Carlos Monzon: strenghts & weaknesses

Bodhi said,

There is a lot of talent at middle. I do not think you can squeeze in those names. Bodhi thinks he can, so I asked for it. We will see if he posts his top 30.

None of the above guys would be in my top 20.

 

Monzon was a big middleweight... He always strained to make 160, especially after winning the title...

Monzon's weaknes was he had stiff upper body movement and he didn't fight well going backwards for any length of time... However, he was great and got the job done... His hand and foot speed was merely average, as well...

BUT! I still see Hagler of 1981 being too talented, tuff and skilled for '71 Monzon in a time machine... A lot of folks will balk, but I care less...
bbb:hat

MR.BILL

 

Monzon really was a 168 to 170 pounder... He worked hard and dieted like a freak to make 160 for his title fights from 1970 to 1977...

Monzon did beat "Griffith and Napoles" during his reign, but BOTH men were naturally smaller than Monzon by several pounds... Especially Joe Naps...

Monzon is a top-5 ATG 160 pound champ... No doubt...

I still rate "Robinson and Hagler" ahead of Monzon though....

MR.BILL

 

I'd give Monzon the slighest of edges over Hagler but I don't see how anyone could be upset by a Hagler over Monzon prediction. Marv was very special.

 

Since when does KO ratio's have anything to do with it? Briscoe's KO ratio is low because he lost a fair few fights pre and past-prime. 53 stoppages in 66 wins, 80% there.

You wouldn't call him a big puncher because you are an idiot. The fact that the ultra-tough Briscoe was stopped by Valdez is a testimant alone to the latter's punching power.

Langford only statistically had a 40% KO ratio. I bet he couldn't punch either, aye? I bet Vitali's 90% KO ratio makes him one of the biggest punchers in heavyweight history, right? Oh wait, scrap that second statement. You probably think that's true.

 

Watch Monzon-Briscoe..Monzon dosen't look stiff to me...and observe the fluidity and variety the punches Monzon was constantly tossing at Briscoe...and constantly on the back foot.
IMO, Monzon decisions Hagler...way too much ring savvy and smarts for Marv..and Carlos better utilized his height and reach than nearly anybody..Monzon W15 Hagler.

 

Next thing is, I don't really rate dude's like "Leonard, Hearns, Duran, Frank Tate, Toney or Jones" as true middleweight champs of significance, either.... All these stars did was make pit stops either in the division or on the throne....

Dude's like:

1. Robinson
2. Hagler
3. Monzon
4. Greb
5. B-Hops
6. Ketchel
7. Walker
8. Cerdan
9. Garcia
10. Fullmer

These guys were either natural middles or former welters who grew into 160 pounds comfortably

MR.BILL

 

That's a good question

I don't think you can say SRR and especially Hearns would beat them all. Guys like Briscoe and Valdez would potentially ruin Tommy's night with their genuine MW power, they are both better fighters than Barkley with a similar roughhouse style.

SRR basically traded victories and defeats with multiple middleweights who were not clearly better than the bunch that Monzon beat. SRR would probably drop a decision or two.

Hagler on the other hand, you would have to favour over *every* opponent Monzon beat. And clearly favour. Marv wouldn't be getting wobbled and having to hold on against Briscoe or Valdez, that's for sure.

Greb, well no footage, but a guy who is often rated in the top 10 ATGs at LHW would surely walk through Monzon's opposition. Ditto for Roy Jones Jr, he would probably hardly lose more than a round or two in a fight against most of the opponents Carlos fought.

Monzon basically never fought a master boxer his own size. Hagler did, Greb did, Jones did, and they all did well. So in that respect Monzon is not quite as tested IMO.

 

Top 8 is decent enough, but Garcia and Fullmer? Am I right in thinking Ceferino Garcia or is my mind going blank? You'd put both above the likes of Burley, Williams, Tiger, LaMotta, Dempsey, Ryan etc?

 

Yeah, we can add Tiger and LaMotta for sure.... I was just rambling at the time....

Drop Garcia and Fullmer...

MR.BILL

 

Thanks I'll try to watch Monzon fights & Canizales fights more often as these days past. What do you think was his best performance? For Hagler it was Hearns, for Hopkins it was Trinidad, what was Monzon's in your opinion.

 

Some good posts here. I agree that much of what made Monzon great were things that don't jump out at you the way Robinson's speed or Hagler's combination punching do.

Frankly, he's boring as hell to watch. Never one to engage in protracted toe to toe exchanges and always in control of the situation, there really aren't any trademark wins that people remember as classics, and I think he's downgraded for that a bit unfairly.

His biggest strength to me was his ability to exert his physicality on his opponent in patient, almost insidious fashion. He wasn't a brute who came out at the bell and mauled you around, he tested the waters first and then gradually broke you down. The opponent was always reacting rather than fighting a positive, strong effort on their own behalf.

 

Well, he wasted Benvenuti in the rematch and hammered poor old Napoles in France..... Them were big wins.... BUT! Some say Benvenuti was faded and Napoles was tiny.... This was all true....

SO!! Prolly his fights with Griffith were Carlos' best wins..... BUT! again, Griffith was a blown-up 147 pounder who was most fit later on at about 154 in reality..... Monzon once again pickin' on the smaller dude....

MR.BILL:hat

 

Is it me, or does Carlos Monzon and Vitali Klit have similar styles??

MR.BILL