I have the impression,possibly ,misguided , that Flowers is a little overated ,on the basis of his wins over Greb,which I have read could have gone either way.Flowers was known to slap a bit and dropped decs to guys he probably should have dominated, so a bit inconsistent. Monzon was very consistent and for a long time ,I take him to beat Flowers and proably stop him late, though I would like to hear arguments to the contrary.
I'm not saying anything to the contrary. Monzon was the epitome of a consistant champion. I picture Flowers as an mauling fighter with fairly quick hands and an unorthadox, attacking style. Keep in mind he lost a very controversial decison that he should have been awarded (per reports) against Mickey Walker. Walker certainly wasn't inclined for giving a rematch...Monzon, I feel would score the cleaner blows, but Flowers mauling and wrestling in clinches(as they fought in that era) would have Monzon out of his comfort zone a bit. Flowers fought in an era where he mixed with not only middles, but light heavies and heavyweights too. He shouldn't be taken for granted. I'll say Monzon though, by decision. Consistancy speaks volumes.
Flowers basicaly had no weakneses apart from his chin. Nobody really beat him convincingly on the cards. If Flowers had an iron chin he would basicaly have been unbeatable. I would say that he either gets stopped or wins by decision.