I can see him getting hurt by someone like Fitzsimmons but certainly not by your average mw puncher. :good His claim for that spot is as good as anyones after WW2. My top mws post-WW2 would be Robinson, Tiger, Monzon, Hagler, Hopkins. My pre-WW2 ones would be Dempsey, Ryan, Fitzsimmons, Ketchel, Greb, Walker, Steele. The bold ones are the ones with the best claim for the top spot.
thats fair.i have robbie no.1 at 147 and 154 lb but not 160lb. when he won the title and toured europe he made some pretty decent european middles look awful so he must have been a great.
Hearns punched just as hard as Hagler did, and that was not enough to stop Leonard over 2 fights. No one has ever claimed Hagler would get hurt by Leonard, stop making up straw man arguments to dodge the question. The question is whether SRL has a chin. Look at his opponents he faced, how hard they hit, their career highlight KO reels, and how Leonard stood up to their power. How often Leonard was on ***** street in his entire career? He has only one stoppage loss, a TKO when shot, in his last fight. He even went the distance after the Norris battering, and Terry was a young LMW who could really punch. Sugar Ray Leonard had a granite chin. And he was not exactly easy to hit flush in the first place. Monzon did not have ATG power like a Jackson or Fitzsimmons. Hence, this fight would go the distance.
Right so 32yo and 33yo versions of Benvenuti/Griffith who are coming off losses are better than a 32yo ATG Hagler who hasn't lost in years. The BS Monzon fans come out with at times to hype their man
Stalker . Right but I don't think I've come out with anything as bad as: 32yo and 33yo versions of Benvenuti/Griffith who are coming off losses are better than a 32yo ATG Hagler who hasn't lost in years. (well not recently )
Well, Hagler to me looked worse than Griffith and Benvenuti the first time around against Monzon. I´m not a stalker, I have a tremendous memory when it comes to thsoe things. :hey
PP, there were plenty of clueless types like you around back in the seventies that were always at a loss to explain how Monzon could win vs his superior oppostion...they NEVER learned. Always siding with the guy who would lose...always, always harping on how "slow", "stiff", "wooden", "mechanical", etc., Monzon was...always wrong, always confused..always surprised and unable to explain how Monzon won yet again..."but...but...but..he's too "slow"..."stiff"..."wooden"...mechanical"...never really able to understand how utterly effective, and in command Monzon was.
I think there's a misconception that Monzon was incredibly slow. Monzon, especially pre-gunplay was not slow, had tremendous timing, and a tremendous abillity to set up his punches. Nothing slow about the right hands which stopped Benvenuti twice: [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VJYDP-aojQ[/ame] The trouble I see Leonard having here is that Leonard-Monzon looks like Leonard-Hearns I to me. A tall, skilled opponent with an excellent jab who will not provide many countering opportunites for Ray. Ray would have to turn stalker in this fight, just like against Hearns, and the fact is, Monzon is a rougher, harder, more durable customer than Tommy. He's also physically stronger. Ray is one of the greatest of the greats, but I just see a great big man beating a greater little man here. I say Monzon, 9-6ish.
Well Hagler would always have problems with Leonard's speed and come on strong where as Monzon would always have problems with Griffith/Benvenuti earlier based on styles. Its the old 'Leonard wins therefore Hagler can't be primed', it can't have anything to do with Leonard making him look bad?
I don't think Monzon is that similar to Hearns, for 1 he is much slower, less reach, less height, lesser jab (although still a good 1), lesser 1 punch power. On the plus side much better inside (Hearns weakness), stronger, much better chin, better stamina down the stretch. So Leonard can box and move against Monzon where he couldn't against Hearns
Monzon had some German efficiency going on. :good That Hagler wasn´t prime was very evident in his effort, he couldn´t really pull the trigger. Yes, Leonard increased this but against a fighter of Hagler´s calibre you can´t do this for 12 rounds, not even a Leonard, and still even when he had the openings he couldn´t get going. I think it´s just so obvious you have to be very biased to not see it. Or have an agenda.
It mostly had to do with the opponent. Hagler could have steamrolled a handful more of the Roldan/Mugabi ilk. Mugabi was a force who fought a great fight against Hagler. Hagler may have ruined Mugabi. NOBODY was saying that Hagler was shot. EVERYBODY thought he would steamroll Leonard and possibly hurt him. Hagler lost that fight between the ears by coming out orthodox for 4 rounds. What an idiotic strategy.
I always suspected that there was something Germanic about Monzon's resolve and efficiency. More Germanic that Latin in many ways, in that he wasn't controlled by hot blooded emotion or anything..there was a cold ruthlessness about him that made him so successful!!:good