Carlos Monzon. How great was he? Feel free to post a fight.

[Slugfester]

Both have certain advantages. Marvin has a better chin, Monzon is a better ring general. Monzon seems to believe in three things--feel the opponent out, keep the jab going and hit and don't be hit.

Monzon has great defense when he keeps the distance. When a man can manage to pressure him he becomes more vulnerable and takes some punches. He is more affected by hard punches than Hagler but also punches harder. Marvin is a busy crowding fighter, just the right style. Marvin would do a lot better than Briscoe did, and Benny hurt Carlos pretty badly once. Monzon has a good lug buster inside and outside. He fires for that spot a lot with the right hand. The left jab is very good, the left hook reasonable and quite good when it is a semi-uppercut to the body.

Hagler normally doesn't rush into things too early either. But all of their fights become wars, so one is inevitable here. They will hate each other for the harsh treatment received, and a rematch is guaranteed. It is a 50-50 fight IMO. It can't get much closer in wagering.

Griffith did so much better in the second fight.

[Slugfester]

I know I will get in trouble for this.

The Robinson who took the MW title from Lamotta has a harder time with Hagler than he does Monzon, I think, and beats them all if had to bet. He is a better two handed puncher than Monzon, for instance. Monzon swings the left and keeps it active but it does not knock anyone out. Robinson KOs them with either hand head or body. I think I can see from reviewing his fights that he will not take Robinson's combinations very well. Whereas I think Robby can take his slightly harder punches (or evade them) long enough to get the job done. If single punches of welterweights bother him that much and Briscoe almost had him out I think Robinson will KO him and KO him good by the 5th round.

Monzon usually hardly ever gets hit in the opening rounds, using his largo jab and getting the range. When the war breaks out he can be hit

[QueensburyRules]

There were a couple versions of Robinson as a middleweight. Pre- retirement and after he comeback from dancing for a couple of years.

My own view is that after he comeback a fight with Monzon would probably be 55% Monzon 45% Robinson. Carlos was a stand up fighter and Ray didn't have trouble with that style. Sugar Ray could punch even into his late 30s.

Robinson from 1949-52 was the best middleweight I've seen on video or film. He would dance, stick and move. Monzon wouldn't do well. Probably gets stopped. The 2nd Randy Turpin fight being my best example.

- - Monzon would turn Turpin into hamburger.

Robby was on a splendid Euro tour fighting their bums for riches beyond compare. He was hung over when Turpin surprised him. We saw what the professional Robby did in the rematch to the kid who ended up tragically a few years later because of all those accolades that got to him mentally.

[DooGee#33]

- - Monzon would turn Turpin into hamburger.

Robby was on a splendid Euro tour fighting their bums for riches beyond compare. He was hung over when Turpin surprised him. We saw what the professional Robby did in the rematch to the kid who ended up tragically a few years later because of all those accolades that got to him mentally.

I don't know about that. Turpin had a very short peak but he was a big, awkward, strong middleweight with a good jab. His awkwardness worked for him. His career fell off a cliff partly due to being cracked by Robinson but also emotional and mental illness.

Randy wasn't a shop worn Welterweight like some of Carlos's challengers. Not saying Monzon couldn't best him but it might a tougher fight or Turpin could upset him.

[DooGee#33]

Both have certain advantages. Marvin has a better chin, Monzon is a better ring general. Monzon seems to believe in three things--feel the opponent out, keep the jab going and hit and don't be hit.

Monzon has great defense when he keeps the distance. When a man can manage to pressure him he becomes more vulnerable and takes some punches. He is more affected by hard punches than Hagler but also punches harder. Marvin is a busy crowding fighter, just the right style. Marvin would do a lot better than Briscoe did, and Benny hurt Carlos pretty badly once. Monzon has a good lug buster inside and outside. He fires for that spot a lot with the right hand. The left jab is very good, the left hook reasonable and quite good when it is a semi-uppercut to the body.

Hagler normally doesn't rush into things too early either. But all of their fights become wars, so one is inevitable here. They will hate each other for the harsh treatment received, and a rematch is guaranteed. It is a 50-50 fight IMO. It can't get much closer in wagering.

Griffith did so much better in the second fight.

My own view is that Hagler vs Monzon would be an intense tactical bout. It would certainly go into the later rounds and who wins for me might change day to day. I never can get a feel one way or another they were both so good.

A side note though not an all-time great middleweight champion I think Tommy Hearns would be a nightmare match up for Carlos Monzon due to styles.

[billeau2]

Robinson's dancing was mediocre at best. Strictly a novelty. I don't think people would ever come back for a second helping. Marciano doing ballet would be more entertaining.

Nooooot for the right reasons....But entertaining? yes!

[billeau2]

Marciano in a ballet is a disturbing thought.

Goldman walked in the room, past the line of graceful, hard hitting prospects, some large, some with reach... to a man with two left feet, no reach, was ackward, not big... What was Sam thinking? But boy could Marciano punch!

[billeau2]

My own view is that Hagler vs Monzon would be an intense tactical bout. It would certainly go into the later rounds and who wins for me might change day to day. I never can get a feel one way or another they were both so good.

A side note though not an all-time great middleweight champion I think Tommy Hearns would be a nightmare match up for Carlos Monzon due to styles.

I think Monzon was more hittable than a lot of posters have stated. I think he was decent defensively but Monzon was hittable. Hearns would be a great match up imo... If Hearns just has a better jab than Monzon, and if he could take Monzon's shots, Hearns could win... But Monzon was relentless and if hearns lost to Hagler in a war, he would not fare much better, if at all with Monzon. But Monzon could be kept at a distance with a great jab, at least I think it is a possibility.

[DooGee#33]

I think Monzon was more hittable than a lot of posters have stated. I think he was decent defensively but Monzon was hittable. Hearns would be a great match up imo... If Hearns just has a better jab than Monzon, and if he could take Monzon's shots, Hearns could win... But Monzon was relentless and if hearns lost to Hagler in a war, he would not fare much better, if at all with Monzon. But Monzon could be kept at a distance with a great jab, at least I think it is a possibility.

Hearns had a potent right hand behind that Jab as did Carlos. Tommy would be a shade taller and have a significant speed advantage. Can Monzon take clean shots from the outside from a hitter like Hearns? It would be uncharted territory for Monzon being out jabbed. Correct me if I'm wrong on that.

Carlos does have a better chin and yes he was relentless. The styles may not work for him in that one. Overall he was a greater middle than Tommy no question but everybody has a kryponite. The Hitman could be his. After all you don't get the name Hitman for nothing.

[Dr. Z]

During the Emile Griffith fight, satelite broadcast from Argentina, Howard Cosell offered the following assesment of Monzon: "overrated, with a good right hand." Meanwhile others put Monzon on a short list for the greatest middle weights. People say he used his size, others point out that Monzon had a distinct method of operating in the ring, one that was deceptively technically sound.

There is not much contraversy these days: Most would say Monzon was one of the greatest fighters. Yet when we start to compare him to other great middle weights, most notably Hagler, opinions seem to differ widely about what such a fight would look like. This even goes for fighters that moved up like Leonard and Duran.

I am going to post the Emile Griffith fight, Griffith, another incredible fighter, one who many think was cursed and never fought as intensely after the death of parot in the ring, gave a great account of himself and Monzon did classic Monzon, hence I think this is a good fight to look at, at least initially.

https://********/nOzWKUXtRNA

The second fight

https://********/D_4bitZ3oCo

Monzon fought Benny Briscoe two times as well, Brisco was a great body puncher, and a strong opponent. Lets throw that in here as well.

https://********/wdHDPUCAmvs

The second fight
https://********/oKzE5eg3mkM

I will discuss my opinions about Monzon, but want to not prejudice the thread just yet.

Monzon is one of the all time greats at 160. However he is by his fans, he is a bit over rated. Who is the best he beat? Bennie Briscoe? That man lost 24 times.

Griffin was good but a 5'7" welter weight . He lost 24 times too. Yet both men had their moments and some say Briscoe beat Monzon.

Monzon was not fast in the ring. By ATG middle weight standard he was sort of slow handed. His best stuff was his consitacy. IMO he fought very few good natural middles.

This is the truth. I see you are a fan of his. Educate me.

Hagler was much better.