Most of those were when he was well past prime though. Don't see any middle in history facing Robby's competition without suffering a few blips too.
It wouldn't matter if he was 100 when he had those fights. It's part of his middleweight ledger, whatever the age. Take Basilio, for example......whom else at 160 did he beat?
King Carlos and Valdez were past prime when they fought. Valdez turned pro at 16 and labored in the S.A. boxing venues. That's were his early decisions, not KO's come from. Roughly the same scenario for Monzon. And, I think, he avenged ALL his early losses. All hail King Carlos!
I think this also, that Hagler would need to be aggressive and quick out of the trap while Monzon was warming up. He could be a slow starter himself though, and I think Monzon was physically stronger in the trenches. That said, I think Marv had the jab, smooth enough footwork and rangy punching arsenal to compete evenly with Monzon at range, or not get outboxed there at least, and poked/manoeuvred around by Monzons jab.
He simply came out knowing he would win. I saw many of his fights where he was initially lackadaisical but, after landing a numbing shot, put the 'peddle to the metal', from 1st to 4th gear, if you will. All hail King Carlos!
He could take you completely out of your game plan. Tho I loved Carlos, I was rooting for Valdez both times. When watching both fights, I was amazed that the Valdez I was seeing didn't appear so much like the all-time great wrecking machine he was; he rather seemed like some 'dangerous #5 contender' who could only pull an upset with a big shot. Carlos said the only fighter who made him do things he didn't want to do was Emile. Sidebar: for you naysayers that Carlos fought over-blown lesser weights moving up in class, Emile was a middle from the mid-sixties on. Plus Griffith was a hall of famer as was Napoles so enough of the nonsense about the (former) welters he fought. All hail King Carlos!
That's ridiculous. He had 19 career losses in over 200 fights. 13 of those 19 losses occurred from 1960-65, when he was at 38 to 44 years of age and a total shell of himself. Who did Leon Spinks beat at heavyweight apart from Ali ? I guess that disqualifies Ali from being #1 heavyweight ?
Well, if you take Robinson’s middleweight ledger from 1942, when he started fighting in defined middleweight contests through to the title win in 1951 over LaMotta, you’re looking at a guy who went about 60-1-2 at the weight. Yes, Robinson was clearly beatable past his prime at middleweight but at his peak, he was arguably (and of course it is an argument, but a valid one) the best fighter there’s ever been at any weight. His resume at middleweight is mightily impressive and had he not called it quits between 1952 and 1954 I think he’d be a much clearer choice for number 1.
SRR’s middleweight record for reference: https://www.boxingforum24.com/threads/sugar-ray-robinsons-fight-record-at-middleweight.614058/
I quite often find myself in agreement with you, but I respectfully disagree on this point. I get what you're saying, but surely age does factor in some way, no?
Hagler for me has a bit better opposition tho still not overwhelming. The loss to SRL in his finale comparative to Monzon's smooth win over the second best middle in the world is where Monzon sneaks ahead for me.