If Monzon and Hagler Shared the same era ?

jowcol, these kids must've just started following boxing when the sport's vids became available on You Tube. It reveals a certain ignorance about Monzon and his style and approach to boxing. A certain willful ignorance. It's like boxing history began in the 80's for them. The poster who said Hearns would wipe the floor with Monzon every time is a General forum level neophyte, or a genuine boxing idiot at worst. Hearns' chin betrayed him at the darndest times...or is what the great James Kinchen's glove making contact with Tommy's chin an abberation? Or his being carried from the ring like a baby vs Hagler? Most of you greenhorns overrate the hell out of Hearns...yeah he was a very good fighter..maybe he just does achieve greatness...but he was a front runner, to be honest with you...as exemplified by his flopping against the two major challenges of his boxing career. I think Rodrigo Valdez would have put Tommy to sleep...and Monzon would have been a bit more methodical, and ground him down by round 7 or 9 at the most. Monzon was IMO the stronger of the two with a better chin by far and the better ring IQ. Monzon was a great middleweight champion....Thomas Hearns was not.
Concerning Monzon vs Hagler...as I've previously said, I don't believe there would have been any kds and certainly not a knockout...just a chess match, and that would have been somewhat boring and anti-climactic to most of you clueless youngsters...expecting rock em/sock em robot action, with your hero, right out of a Rocky movie, clobbering the greatest middleweight champion of all time, whereas a sawed off, puffed up ex lightweight champion in Duran can almost out think him and outpoint him...giving Duran too much respect, for God's sake!
I thought Hagler was some kind of royal baddass...that he would have shown Duran who was boss and put him away in a timely manner!! Instead, just like vs SRL, he showed one of his greatest weaknesses...now he didn't have many weaknesses, I guaran-damn-tee you, and I have him right after Monzon as a great middleweight champ...but that weakness was a tendency to choose the wrong tactics and strategy, as in Antuofermo l, Duran and Leonard...and there may have been other examples. Marvin acted a bit confused at times..and that's where Monzon tops him. Monzon never had any doubt as to his purpose, and always imposed himself on the opponent. There was never any doubt as to who was boss...and with Carlos Monzon, boxing was a chess game, with the 15 round distance playing out as part of his strategy. I'm not repeating verbatim what I posted previously about Monzon-Hagler, except to say succinctly, that IMO, Monzon would have outboxed, outpaced, out thought and frustrated the ever aggressive Marvin Hagler essentially. There would have been plenty of moments for Hagler, and I'm not implying that it would be a walk in the park for Carlos, like you monkeys seem to think that it would be for your guy. But it wouldn't be nearly enough, as the end result would have been a clear, deserved decision win for Carlos Monzon. You boys overrate your heroes and display great ignorance...again, willful ignorance, about the great fighters of the 70's. Boxing wasn't invented or come into being all of a sudden in the 80's and 90's.

 

Hearns lost to Iran Barkley at middleweight. Comparing him with Monzon based on what he did at middleweight is ridiculous. Nunn and Kalambay for example would be heavily favored over anyone Hearns beat at middleweight and unlike him they both beat Barkley.

 

I know, right, the lengths some of these ATGs would go to avoid The Bodysnatcher!

 

This whole notion of, Monzon would win because Hagler would fall victim to his own mental weakness is one of the worst. Basing a judgment on the idiocy of another is one of the worst logical deductions you can make. People act like he messed up against Vito, and this illustrated his mental weakness, for Christ sake, he should've won that fight. He was comfortably ahead, and I mean comfortably ahead, and figured he did enough already, and frankly he likely did. People forget that he slowed down some because he not only thought he was well enough ahead (rightfully so), but because he had beat the ever loving crap out of Vito for many rounds and expended a lot of energy to try and get him out of there. He just didn't fold mentally because the going got tough.

People keep missing the fact that Hagler would view Monzon as trying to be the bully and the big guy of the division. That would strike a cord with Marvin where he'd bring it, and bring it hard. He isn't going to be overconfident like he was against SRL. He's going to come after Monzon with the tenacity he did against Hearns. He would fight nothing like he did against SRL because the storyline would be vastly different. Monzon was very predictable in his movements and how he fought. He was great about implementing his plan, but it was often a quite similar plan. Jab, jab, circle, one-two, jab circle. He fought the vast majority of his fights doing that exactly same thing. He would mix it up and get to war inside at times, but the above was his much preferred way of winning fights or softening his man up. That is a terrible way to fight Hagler. Hagler is simply the better overall boxer than Monzon, and he's not winning a battle using that tactic. He also isn't somebody who's going to go balls to the wall and pressure Hagler the way Vito did. That isn't his style, nor do I think that would go well for him either.

This whole expecting Hagler to turn mentally weak during the fight is a little silly. Maybe Monzon was able to look so mentally strong because he was facing guys on the downside of their careers. If the Patriots played the Browns every week, they'd look like the best time in football history. They play the Jaguars every week, it wouldn't look nearly as easy. Maybe that has something to do with why Monzon was able to impose his style and be so mentally strong.... The coin flips both ways here.

 

I dont understand why posters here cant do a proper analysis between these two fighters. Hagler is NOT a fighter that Monzon is going to trade left jabs with. and the eastside cognescenti just doesnt understand it!

they refuse to concede that it is Hagler who has the advantages but instead insist on the following absurd claims "Monzon will adapt faster than Hagler" and "this is going to evolve into a chess match - PERIOD"

DOI! someone here has been reading too much fantasy. I myself grew up on fantasy but at some point I outgrew it

Hagler is simply a more dynamic fighter than Monzon was, with more guns, and thus an exponential more diverse attack. it would just be too much for King Carlos to cope with with the end result similar to the following::

This content is protected

and yes, Hagler WOULD tko Monzon. Why? why let it go to a decision when he can knock him out?

 

LOL! look at that poster hanging all his hopes on the Duran fight, foolishly predicting Hagler to become "tight" and "tentative" which is like betting a Toyota is going to break down at 10,000 miles

 

Hagler's superior versatility and speed carries the day, I think. He could work off the back foot and I believe he could quite easily stand his ground given his punch resistance. By the time Escopeta makes his later round charge, the best and most motivated version of Hagler probably has enough left to hang with him, and gets the decision in the end.

And, again, we're dealing with the best and most motivated iteration of Hagler here. This is the fighter with the Everest sized chip on his shoulder after having been stiffed on a couple of occasions. I don't think he's leaving anything to chance or feeling content to coast on a lead against someone who would represent the biggest challenge he would have ever faced.

 

Hagler hated all his opponents and big punchers seemed to bring out a even
more violent Hagler. Hagler was more versatile than the one dimensional Monzon.
Emanuel Steward stated Hagler would ko Monzon . I can't be sure of that but i can
be of a Hagler victory.

 

All I can say is that this computerized 'what if', IMO, somewhat, accurately showed Hagler as what he could do but, I hardly recognized the computerized Monzon. They're both ATG's and Monzon would have copped a UD.
I'll go back to my proposed Valdez-Hagler fight. Rodrigo didn't even look the same against Monzon, groping, trying to find openings that weren't there. That's King Carlos's skill; taking you completely out of your skill set.
Seeing Carlos out like a light is laughable.

 

Agreed ,,What is more laughable is people think that Monzon is going to fight him that way. So they watch that joke of a video and say, well he did that to Hearns so he is doing that to Carlos..And they eat it up with a fork. People don't stop and think that Hearns worst weight was probably MW, and Carlos at MW speaks for itself .... More so, you have to check your bias at the door on this one, because objectively this is one hell of a fight and it's going to be close, imo

 

That you can. It's like money in the bank!

 

Hagler would win, most probably by tko but I also wouldnt be surprised if Hagler laid him out for a ten count as in the video

I think it would go about 8 - 10 but I also wouldnt be surprised if it ended by round 5

The reason? Hagler was expert at whittling down tall lanky opponents

Here's how the fight breaks down:

In rds. 1, 2, a moderately aggressive Hagler begins with his right jab as both men look to find the range, testing each other's defenses and over the course of rds, 3 - 5, we find that Hagler is much more successful at landing HIS right jab, than Monzon is at landing his left jab

In addition, we find that Hagler negates Monzon's right cross with in close rib cracking right hooks

Over the next two rounds we see Monzon's guard dropping lower and lower as Marvin steps in with his ramrod jab, busting open Monzon's features and complementing it with the right hook to the head as only hagler can, givng Monzon a TERRIBLE headache

As fellow Argentine Juan Roldan found out, Hagler gets stronger as a fight progresses. All the while, Monzon gradually weakens every round though he bravely hangs on.

Monzon begins to think "is there no way to drain his strength?"

sometime before the 10th, the crowd senses the end as it is obvious the Argentine cannot hold out much longer; it will be over soon

As in the Minter fight, Hagler senses the end and accelerates the pace, launching one more all powerful right hook putting Monzon down for the count (much like the video)

as Teddy Atlas says, "I learn more about Hagler every time I watch him fight"

 

Red Cobra had a great post early in this thread.

In general I honestly think I'm seeing both sides over hype their guy a bit and no one really striking a middle ground chord.

 

I'll crystallize it...make it succinct for you,....and beyond this, we'll just agree to disagree....Monzon was too smart for Hagler...he was always ultimately in control, and Marvin was not.

 

it may be succinct, but does it have the ring of truth?

and the truth is,,, it has the ring of falsehood, as though you left something out

The winner of this fight can only be correctly determined by a stylistic analysis, not some half ass hypothesis "Monzon was too smart ...he was always in control, Hagler wasnt"

that's just trying to bring Hagler down to his level and even lower

but there's no analysis of how each man is likely to approach the fight, what each man is likely to do, at what stage of the fight, what strategy is likely to be used. if there's anyone here that can do analysis, it's me

if you want to use the same old "marvin is not ready for a fight of this magnitude and will be mentally tight",, I can easily claim Monzon's main weapons, the jab and cross, are to slow, especially against someone who movers laterally, or someone like Hagler who can bring his guard up very quickly. In that case, Monon would miss the whole night and leave himself open to counters

1987 version is about the only version Monzon would give a lesson to because even Monzon was faster! maybe 70s version Hagler may have been over his head

but if we're talking early 80s, you can forget about Monzon fighting at an even pace throughout 15. you kidding?

you think Hagler' just going to accommodate him? He's going to turn up the heat

if your kind of reasoning had any merit, the classy, unmoveable Alexis Arguello, would have owned a UD over an embarrassed Pryor.