Greater Ring General: Sandy Saddler or Carlos Monzon?

Monzon. Saddler's fights that didn't end in explosive KOs were often ugly, foul-filled inside messes.

Could go either way. Monzon was more consistent, but Saddler had more success above his natural weight class, and his KO of Pep was bigger than any single achievement Monzon had IMO.

 

From what I've seen, there isn't much to give Sadler a Ring General award over Carlos Monzon. As far as ranking, I think like My2Sense also. I could see it either way. I lean toward Monzon though.

 

Monzon might be the greatest ring general ever...certainly a step above Sandy in this regard.

But I would have Saddler a couple of spots higher alltime.

 

Monzon is the better ring general.

Saddler should be ranked higher.

 

deal THis although i dont know if Monzon was the greates ring general. On my All time list they are pretty damn close maybe Sadler a tad higher.

 

:good:deal

 

Monzon for me is one of the 'near perfect fighting machines'. He is just such a great ring general. So I would pick him over Saddler.

http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showthread.php?t=212938&highlight=bogs

Why i think Monzon is the better Ring General.



For me Monzon had the best reign in boxing history and was the most dominant champion, for me he surpasses Sadler again.

Here is my reasoning why Monzon has ther best reign ever.

Carlos Monzon IMO

1.Quality of Opposition beaten at the weight
Not the best quality of opposition (compared to other reigns) IMO, still very good. Wins over Benvenuti, Griffith and Napoles stick out.

Benvenuti - reigning Middleweight champion. Was thought to be a good champion who could continue for a good few years. Was definitly regarded as the best in the world at that time. A top 30 Middleweight.

Napoles - The Welterweight champion of the world, in his prime although moving up. The real significance of this win is that it established Monzon as definitly the best of his era by beating his only other realistic rival IMO.

Griffith - Despite past his prime Griffith was still a better than World Class fighter IMO. He is a top 20 MW definitly. Monzon beat him twice.

After these great wins, Monzon then has the wins over the second tier opponents like Briscoe and Valdez, both guys were just below great but better than the ordinary contenders. Monzon beat Valdez twice.

Then Monzon has the contenders which bolster any record. The likes of Bouttier, Licata, Moyer & Boggs all add to it. These guys were definitly not as good as say Griffith but they were the top cntenders of the time and pretty good.

2.Quality of Performances at the weight

This is where Monzon impresses the most IMO. His wins over Napoles, Benvenuti and the first Griffith fight were all completly dominant wins over great fighters. No other champion can claim to be so dominant over 3 ATGs IMO.

His beating of Valdez whilst past his prime is further testament to his performances as he beat the only other rival to his honours, in one sided fashion. The win over Briscoe where he has some trouble, actually shows his greatness as he recovers from the trouble and fights back to win, again dominant.

At times especially later in is career Monzon didnt look at hsi best against the lesser opponents he defended against but he still domiannted these lesser opponents. Early in his career he was brutalising these opponents but as his career progressed he was less urgent when fighting these types.

3.Examination of Losses

None as Champion.


4.Longevity

Monzon had complete and utter controll of the Middleweight division for 3 1/2 years and was stripped of half his title. His controll as undisputed champ covered 9 defences, and he was completly domiannt. After he was stripped he had 3 further defences before unifying the title against Valdez then sucessfully defending it.

Overrall that is 14 defences over 7 years. With the top class mixed in throughout.

 

Very well said GPater..and I agree...Monzon was better and one of the very best ring generals ever.

 

Everyone pretty much summed it up.

Monzon always seemed to be in control of his fights. Very calm and collected. He would never panic even if he was in a tight scrap.

Saddler on the other hand was a dirty fighter and if he was having a bit of trouble he would get frustrated and the science would go out the window. I believe it cost him a couple times via DQ's.

 

@McGrain

 

I'm still doing that now.

 

How is Stoney these days? You ever speak to him at all?