Carlos Roque "Shotgun" Monzón vs. "Marvelous" Marvin Nathaniel Hagler - Definitive Classic Breakdown

For sure, two of the greats at 160. I have seen this mythical matchup before, and I have always backed Hagler's versatility over Monzon's precision. Like others have pointed out, Monzon liked to set the pace and was a very methodical working behind his jab. I believe Monzon would have some issues being effective with his jab against the southpaw Hagler. Plus, Hagler would be pushing the pace and making Monzon fight. I don't believe for a second that Monzon can hurt Hagler and with this fight likely going to the cards, I will take Hagler who was rarely out punched in a fight.

 

I voted Monzon points, without confidence. The only predictions I'm confident in is that it'd go the distance and would be close, either way.

I'd anticipate a highly technical fight, fought at a variety of ranges throughout the 15 rounds.

Hagler would likely hold his own on the inside throughout, as well as outside initially, with his greater speed offsetting Monzon's advantages in height and reach, during the earlier rounds.

Eventually, and inevitably, there'd be a few individual rounds where the pace would slow somewhat. I think this is where Monzon's advantages in height and effective reach would allow him to pick up the odd cheap (relative to how hard Hagler would have to work for the rounds he'd win) round by boxong safely at distance, which make the difference in a 8-7/9-6 type decision.

 

The thing is @Journeyman92 i am an old timer and often get accused on here of always going for the earlier fighter in these debates.But i followed Monzon from an early age and liked him but he always left me wanting more.Hagler on the other hand i really got.I know this doesnt mean he would beat Carlos but my gut feeling is he would

 

Voted Hagler by stoppage, no reasoning behind it, just like him more

 

I tend to go back and fourth on the winner of this fight. These guys are about as evenly matched as can be imo. Hagler has an advantage in power and athleticism, would also say he has a slight advantage in chin. I think he has a better or atleast more varied overall skillset but that doesn't necessarily mean that he'd win. Neither really has an opponent they faced that's telling as to how they'd do against eachother. For Monzon, maybe Valdez and Briscoe? Issue there is the stance. For Hagler maybe Hearns? But Hearns was alot less durable than Monzon, which is why Hagler was able to just rush him until he landed something big. I actually think for Hagler, the fight against Mugabi is a little better for comparison. Mugabi boxed more in that fight than usual, troubled Hagler by using his jab, timing him and leaning out of range for his defense. These are all things that Monzon excelled at. It's important to note though that Mugabi was a smaller faster more athletic opponent than Monzon and that Hagler by this point was declining.

Monzon's fights against Briscoe and Valdez don't tell us a whole lot other than pressure could be effective against him, though not *that* effective considering that they both still lost to him twice. It's still feasible to assume that a fighter like Hagler who had more skills at his disposal than Briscoe and Valdez could possibly execute similar gameplans to better effect.

Main tools that would be integral to victory for Hagler here would be consistent pressure, him fighting out of southpaw, his southpaw jab, and his body work. For Monzon I think it's largely down to his right hand and whether he can slow Hagler down and find consistent counters. A knockout for either man is very unlikely, though there could be a chance of Monzon stopping Hagler on cuts.

Early fight I see Hagler coming out in southpaw and fighting with educated pressure behind his jab, doubling and tripling it up to back Monzon up to the ropes. With Monzon being a taller target Hagler would likely focus his attack to the body. Monzon having not faced many southpaws would likely struggle with executing his usual game-plan and landing his jab against Hagler who would be setting a high pace. And outworking him for most of the early rounds. I think Hagler would also find success going to the head here, catching Monzon off guard with that leaping jab he had, and with some fast southpaw crosses. Monzon would be having his own success but his work would be overshadowed by Hagler's work rate and body shots.

Come the mid rounds I think Hagler slows down a bit and Monzon starts finding the mark and evading Hagler's shots while tying him up when in close. In particular I think he would find success countering Hagler with the right hand down the pipe when he presses, while also keeping him turning to his right and walking him into jabs. At some point during this period I think Hagler would realise that Monzon is starting to figure out his pressure and he'd start to box a bit more, standing in the middle of the ring and using his jab more. I could see him having success doing this for maybe a round before Monzon adjusts and outboxes him at range, using his length.

Late fight Hagler starts pressing again, much more haphazardly now, trying to put a beating on Monzon. Monzon would still be landing but Hagler would be able to walk through most of his shots, taking 1 or 2 to land 4 and trying to rough him up in the clinches and on the inside. By this point though I think Monzon would be turning his 1-2s into 1-2-3s. Catching Hagler whenever he came forward and turning him, not always without being caught with lead hooks from Hagler on the way out though.

By the end of the fight I think the scorecards would be close, and largely depend on what somebody values more when scoring. Hagler's Volume and aggression or Monzon's accuracy and better headshots. If I could say a draw I would but that'd be a cop out, so I'll say that Monzon gets a 15 round split decision here, with the difference on the scorecards being maybe a round or 2.

This is all assuming that Hagler doesn't do something like coming out in orthodox and that Monzon would be able to adjust to Hagler being a southpaw, which I don't know for sure if he could, but think he probably would.

 

I went with Monzon, but this is going the full distant, I think it can really go either way.

 

This thread is a banquet of boxing! A brainfest of boxing boffins put together by a fantastic poster!...Like a 1980s Dream Mile or Wrestlemania it will be a regal affair but also poignant for the fallen boxing brotherhood.....I think of Richard M Murrieta and The Morlocks....

The living....the Internet's wisest boxing minds owe it to their memory.

Perhaps an invite can be sent out to John Mcglothlin

 

You may not have Mcglothin but you do have the guy who thinks James Toney would beat George Foreman…

 

It’s good to see you posting I must’ve missed your more recent activity because I can’t recall swapping words in a minute, I’m considered a size guy despite thinking Louis beats King Kong let people say whatever they want haha… I have to say I do agree, I kind of “get” Hagler everything he does makes sense from my inexperienced perspective Monzon is “off” and “uncanny” with how he fights I’m repeating someone I forget who here who said it “he’s just really good at winning!” And it might just be you and I won’t ever understand why lol.

 

God have mercy on us

 

He left us behind a long time ago when we sacrificed his only son to the unappeasable H2H mob… Marciano had to get the axe in the name of progress but we reaped spiritual alienation, now with Foreman on the block it’s too late to go back to simpler times son, have faith that Preem will be merciful.

 

I hadnt heard of RMM's passing. Go easy.

Since we're pitting the best versions of the two against one another I've got Hagler winning this-and I feel pretty confident about saying this. The best version of Hagler has the edge over Monzon in terms of speed, versatility and durabitly. Plus, he had a greater idea of the type of approach Monzon utilized by virtue of facing a dime store imitiation in Obelmejias on two separate occasions. People wll naturally be upset by that comparison, but Fully Obel was a taller, larger guy with decent fundamentals. Monzon was obviously much, much better, but the template's there for Hagler to use.

Who exactly did Monzon face that could replicate Hagler's multi-faceted approach and switch hitting? Griffith? Maybe, but the latter tended to be one paced and was naturally smaller than Marvin, and he didn't switch hit. Monzon's going to need some time to adjust, and by the time he does, the best version of Hagler can adapt and accelerate to seal the deal on the cards.

It's not easy, but it's clear for Hagler.

 

I think in this fight …it would be best for Hagler to stay in the southpaw stance as much as possible

 

If I’m not mistaken …I think Briscoe said in an interview that Monzon was better…( I could be wrong)

 

I think Monzon was more consistent in his big fights so I'd pick him to win.

Hagler in some of his big fights vs Antuofermo 1, Leonard, Duran, made tactical errors and didn't perform at 100 percent maybe the big occasion got to him at times ?

But based on the above Monzon by decision for me.