Carlos Monzon of the 1970's, versus Marvin Hagler of the 1980's, bout at middleweight. Hagler fights with a pebble in his right shoe. Who wins this? How and why?
I'd take Monzon by decision. His height and range would be the key difference in an otherwise evenly matched fight.
I touched on this briefly in my middleweight survey article, and here's what I wrote: Making a case for Hagler over Monzon is a trickier proposition. Essentially, this is something which comes down to personal preference. In terms of accomplishment, both were highly celebrated middleweight champions deserving of all the accolades they receive. Since I view them on equal footing in terms of accomplishment, Im forced to wonder who would win if they squared off at their best. In a head to head contest, I tend to believe Hagler would have defeated Monzon. Hagler had a tremendous ability to avoid the jab, and I believe in a mythical fight between the two that he would have been neutralize Monzons jab and work his way into mid-close range where he would have a decided advantage. At mid-close range, I think Hagler is able to penetrate Monzons stellar defense, and I believe Hagler would also be able to take advantage of Monzons slower footwork. I see it as being a highly competitive hard fought contest that eventually sees Marvin wear down the bigger Monzon for a clear points victory, and possibly even a late round stoppage.
Joke thread? Personally, I think Monzon. He always get´s the job done and more often than not I don´t exactly know why. He just looks so average. To me he is really marvelous ^^
A chess match that is evenly matched most of the way. Monzon has the reach, whereas Hagler has the talent to slip Carlos' slow jab and then counter to the body. I feel Marvin would gradually wear Monzon down and win by points over 12...and by 14th round TKO over 15.
Okay, I mean picking Marvin to win is reasonable. What´s not reasonable is wearing Monzon down and TKOing him over 15. That won´t work with Monzon.