Best fighters of the 1970s, 1-10

I personally have Duran at no. 1 and Monzon at no.2 but it’s entirely reasonable to have it the other way around.

Possible reasons for Monzon at no.1:
-higher level of competition he faced and defeated during 70s (Benvenuti, Griffith, Briscoe, Napoles, Valdez). Duran beat Buchanan and DeJesus at lightweight and Palomino at welterweight but Monzon edges it there.
-completely undefeated during the decade. Duran lost to DeJesus (albeit in a non-title fight)
-unified and undisputed champ for almost his entire reign. Duran didn’t unify until his last defence (although as Duran had already beaten DeJesus in 74 and DeJesus was WBC champ from 76 till Duran beat him again in 78, that’s splitting hairs somewhat).

I don’t think there’s a lot in it either way.

 

I think that’s overstating it a little bit. They were clearly the two most outstanding champions of that era and not a lot to choose between them.

Duran was arguably more dominant than Monzon (11 kos in 12 defenses) and just looked better in the way he won but he didn’t meet as high a level of opposition as Monzon overall.

-Duran beat: Marcel, Suzuki, Buchanan, DeJesus(x2) and Palomino
-Monzon beat: Benvenuti (x2), Griffith(x2), Briscoe, Napoles and Valdez (x2)

Arguably, the fighters Duran beat were a bit fresher than the ones Monzon beat so that could counterbalance the overall competition advantage of Monzon.

But the point is, there’s really not much in it.

 

Yeah, I'm completely mad, aren't I?! What was I thinking?! Thanks for setting me straight.

 

I know engaging with you on this is a completely futile exercise but... Jan 1st 1970 to December 31st 1979 (also known as the 1970s) is the period we're talking about so Monzon's record in the 60s is not part of the discussion - given that Monzon became middleweight champion in 1970 I don't think that hurts him much though.

Kurupt and I have both made valid points about how you can put Duran above Monzon (I've also balanced that in giving points why Monzon could rate above Duran) so to say it's completely clear that Monzon was greater than Duran in the 70s with zero grey area is ridiculous.

Duran started the 1970s by beating Ernesto Marcel, future featherweight champion and ended it by shutting out only recently deposed welterweight champion Carlos Palomino. In between he beat Buchanan and DeJesus twice (both by KO). Maybe there aren't many others that make much of an impression on Duran's record (Royal Kobayashi in 71 and Guts Ishimatsu in 73 were both future world champions that Duran defeated as well during this period, though) but a large part of that is because Duran was destroying his opposition.

Acknowledging that Duran and Monzon were the two most dominant champions of the era is pretty straightforward. Suggesting that Duran has a strong argument for no. 1 but that Monzon has an equally strong (albeit different) argument to be rated as no. 1 is also pretty straightforward. But saying that Monzon is by far and away the best and Duran is not even close is myopic in the extreme.