"All right here we go, 2 to the Chezer, big bull to Tablations, 10 to Billy to match his w@ng, and the dealer gets a 3"
This isnt a Monzon v Hagler comparison its about Monzon's challengers.,and the fact that biased/ignorant posters say Monzon only fought small men coming up in weight, its BS. Neither Sibson ,Roldan,or Mugabi would beat Briscoe or Valdez,they would have their work cut out trying to beat Griffith at 160lbs! Griffith carried his weight up to middle just fine! How else do you think he beat the following middles? Briscoe Tiger Bogs Benvenuti Hayward Gutierrez Heilman Archerx2 Fullmer Harris Cohen And you chose after the second Monzon fight the 73 to trawl over Griffith's record.Why didn't you choose the71 one where he won his next 5 fights? Don't tell me, I know the answer!lol Griffith and Valdez carried their weight up to middleweight well enough to win the title! Obelmijas was undefeated? Sure he was who the **** did he ever beat? Hamsho beat a washed up Benitez[ex welter,] a washed up Minter ,and Wilfred Scypion on a dsq Hoo ****ing Hooray! Napoles had 5 more fights? Yes and he won the first4 of them! Monzon was the older man in the majority of his title defences too! I've never questioned Hearns power at any weight but to continually state as one fool does that Valdez began as a welter is stupid because so did Hearns and Leonard who beat Hagler,and Duran was a lightweight Antuofermo whom Hagler drew with was a natural light middle,Mugabi was too. You can't have it both ways! Monzon fought plenty of full sized middles,Licata,Tonna,Bouttier,Benvenuti,Mundine,Briscoe,Bogs for example. I don't think there is a gnat's **** between Monzon or Hagler for greatness either can easily be placed above the other,and to boost one it really isn't necessary to downplay the other's credentials. I just wish some had a bit more objectivity about their opinions.
"I don't need Clomptons head. I'm gonna take this ****in' thing, I'm gonna put it thru the window and me and my buddy Surginghb are gonna go out thru the hall, downtown, sit down at a bar, wet our whistles and watch the fight! That's the bet. Now does anybody want any of it ? Huh?"
But would you pick any Monzons opponents to beat Hagler? That question goes both ways, my point was Hagler fought a far superior group of Middles than Monzon did. How many 3-5 or 13-7 opponents Hagler defended his championships against? How many completely washed up fighters he defended against? Monzon certainly had at least 5.
I have seen the many posts by some and in so many threads for a very long time now trying to say Monzon had an easy go even from the get go … And I have looked into his early record a bit, read a lot of articles and seen the docs from the Argentinian boxing writers, all in Spanish btw which I can understand quit a fair amount, who have been around Monzon since the beginning. And the fact is that there was very tough boxing going on around Brusa and Luna Park. So much so that Monzon wasn't even close to being the favorite in the majority of his fights and he surprised everyone... And we have heard about the Draws to diminish him.. I just recently posted a thread about the Argentinian scoring system during that time which is very informative and explains why there is more draws if you come away with that possible conclusion after reading the article … It's funny how Monzon is so often knocked for his draws, yet poster's do not take the time to read it for the insight ,, The thread is probably on page 2 or 3 by now, LOL, which I think has only 1 reply . haha
Which of Hagler's opponents beat Monzon? Do you think Monzon draws with Antuofermo,goes life and death with a tubby Duran,loses to a Leonard having his debut at middleweight after 3 years retirement?
Yes, an excellent post McVey...the kind I've been trying to make...a case for that era of fighters...of the 60's and 70's...that so many of the boxing boobs and no-nothings that overpopulate this forum so willfully and obtusely continue to undersell and hold in such derision.....and a case for giving a fair shake to the greatest middleweight champion of all. The idiots here seem so much like the first disbelieving critics of a certain heavyweight fighter who won the title in the early 60's. Same kind of obstinate morons. Great post.
Look, I'm not hear to bash Monzon. ( I save that for Mayweather Jr) as I said with my 1st post I consider him top 5 at Middleweight. But I do look at ALL fighters through a microscope. And in my OPNION,he isn't the best I've seen at Middleweight. I've pointed out my reasons for my belief, and it comes through hard research, and video analysis. I could be wrong, but I've heard nothing from anyone that sway my opinion. And of course you could be wrong also. But unlike most of you I'm reasonable about my opinion, if I hear something that makes since I'm more than man enough to say I'm wrong.
