Hagler vs. Monzon. Battle of the Legends.

I like hagler in this fight. Monzon may have had height and reach but hagler was stronger, had a better jab, threw fluid combos and was a southpaw to top it all. Monzon nothing to hurt hagler with,and besides, hagler had a granite chin anyway.

Hagler would rough up monzon on the inside especially because monzon wouldn't have been able to keep him off. Monzon was slow of foot so he couldn't dance away from hagler. Haglers jab would redden and eventually bust up monzons face, en route to a late round tko.

Hagler was better than the best fighters that monzon fought and this fight would show it.

 

bollox,hagler showed briscoe too much respect like he did with duran and boxed briscoe.

 

TedSpoon you call yourself a writer? You leave quite a bit to be desired in your explanations. Was not Vito a rough house brawler? And did he not hold Hagler to a 15 round draw? That's one of Marvin's most well known fights and you forgot about it. I can't believe you did that!!

Also, did not Hitman Hearns have a build similar to Monzon? And did not Hagler destroy him in short order?

You, my friend have got some explaining to do!!

If you cannnot adequately explain this oversight, then why should we buy your book?

 

people are saying Marvin didnt always fight his fight they were the fights he gave too much respect to opponents. i dont think this owuld be a problem against Monzon as he would know he needed to go for it.

I think this is a close, close fight probably the closest ever. But i pick Hagler by a close competitive UD or SD. I like his controlled aggresion, chin and speed. He would nutralise Monzons jab with him being a southpaw IMO. Hagler also had a very good jab which i think he could counter Monzons jab with. The Monzon right hand would be effective but its best throwin long. I thik Hagler might take afew to get into mid range and box from their and really bang the body. Thats my take and like you see it is really close.

 

Hagler by decision in a close technical chess match

 

For some reason I thought I'd be in a small section going for Monzon on this one, good to see others see the same way.

Monzon kept things simple, didn't waste too much. It was jab, right hand then maybe an uppercut or left hook. Monzon is one of the few fighters I've ever seen who was capable of grinding down his opponent with that style whilst being on the backfoot. He was rangy and like someone else mentioned tied up effectively on the inside. I don't see Hagler doing much damage - Monzon on points.

 

My 2008 post stands. Monzon was too smart for Hagler. It's a shame this bout never occured, or more precisely, that these two weren't in their peaks at the same time or era..Monzon would be rated in the stratospheres by the experts if they had fought.

 

Prime Hagler would be too fast for Monzon. Monzon was good but somewhat mechanical in his approach. Hagler was more fluid and operated at a faster pace. Hagler of '80-'81 would bring too many weapons to the table and outbox the skilled but somewhat robotic Monzon to a decision in a great fight. On a side note...I don't think the fact that Hagler's failure to move up in weight should be held against him. He wasn't a really big MW anyway dispite his physique and may have realised that MW was where he should stay. Monzon never tried it even though he was a big MW and feasted on smaller opposition but I don't see any criticism regarding that. Both men decided to compete at MW so lets judge them as MW's and what they accomplished in thier own division.

 

I'd take Monzon via close decision. He's very comfortable and natural against various styles and at various ranges. He can also change up on a whim if it's needed. Quite an underrated thinker in there. He'd also take away much of the effectiveness of the Hagler jab at longe range and more than match him up close. What an fascinating matchup it would be.