Carlos Monzon Vs Hearns - Is This The Worst, Fight At Middle For Tommy?

Worse than Hagler?

 

Hearns gets hurt badly

 

I actually think so, yes. Hagler didn't box his normal fight against Hearns. He was uncharacteristically aggressive and looked for a pier 6 brawl from the get go. A regular approach by Hagler would have given Hearns a much more even fight. Monzon negates most of Hearns' outboxing tactics and he brings a granite chin to the table as a matter of course.

 

I never saw Monzon of the many fights I've watched of him, really deviate from what
worked for him .And that's Start cautiously behind the long jab, get a feel for what
the opponent is trying to do. Grind the opponent down.
That was his formula for success. Monzon isn't winning a jabbing contest against
Hearns. Especially when considering how effective 5'7" natural welter and past
prime Griffith was against him with his jab early in their fight in 71.
Hearns would also be the only opponent (I can think of) who would have
substantial height, reach and speed advantages. And possibly a advantage
in power.
If ( And that's a very big "IF") Monzon did beat Hearns it wouldn't be as
damaging as the Hagler fight or as damaging as his fights with Barkley
or Roldan. It simply wasn't his approach.
It would be very similar to the 1st fight Hearns had against Leonard. And that's
falling behind early on the scorecards , realizing it's a losing battle to
try and out jab Hearns, "Take the chance and be great". focus in on
attacking Hearns body, grind him down and wear him out in the later
rds. Hearns legs would start to give way around 9th rd, ( Issues he
had the entirety of his career, even at welter)
referee stops contest between the 10th -14 rds for Monzon, Hearns
endurance issue being the deciding factor.

 

Which we know Hagler wouldn't do, because we saw what he actually did. The real Hagler-Hearns fight renders your theoretical "regular" "more even fight" redundant. Hagler was a horrible fight for Hearns, and over inside 3 rounds.

I'm not saying Monzon couldn't do something similar though. It is hard to say.

 

Did Valdez bit harder than Hearns? Tommy is taller and longer than Monzon. CM was more of attrition puncher but still could have hurt Hearns.

Interesting fight.

 

Pretty excellent post .. Tommy at his absolute best would be very dangerous with his size, reach, speed and power but let's face it , Monzon was a beast, took a monster shot and had insane endurance ...Tommy had a shot over 12 but I can't see over 15 ...

 

That's basically my point. Monzon was to methodical and patient
to ever go at Hearns the way Hagler and Barkley did. He
would depend on his superior endurance, get him in deep
water, drown him.

 

Nice analysis

 

I tend to think Flash24 has the best post on the topic. I don't think Monzon would (or even could) Bumrush Hearns like Hagler. I think it would be a long grinding fight where Hearns would probably win the early rounds and Monzon the late ones. Over 15 I think Monzon takes it. Over 12 ... I'm not sure. Over 10, Hearns.

 

Carlos would blow him out. And this is from a great admirer of both men's boxing.