Monzon & Hagler

[Yogi]

I would STRONGLY oppose that viewpoint as I consider Hearns to be an ATG P4P fighter and a definite notch above Valdez and Briscoe.

Sure, I can agree with Hearns being an all-time p4p'er, whereas neither Valdez or Briscoe are as such, but these fights wouldn't be taking place on a p4p basis...They'd be at middleweight, and some of the fights Hearns had at middleweight suggest that he'd be in a ****load of trouble against either Valdez or Briscoe.

Juan Roldan was a strong, aggressive & hard hitting middleweight who gave Hearns loads of trouble and just about stopped him, but I don't see Roldan being on the level of either Valdez or Briscoe...Those guys were just as strong as Roldan, hit just as hard (if not harder), certainly had better defenses, were nearly as aggressive, and were just all-around better fighters than Roldan.

Iran Barkley was a fairly aggressive, fairly strong & hard hitting middleweight, as well, but then again he doesn't stack up to the likes of Valdez & Briscoe in pretty much every category imaginable...He wasn't as aggressive all-around, didn't hit quite as hard, wasn't as strong nor as durable, and was certainly much more open defensively than those two. Again, both Valdez & Briscoe were the better all-around fighters.

That's two fights that show a weakness of Hearns' against hard hitting, aggressive, strong, tough middleweights who attacked him, and couple that with the Hagler fight (which shows the same thing), all those fights showed that Hearns was susceptible to getting hurt and tired when facing fighters of that style & who possessed those attributes (it's no coincidence that when Barkley increased his aggressiveness level in the 3rd round their 1st fight, he got a fatigued Hearns out of there). The Doug DeWitt & Murray Sutherland (tough & durable guys, with not much else) fights also add to the unlikeliness of Hearns scoring a stoppage win over Valdez or Briscoe.

What else did Hearns do at middleweight that relates to how those matchups go?

Can't use the Shuler fight obviously, because that guy fought nothing like those two, so I can only go on what's available and how Hearns stacked up to others who presented him with what Valdez & Briscoe would have. And after stacking them up, I only see Hearns getting taken out before too long.

[hhascup]

Damm dude...that;s a tofy.....Monzon , IMO, is the best MW ever end of the story, and he fought some great competition with boxers, and punchers yet he survived and won, he was a master boxer and can hit also, remember he had 59 KO;s....very deseiving boxers , smart....can take a punch.....anyone that took Bennie Briscoe (the best fighter at anyweight class not to be a title holder) punching power and get the W was a tofy....Hagler was a tofy too, can box, but at times not as smart as Monzon was, and that might be the difference between the 2 , which skills wise arevery close...Hagler had his share of lesser comp and so did Monzon.....

Big fights:

Monzon:

2-0 Rodrigo Valdez twice true MW
1-0 Danny Moyer-true MW
2-0 Nino Benvenutti- twice, true MW
1-0-1Bennie Briscoe- twice-true MW
1-0 Emil Griffith-twice- true MW former MW & WW champ
1-0 Mantequilla Napoles-WW

Not bad.....


Hagler:

1-0-1 Vito Antuiferno- twice true MW former MW champ
1-0 Alan Minter-true MW former MW champ
2-0 Mustafa Hamsho-twice -true MW
1-0 The beat Mugabi-true MW
1-0 Duran- WW, 1st MW fight
1-0 Hearns-WW, 1st MW fight
0-1 SRL- WW,1st MW fight..

So, I would say that long tall Carlos would have an easier time dealing with the JrMW and WW that challenge MMH esier than MMH would have dealing with strong true MW of the time...Bennie Briscoe v. Hagler prime for prime would ahve been one for the ages!!

Monzon would had faired better, exept maybe against Hearns...

Like I said before, the only one Hagler might have trouble with would have been Rodrigo Valdez and I think he would have beaten him like Monzon did.

Hagler fought 17 Middleweight Contenders, this is not counting Leonard or Duran, who were not in the top 10 in the Middleweight division at that time, out of 67 bouts. Monzon fought 15 Middleweight contenders, counting Napoles, out of 100 bouts.

Hearns actually out weighed Hagler in there bout and Leonard weighed the same as he did.

[Orishaman]

Sure, I can agree with Hearns being an all-time p4p'er, whereas neither Valdez or Briscoe are as such, but these fights wouldn't be taking place on a p4p basis...They'd be at middleweight, and some of the fights Hearns had at middleweight suggest that he'd be in a ****load of trouble against either Valdez or Briscoe.

Juan Roldan was a strong, aggressive & hard hitting middleweight who gave Hearns loads of trouble and just about stopped him, but I don't see Roldan being on the level of either Valdez or Briscoe...Those guys were just as strong as Roldan, hit just as hard (if not harder), certainly had better defenses, were nearly as aggressive, and were just all-around better fighters than Roldan.

Iran Barkley was a fairly aggressive, fairly strong & hard hitting middleweight, as well, but then again he doesn't stack up to the likes of Valdez & Briscoe in pretty much every category imaginable...He wasn't as aggressive all-around, didn't hit quite as hard, wasn't as strong nor as durable, and was certainly much more open defensively than those two. Again, both Valdez & Briscoe were the better all-around fighters.

That's two fights that show a weakness of Hearns' against hard hitting, aggressive, strong, tough middleweights who attacked him, and couple that with the Hagler fight (which shows the same thing), all those fights showed that Hearns was susceptible to getting hurt and tired when facing fighters of that style & who possessed those attributes (it's no coincidence that when Barkley increased his aggressiveness level in the 3rd round their 1st fight, he got a fatigued Hearns out of there). The Doug DeWitt & Murray Sutherland (tough & durable guys, with not much else) fights also add to the unlikeliness of Hearns scoring a stoppage win over Valdez or Briscoe.

What else did Hearns do at middleweight that relates to how those matchups go?

Can't use the Shuler fight obviously, because that guy fought nothing like those two, so I can only go on what's available and how Hearns stacked up to others who presented him with what Valdez & Briscoe would have. And after stacking them up, I only see Hearns getting taken out before too long.

Bennie Briscoe was the best ever not to win a title, he would have given Hagler everything he could have handle, he was as strong if not stronger than Hagleer, and can punch with both hands like a LHW...Briscoe was an in your face type of boxer that if Hagler would have choosen to fight him as he did Hearns the outcome would probably would not have favor MMH, the man can punch and took Monzon to the brink on 2 figthts....BB is HOF and deserved far more respect from anyone that is a boxing fan....

I still think that MMH would have had a toughrer time with the true MW of Monzon times than his own era...and like I mentioned before, the only one of the group of top fights of MMH that I listed the only one I can see giving Monzon fits would be Hearns...

Monzon is the best MW ever....notr including Grebs era....

Valdez style would ahve been intersting also against MMH which was a brawler type of style....

Anyway you sliced it Monzon comes on top.....

[Yogi]

I've always been a fan of Brsicoe's, Orishaman, but I just can't get behind your statement calling him the best to never win the middleweight title. There's quite a few excellant middleweights who never won the title, like Holman Williams, Les Darcy, Mike Gibbons, Panama Joe Gans, etc., but I believe that I would personally have Charley Burley leading the way in that particluar category...

Briscoe's possibly one of the ten best to never win the middleweight title maybe, but he's in very lofty company even saying that.

[hhascup]

Bennie Briscoe lost to Vito Antuofermo, Stanley Hayward, in fact he lost 24 times and had 5 draws. Hagler would have out boxed him without a doubt.

Hagler did beat him, but that was near the end of his career. Honestly I liked Briscoe, I thought he was in the same mold as Jake LaMotta, as he was only stopped once in 96 bouts and had a pretty good punch. Harold Lederman told me that he was one of the meanest guys to ever enter the ring.

I just think that Hagler had more tools then Monzon did, BUT I would have LOVED to see who would come out on top.

[Orishaman]

I've always been a fan of Brsicoe's, Orishaman, but I just can't get behind your statement calling him the best to never win the middleweight title. There's quite a few excellant middleweights who never won the title, like Holman Williams, Les Darcy, Mike Gibbons, Panama Joe Gans, etc., but I believe that I would personally have Charley Burley leading the way in that particluar category...

Briscoe's possibly one of the ten best to never win the middleweight title maybe, but he's in very lofty company even saying that.

You need to dig deep into history to think of other great MW that never won title...I am a big Briscoe fan...and styles make fights and Briscoe v. Hagler would have been a bomb...

Many boxers mentioned the legendary sparring sessions in Philly were BB and MMH sparred and legend has it that BB got the best of him...but I was not there so I can tell, but I can tell you from what I have heard and now....BTW for those that don;t know Briscoe other than what they read on spread sheet of W-L's and see 24 loses...most of those loses came past his prime....at least 10 of those loses were past his prime after he was into his 30 years old, with his style and ring milage 35 for BB was old....
But back to the issue, I would have BB number one and Dave Sands a close 2nd for the best MW;s ever not to win a title...

[hhascup]

You need to dig deep into history to think of other great MW that never won title...I am a big Briscoe fan...and styles make fights and Briscoe v. Hagler would have been a bomb...

Many boxers mentioned the legendary sparring sessions in Philly were BB and MMH sparred and legend has it that BB got the best of him...but I was not there so I can tell, but I can tell you from what I have heard and now....BTW for those that don;t know Briscoe other than what they read on spread sheet of W-L's and see 24 loses...most of those loses came past his prime....at least 10 of those loses were past his prime after he was into his 30 years old, with his style and ring milage 35 for BB was old....
But back to the issue, I would have BB number one and Dave Sands a close 2nd for the best MW;s ever not to win a title...

I would have to rate Charley Burley, Mike Gibbons, Holman Williams and Joey Archer a head of Briscoe. Briscoe was rated from January 1972 to May 1979 by the Ring, he was rated for a total of 82 months, and his highest rating was #2. Burley was rated in the Welterweight and Middleweight Divisions from September 1938 to August 1947, for a total of 100 months and he was rated #1. Archer was also rated #1 in the Middleweight division in the mid 1960's. Gibbons fought before the ratings was out but he only lost 10 (5 of them were newspaper decisions) out of 133 bouts.

[oldgringo]

Come on now...Bad Briscoe was a damned good fighter and was one hell of a hard puncher...but I agree with the other two gentlemen who would rate Burley and Holman Williams (among others) higher. Burley in particular was said to be one of the most well rounded fighters of all-time.

[SABBATH]

Sure, I can agree with Hearns being an all-time p4p'er, whereas neither Valdez or Briscoe are as such, but these fights wouldn't be taking place on a p4p basis...They'd be at middleweight, and some of the fights Hearns had at middleweight suggest that he'd be in a ****load of trouble against either Valdez or Briscoe.

Yogi, it's much too easy in these hypothetical match-ups to hand pick a few of Hearns fights to prove your point. I could just as easily point to 6'1 middleweight Luis Vinales a fighter with an 18-17-5 record defeating Briscoe . Vinales by the way scored a grand total of 3 KO's while winning only 20 of 57 fights. If this guy is beating Briscoe what's Hearns gonna do. It goes both ways.

[hhascup]

Yogi, it's much too easy in these hypothetical match-ups to hand pick a few of Hearns fights to prove your point. I could just as easily point to 6'1 middleweight Luis Vinales a fighter with an 18-17-5 record defeating Briscoe then dropping him twice in their rematch when Bennie was a world class fighter. Vinales by the way scored a grand total of 3 KO's in 57 fights. If this guy is dropping Briscoe what's Hearns gonna do. It goes both ways.

VERY GOOD, BUT it was Luis Vinales who was dropped and it was in their return bout 6 months after Vinales beat him the 1st time, BUT good catch anyway.

I do think Benny was one of the top Middleweight Contender ever, BUT he wasn't better then Burley or some of the others.