Who rates higher, Hagler or Monzon?

[Dr. Z]

Who rates higher, Hagler or Monzon?


Monzon 87-3-9

https://boxrec.com/en/box-pro/9036


OR

Hagler 62-3-2

https://boxrec.com/en/box-pro/8684


I think Hagler looks better on film, and has beaten better and more diverse set opponents. He has also faced better punchers. There has been some debate here and comparison of opponents. Halger's best competition was more in their prime too. What do you think?

I look forward to a good debate.

[DeeMoney]

Rates in what way?

Resume (peak or compiled career)? Overall perceived ability? Who we think would win more often head to head? Who would beat more top 10 MWs more often? Don't want this to turn into an apples to oranges type discussion....or maybe we do.

[Dr. Z]

Rates in what way?

Resume (peak or compiled career)? Overall perceived ability? Who we think would win more often head to head? Who would beat more top 10 MWs more often? Don't want this to turn into an apples to oranges type discussion....or maybe we do.

Who rates higher is the question. You can answer it anyway you wish. I think Hagler looks better on film, and has beaten better and more diverse set opponents. He has also faced better punchers. Halger's best competition was more in their prime too. As such I rate him higher.

[billeau2]

There was a great quote on the threads from Briscoe, who fought both guys... I really liked it because it captured the aspect of this comparison that was interesting. What it comes down to is Hagler's qualities were more obvious... Most would characterize Hagler as "better." But, Monzon has qualities that make him deceptive. Hard to bet against Monzon.

If they fought? One factor that may be important is the start... Monzon started slower, give Hagler a few on the early rounds, might be the difference.

[Willie Pep 229]

There was a great quote on the threads from Briscoe, who fought both guys... I really liked it because it captured the aspect of this comparison that was interesting. What it comes down to is Hagler's qualities were more obvious... Most would characterize Hagler as "better." But, Monzon has qualities that make him deceptive. Hard to bet against Monzon.

If they fought? One factor that may be important is the start... Monzon started slower, give Hagler a few on the early rounds, might be the difference.

Damn Hagler wrote the book on slow starts with Leonard.

What bothers me about Hagler's chances is Antoufermo and Duran. He could be neutralized and forced into a much grabbing fight, with only spurts of fighting.

This would play well for the taller Monzon who I suspect is stronger.

Monzon would make it diffiucult for Hagler to get inside anyway, but add to it, even once inside Hagler attacks can be neutralized.

I think the telling part of the match up would be Monzon's right hand busting up the left side of Hagler face. E.g. Leonard-Hearns I.

But don't think Hagler would pull it out like SRL did.

[Slugfester]

Like already said, criteria make all the difference. They were both undisputed MW champs who cleaned out their division and never moved up. Hagler lost his last fight, but the majority of fighters do. Monzon grew up on unknown opponents way down south, also a normal phenomenon. Their careers are somewhat equal. I am most interested in who might win. In the future AI can add another dimension to discussions like this by assigning probabilities derived from a million theoretical fights between the two. My guess is AI will out-predict us easily on sporting events.

Hagler can be out-generaled, but is not completely ******. There is only one way for him to fight Monzon, and I would expect even him to solve that pretty fast. I know how both will fight.

[billeau2]

Damn Hagler wrote the book on slow starts with Leonard.

What bothers me about Hagler's chances is Antoufermo and Duran. He could be neutralized and forced into a much grabbing fight, with only spurts of fighting.

This would play well for the taller Monzon who I suspect is stronger.

Monzon would make it diffiucult for Hagler to get inside anyway, but add to it, even once inside Hagler attacks can be neutralized.

I think the telling part of the match up would be Monzon's right hand busting up the left side of Hagler face. E.g. Leonard-Hearns I.

But don't think Hagler would pull it out like SRL did.

Hagler also went to war with the stickman at the drop of a hat...I think generally speaking Marvin was a faster starter for what that is worth.

Inertia is also a consideration here... Is Hagler strong enough to make Monzon move as he attacks? Or does Monzon set on his shots and cause damage? Which fighter can cause the other man to move out of position?

The Briscoe fight is instructive here. Briscoe was able to get Monzon to move.

[mrbig1]

I would pick Monzon vs Hagler for one major reason. Hagler has a low work rate. he could be out worked. I thought Hagler beat Antuofermo in their first fight. but it was a very close fight. Hagler vs Duran. Same thing. Not only did Duran out punch him in some of those rounds. He also out boxed him. once again, a very close fight. It was that fight that I thought Leonard really had a shot. Sure, enough Sugar ray out worked him and stole the fight. Monzon was a busy fighter. Who was as fresh in 15th round as he was in the first. both these fighters are from my era.

[Ivich]

Hagler also went to war with the stickman at the drop of a hat...I think generally speaking Marvin was a faster starter for what that is worth.

Inertia is also a consideration here... Is Hagler strong enough to make Monzon move as he attacks? Or does Monzon set on his shots and cause damage? Which fighter can cause the other man to move out of position?

The Briscoe fight is instructive here. Briscoe was able to get Monzon to move.

Briscoe was 29 when he last fought Monzon, he was 35 when he fought Hagler ,and he had picked up a further 5 defeats.

[billeau2]

Briscoe was 29 when he last fought Monzon, he was 34 when he fought Hagler ,and he had picked up a further 5 defeats.

yes... we have to take what we have lol and we do not the same fighter in terms of condition and age fighting both men. I do think the differences in Briscoe over the length between these two fights, makes a direct comparison impossible... It is not quite the same even as Joshua and Fury fighting Klitsko within a range of time passed. But, if we say Brisco was an excellent fighter, who bore some comparison to Hagler, that might indicate Hagler's performance against Monzon with caveats, gives us some information.

Brisco had aspects of Hagler but was more of a body puncher who had great pressure skills, than an elite pressure fighter who could do what Hagler was capable of doing attack wise. Hagler was probably a harder puncher, if we discount briscoe's hooking body attack, and Hagler had a lot more things he could do to beat someone.

...It is also a fallicy To say Monzon was "exposed" fighting Briscoe. One might be able to reason that if Hagler and Monzon were prime, given Briscoe's relative success, Hagler's approach could be a challenge to Monzon.