I saw an argument between two fans won said Haglers was way better and that Monzon didnt beat anybody The guy contended that Benvenuti and Griffith were better middleweights than the Hearns and Duran Hagler fought and Napoles was on Leonards level for a welter Who was more in the right, whose resume is better
The aspiring wife beater was more right. Even though he doesn't exist and you're just making this event up, with subliminal suggestion, with an agenda to make posters defend Monzon's position and attack Hagler's
For me Monzon has the better resume and is better H2H. Both are ATG fighters and two of the most dominating MWs ever known.
Making it up why would I make it up I didnt wanna post the comments but ya made me do it Monzon's quality of opponents was lesser than Hagler's. Most people recognize he got hosed against Leonard or else he would've gone out the same way and against better competition. The division record is immaterial. If the klitschko break joe louis' record, does that make them better fighters? not likely. Monzon didn't beat greats like Duran or Hearns. He's above Hopkins, but below Hagler cbaldwinjr 1 year ago This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected Reply This content is protected Share Remove Flag for spam Block User Unblock User Monzon beat Emile Griffith, who is an all time great and was a better middleweight than Duran and Hearns. Check their record José Napoles was in Leonard's class as a welterweight, easily top 5 of all time, and got destroyed by Monzon. Like it or not, Hagler had a dead close fight with Sugar Ray and lost the title
Hagler better resume and better H2H. Both of their resumes are packed with fat Welterweights, but Hagler has the more accomplished fat Welterweights on his resume. END OF THREAD.
Monzon. Resume and H2H I give him the edge. They both beat a fair share of solid contenders, but Valdez was a better middleweight than anyone Hagler beat, and Benvenuti and Griffith were a superior duo at the weight than Hearns and Duran.
Carlos Monzon Jorge Fernandez x2 Jean Claude Bouttier x2 Tony Mundine Denny Moyer Tom Bogs Emile Griffith Tony Licata Rodrigo Valdez x2 Jose Napoles Tito Marshall Nino Benvenuti Bennie Briscoe Marvin Hagler Juan Domingo Roldan Vito Antuofermo x2 Sugar Ray Seales x3 Bennie Briscoe Kevin Finnegan x2 Alan Minter Thomas Hearns Mustafa Hamsho x2 Tony Sibson Eugene Hart Bobby Watts Roberto Duran Pretty close to be honest, but I have to give it to Hagler
Hmm, Hagler is one of my top 4 fav fighters but I have to give this one to Monzon though it's close but clear. I haven't seen enough Monzon as many of his fights on youtube aren't in the best quality and I don't want to get his career set and find out I that I made a wrong choice. I want to see his Valdez fights so bad but the quality on yt is so crap. Both some of the best MW's though Robinson I feel should be ahead of them.
I considered Monzon to be slightly better. Hagler was more spectacular, but Monzon just seemed the more consistent. Not much at all is in it though.
Hey..Benvenuti and Griffith WERE better middleweights than Hearns and Duran..and Napoles at his best..in terms of sheer ability WAS on the level of Leonard..