Maybe so .. I just wrote he may give Monzon a lot of trouble and even if he lost it would be a hell of a challenge based on height , reach, speed, etc .. as far as wins his share I don't think anyone would dispute that, he was a great, dangerous fighter ..
No I see your point. I think early in the fight he might give him some issues, but I think in a 15 rounder, CM catches up to him.
Just like when Carlos Monzon stopped Eddie Futch's fighter Tony Licata in ten rounds on June 30 1975 in Madison Square Garden, Licata tried his footwork, but Carlos cut off the ring on him, forced him into an exchange, set traps, then began to hurt Tony.
That was Monzon’s only fight in the US, correct Rich? I’ve read the critics weren’t necessarily impressed by Carlos - not sure what they were expecting - perhaps he wasn’t quite as on point as other fights in his first o/seas foray but nonetheless still impressive - Licata was very tough guy, good boxer. I’ve seen the fight and thought that it was actually one of Carlos’ more broadly entertaining fights.
And Michael Nunn was beaten by people who wouldn't be fit to tie Monzon' s shoes. What is your point here?
82 bout unbeaten streak for King Carlos Monzon from Oct 9 1964 until he retired on Aug 29 1977, retired as champion, 14 title defenses, 1970-1977. Not a lot of fighters can boast that they retired as champion.
Yes Nunn was good enough to be the downfall of Monzon the real question is does he have the cold discipline to stay focused over 15 and not the 12 in his era....Alot of fighters had more talent than Monzon but they didnt have his cool assassin mentality and his analytical brain to find a way. Anyone with the winning streak he had found a way to consistently have the winning mindset
Nunn would give him plenty (he's a helluva lot better than a Tony Licata for example) as his speed and size would be something Monzon was anything but used to. I'd back Monzon to grind him down eventually tho particularly over 15.
Really? Ok, that’s interesting. Who are you thinking of in particular that is overrated? I think the problem with the post-Hagler era (and in contrast to the Monzon era too, of course) is that no one fighter proved themselves to be the absolute best and that anyone who had a claim for a while, which Nunn certainly did after Kalambay, ended up losing. The splintering of the titles definitely didn’t help that but the organisations (WBA in particular) didn’t allow fighters to unify either (Nunn-Kalambay should have been one, Toney-McCallum should have been another). Now, had there been one title on the line, I don’t think any one fighter would have been able to hold on to it for that long, in part because none of them were either Monzon or Hagler but also because there were a higher calibre of would-be contenders in the late 80s and early 90s than I think there probably were overall between the 70s and early 80s and they were at a similar level. There really wasn’t much between them but they were excellent, just not great like a Monzon or a Hagler.
A tall, fast, athletic southpaw could give anyone fits. Monzon included. Would Nunn be Carlos’ kryptonite? Impossible to say, but to dismiss it ignores that Nunn had a particularly difficult style and styles make fights.