlos was the best middleweight champion ever.

theone wrote:Lomatta at his best beats every one monzon ever fought. Besides that, i do agree that King Carlos was the best middleweight champion ever.

You'd pick him over Valdez eh?

Maybe LaMotta could outwork him, but I wouldn't put any money on it. He's certainly not stopping Valdez - LaMotta was not nearly as good a puncher as Monzon or Briscoe. I never went too much on Jake's defense, and Valdez was a massive puncher. And it's not like pressure really troubled Valdez either - he soundly defeated Briscoe three times, who, though wasn't as fast as LaMotta, was definitely a harder hitter and possibly a better bodypuncher.
When I compare films of the two, I can see Valdez as the better middleweight. He was far more well rounded as an offensive fighter. The slicker, rangier boxers were the ones to defeat Valdez, not swarmers or sluggers. He was far too strong, powerful and durable for them - as well as having a good defense, infighting skills and speed.

In my opinion, Valdez would be to LaMotta what Liston would be to Marciano.

You'd pick him over Valdez eh?

Yes. I think your really close to overrating Valdez, although I believe he was a great fighter. LaMotta may have been the strongest middleweight who ever lived. I'm talking physical strenght not power. Vladez may have hit harder but he wasnt nearly as strong. Lamotta was also a smart swarmer, great at cutting of the ring and pinning his opponents against the ropes. Lamotta punches may not have carried much power up top, but he was a devasting body puncher. I dont think anything nmeeds to be said about his chin, I doubt Valdez could dent it.
i believe Lamotta would beat Valdez over 15 tough grueling rounds.

manassa,


do u pick valdez over griffith in a heads up matchup?

theone wrote:

You'd pick him over Valdez eh?

Yes. I think your really close to overrating Valdez, although I believe he was a great fighter. LaMotta may have been the strongest middleweight who ever lived. I'm talking physical strenght not power. Vladez may have hit harder but he wasnt nearly as strong. Lamotta was also a smart swarmer, great at cutting of the ring and pinning his opponents against the ropes. Lamotta punches may not have carried much power up top, but he was a devasting body puncher. I dont think anything nmeeds to be said about his chin, I doubt Valdez could dent it.
i believe Lamotta would beat Valdez over 15 tough grueling rounds.

How do you know LaMotta was so much stronger? What proved this?

I would say Valdez was pretty damn strong himself, considering he was able back up and outfight the swarmer/slugger of the seventies middleweights, and hang with Monzon in the clinches.

You doubt LaMotta's chin would be dented... Fair enough. But again, what proved this? No doubt LaMotta's chin was made of something special, but everybody is human. He was stopped by Robinson - Sugar Ray didn't hit like Valdez. He was faster, more accurate and threw more spectacular combinations, but the raw power contained in Valdez' fists was much more. But he was also fast, and threw pretty good combinations himself.

And yes BB, I pick Valdez to beat Griffith.

It's excruciatingly close. The more I consider this question the more I'm inclined to think that Monzon could be pound for pound in the top three of all time. Right there neck and neck with Robinson and some days I wake up and find Monzon at the head of the pack in my mind.

Depends on what I have for dinner.

BoxBuzz wrote:It's excruciatingly close. The more I consider this question the more I'm inclined to think that Monzon could be pound for pound in the top three of all time. Right there neck and neck with Robinson and some days I wake up and find Monzon at the head of the pack in my mind.

Depends on what I have for dinner.

Pound-for-pound top three?

Well, I'd have to disagree, but I will agree that Monzon was special. Thirteen years undefeated, only one recorded knockdown against his name, faced and beat the best opposition, defended his title fourteen times in six different countries, captured the title in a foreign country, defeated the heir to his throne, faced and beat a big variety of fighters from different countries and with different styles, and rarely came close to losing... That would be pretty incredible in itself, but add to the fact Monzon didn't like to train, partied and drank heavily in between fights and also smoked twenty five a day during training... Quite amazing.

Decagon wrote:You're overrating Rodrigo Valdez. He simply didn't beat very good competition, even compared to someone like Bobo Olson, who beat Gavilan, Turpin, Marshall, Maxim and Robinson.

Valdez gave Monzon the hardest fight of his life and knocked him down for the first time in thirteen years. He beat long time top contender Bennie Briscoe soundly three times. If Valdez was a boxer-mover that accomplishment wouldn't sound so good, but he forced back and outfought one of the biggest hitting, toughest and the best swarmer/slugger of the day. Valdez also beat Gratien Tonna and Rudy Robles.

The division wasn't as deep as Robinson's in Monzon's time. I believe the very top middleweights were better, but the B class ones weren't.

Given half the chance, I'm sure Valdez would have had a field day with BoBo Olson and his beaten opposition.

I mean, watching and comparing the film, I can see that Valdez would have knocked the hell out of Rocky Graziano.

You doubt LaMotta's chin would be dented... Fair enough. But again, what proved this? No doubt LaMotta's chin was made of something special, but everybody is human. He was stopped by Robinson - Sugar Ray didn't hit like Valdez.

Robinson landed a hell of alot more leather on Lamotta than Valdez ever would. ray was also very familiar with Lamotta having fought him so many times before.

How do you know LaMotta was so much stronger? What proved this?

same reason you think Valdez was stronger. Watching both of their fights, Lamotta justs look like the stronger fighter to me. I also believe Lamotta did it against tougher oppisiton overall.

I dont want to get into a long drawn out debate over this mainly because I respect your thoughts on Valdez, who has been grossly overlooked for too long. Just the way I see it.

I mean, watching and comparing the film, I can see that Valdez would have knocked the hell out of Rocky Graziano.

This I totally agree with.

And actually Olson didn't beat Robinson. I didn't think he did, but I had to go and check it.

As for Turpin, was he really that good? I'd say he caught a half-trained Robinson at the right time.

Lloyd Marshall was effectively shot.

Gavilan was a great fighter, but his record would suggest he was starting to lose it by that point. Either that or his fight with Olson was one hell of a debilitating scrap.

Beating Joey Maxim was a good win... But it wasn't really amazing. Every man and his grandmother beat Maxim at some point in his career.

theone wrote:

You doubt LaMotta's chin would be dented... Fair enough. But again, what proved this? No doubt LaMotta's chin was made of something special, but everybody is human. He was stopped by Robinson - Sugar Ray didn't hit like Valdez.

Robinson landed a hell of alot more leather on Lamotta than Valdez ever would. ray was also very familiar with Lamotta having fought him so many times before.

How do you know LaMotta was so much stronger? What proved this?

same reason you think Valdez was stronger. Watching both of their fights, Lamotta justs look like the stronger fighter to me. I also believe Lamotta did it against tougher oppisiton overall.

I dont want to get into a long drawn out debate over this mainly because I respect your thoughts on Valdez, who has been grossly overlooked for too long. Just the way I see it.

Wait a sec - I never said Valdez was stronger.

From memory I think I said something along the lines of "Valdez was too strong, powerful and fast for them [swarmers], with the durability and skills to back it up" - in that, I mean he had too much of everything. Valdez was too well rounded, with the power, strength, speed, skills, durability all in balance. If you know what I mean.

I would agree that LaMotta faced the stronger B opposition, by quite a big margin. But that doesn't mean to say Valdez couldn't have done the same. He just never had the opportunities, since in the seventies the division was not quite as deep; in that it had more talented fighters overall. Though I stick by my statement that Monzon's A class opposition was better than Robinson's.

Decagon wrote:Based on what do you think Valdez would beat Lloyd Marshall, a man who knocked out Ezzard Charles and completely dominated Jake LaMotta? A middleweight who also beat Charley Burley, Joey Maxim, Holman Williams, Jack Chase, Freddie Mills and Lou Broulliard?

Because Lloyd Marshall was shot when Olson beat him. That's what I was addressing, no?

For your information I would actually pick the slick Marshall in his prime to outpoint Valdez.

Based on what do you think Valdez would beat Lloyd Marshall, a man who knocked out Ezzard Charles and completely dominated Jake LaMotta?

You sure about that last part Decagon? I never saw the fight myself but I've read several times that the fight with Lamotta could have gone either way.

In my opinion, Valdez would be to LaMotta what Liston would be to Marciano

This quote also made me think you thought Valdez was stronger.

One of Marshall's old sparring partners once told Harry Otty that it was an "easy fight" for Marshall, and that it would have been stopped if LaMotta hadn't already earned a reputation as being one of the toughest ever.

Not exactly an objective source, no?

i think i read accounts of the fight in some of my old magazines. I'll look it up.

Based on what do you think Valdez would beat Lloyd Marshall, a man who knocked out Ezzard Charles and completely dominated Jake LaMotta? A middleweight who also beat Charley Burley, Joey Maxim, Holman Williams, Jack Chase, Freddie Mills and Lou Broulliard?

charles was green and lamotta did not get dominated. it was a very close fight. i have read many newspaper reports on the fight.


i dont think uve done enough research decagon. i mean u rated jersey joe 19th greatest light-H even though he never fought at light-H in his career besides his first couple pro fights when he was 16 years old!

Decagon wrote:Again, I'm really interested in any specific news reports about the situation.

And if we're going to bring up old stuff, let's not forget that you derided Jack Johnson for race mixing. So, what do you have against white people marrying out of their race? I'm white, and I'm married to a Korean woman. I have a half-Korean son. Do you have a problem with that?

o i see u like to bring up posts that happened 6 months ago..........


anyway what I was implying was americans, NOT ME, viewed jack johnson as a crazy no good negro and part of it was because he had no regard for rules and loved to parade around with underage white woman which was a big no no back then.

as for myself, i have nothing against it


as for u marrying a korean woman, even if I did have a problem with it, what are are u going to do about it? but to answer ur question, the answer is of course not.


Im White, but I used to go out with a girl from brazil.

Decagon wrote:You started the topic saying, "Felix Trinidad- I disliked him after he got a gift desicion over Oscar, and I felt that effected Oscar the rest of his career," and the rest of the topic was about boxers you personally disliked, not about unpopular fighters. Don't try to whitewash what you said.

om im sry, i think my opinion has changed a lot from 7 months ago. i like jack johnson now after revieiwing and studying his career and i do like felix trinidad..


off course, im not the one who makes fun of rocky marciano for being decapitated and wishing mike tyson dead.

Decagon wrote:I'm white, and I'm married to a Korean woman. I have a half-Korean son. Do you have a problem with that?

Why haven't they locked you up already?!

DoubleM wrote:

Decagon wrote:I'm white, and I'm married to a Korean woman. I have a half-Korean son. Do you have a problem with that?

Why haven't they locked you up already?!

do u guys ever have conversations about the korean war?

...just skimmed this one, but read enough to realize i must remind all of you again.....to judge Robinson against the middleweights you must go back to the time when he was STILL A WELTERWEIGHT ....before and after he got the title at welter. By the time he won the middle championship he was starting to slip. Before thay he be beat LaMotta!!!he kayoed Artie Levine.. he beat Georgie Abrams...gave pounds away to all of them.

I won't get into Robinson vs.Monzon....but Robinson's middleweight foes were a stronger crew....mostly..than Monzon's.

Robinson easy . . .not even close.