Les Darcy vs Carlos Monzon

As I have not used a fake name on this forum I can only say that Anthony Reader didn't the same guts as I have,,,, yeah, you know who you are.

 

And people wonder at some of my responses to this idiot...

 

I posted what you were wrong about ,if you could stop foaming at the mouth you might have seen it.

Here it is again ,I corrected it and you ignored the correction.
I've underlined it for you .

Forget about Donald Bradman, this is a boxing site no-one gives a f*ck about him here.

The one where you say Moore was nowhere near ready for a title shot against Zale.
Moore was his number one contender in1942.
In the same post you said the mob controlled boxing and if they thought Williams and Burley worth of title shots they would have got them.
Williams was ranked the following in Zale's title reign.
1942 no3.
1943 no2
1944 no1.
1945 no 1.

Burley was ranked:
1942 no2.
1944 no3.
1945 no 2.
1946 no2.

I'd say that proves they were ready and had justified themselves as title challengers. They were certainly more worthy of title shots than Steve Mamakos who was unranked.

.

I don't want you to take any of your vitriol back.
It made me laugh. Boy do you have some issues," "pommy spastic"", scum".
Got anymore endearments for me sweetie?

Don't ,"like the cut of my jib," anymore then ?


I'll just slit my wrists .:verysad

 

Darcy's only real none DQ loss happened when he was 18, and he avenged both losses.

Never knocked out ( perhaps even knocked down ) you could make a case Darcy could really could have given boxing something special. But we will never know as he died at just 21 years of age.

Monzon did not get his act into gear until age 23-24, so at the age of 21 I'd pick Darcy.

 

Originally Posted by klompton2 View Post
Fine. Monzon would win by KO early. Darcy would weaken himself having to get down in weight having grown hog fat on the voyage over to New York in hopes of taking high paying exhibitions and avoiding real competition. He wined and dined himself while running like a coward from conscription that men who didnt have his options were bound to. His antics of refusing all tough fights in favor of trying to match himself with the softest opposition for boat loads of money rapidly loses him favor in the USA and he is told he will either have to face Monzon or be sent immediately to the front lines. He chose to face Monzon's bombs of the Kaiser's bullets but not before ducking and dodging and trying everything he could to either get out of the fight or get every possible concession. When he finally got in the ring with Monzon Carlos' height, reach, awkward but effective defense, and calm under pressure allow him to repeatedly make Darcy overreach and fall into counters. Darcy becomes increasingly desperate which only serves to give Monzon more openings. In the seventh while lunging in with a punch Darcy's legs are turned to jelly by a straight right. A follow barrage knocks out his infected tooth and several others as well leaving him bleeding and senseless on the canvas. Monzon then takes Winnie O'Sullivan back to his locker where she gives him her virginity finally having a real man in her life...

I did not see a reply by Klompton.

Like I said, Darcy was gone by age 21. Very few fighters peak this early. Had he lived much longer we could make an accurate prediction.

At age 21, I think Darcy owes Monzon at age 22 or 23.

 

Lets put it like this ,I have seen another facet of his personality.:yep

 

No hater, can't hate a guy that is dead for so long and is not even known these days. My genuine view of him fighting.

 

I'm not classifying you as such , but I know someone who will.:yep

 

Oh, okay, yah I guess it's an aussie, nationalism can be a very annoying thing sometimes.

 

It's understable I suppose ,it's the hysterical over reaction when you even mildly differ that becomes wearing.

 

This is a good way of looking at things. I cant think of a better middleweight at this age. Does this make Darcy the greatest u21 middleweight of all time? Or depending on where you live, the greatest child fighter ever?

Realistically, it is hard to favour Darcy over Monzon. Monzon did it all and dominated for much longer. But, Darcy is not out of the equation in such a fight. NO matter what happens, Monzon knows he was in a fight. If Darcy was as good as people thought he was, then he just might beat Monzon. Certainly he has a far better chance than anyone who prime Monzon actually fought.

 

This is all Darcy propaganda. Go ask Jeff Smith if this accurately describes Darcy. In their first fight Darcy won the first round after which Smith had a better second, which Darcy won, pulled even in the third, won the fourth stinging Darcy in the process, and the hurt Darcy with a bodyblow. Darcy turned around and refused to fight. The referee declared he saw no foul and forced Darcy to fight. Darcy resumed the fight and Darcy's corner threw in the towel. Somehow that was determined to be a DQ for Smith. Anywhere else in the world thats a KO, but god forbid the house fighter and Stadiums LTD star suffer a KO just as hes bringing in the big crowds. In the return the fight hadnt even started when Smith was DQd, he had never been DQd and never would again and was known for a remarkably clean and aesthetically pleasing style. Yet for some reason the Australians want us to believe that a guy who fought anyone and everyone all over the world was just so intimidated by Darcy (despite having done well against him previously) that he fouled out in under 6 minutes... Some reports accused Smith of having been paid off to lose (not the last time these rumors would follow a Darcy opponent, but tell the Australians that they dont want to hear anything about it even though those reports originate from their own newspapers). To add insult to injury Smith's purse was withheld by Stadiums. He sued and the resulting trial sheds a lot of light on the favoritism Darcy benefited from despite Smith losing his appeal. Smith returned home disgusted and rarely had anything kind to say about Darcy or Australians. He was still angry enough about the situation when Darcy arrived in the USA that he hounded him in the press doing everything he could to get another fight with him so he could knock him out. As for whether Darcy peaked or not we dont know. While most fighters dont peak at 21, there are at least as many that never realise the potential they show at that age. Its entirely within the realm of possibility that we saw the best Darcy had to offer. We do know he was putting on weight rapidly to the point that he weighed over 180 pounds or more when he arrived here. He was a short guy and in an era of same day weigh ins taking off that kind of weight regularly for a guy whose body isnt agreeing that youre a middleweight can wreak havoc on your potential and greatly shorten your career. Ive always maintained that Darcy has a lot of question marks around him, even what we know he did accomplish much less what he MIGHT have done had he lived. Its all enough for me to say he was an interesting footnote but I cant say he was one of the greatest ever. He might have been but I dont even rate him as the greatest MW during his short career.

Now for the inevitable assault from the Australian contingent which will be promptly ignored.

 

Smith v Carpentier is on French Pathe , but I'm sure you know that.

This content is protected

 

Personally I choose Sobers (the man was literally brilliant at everything at cricket, one of the best ever batsmen, brilliant fieldsman and could bowl spin, swing and pace all very well, he could even wicket keep) but Bradman is hands down the best bat ever and you could throw a blanket over half a dozen blokes including Sobers for next best.

 

That is an entirely reasonable position to take and one not accompanied by any jingoistic histrionics or abusive pm's:good