Marvin Haggler in hth middleweight matchups

You are selling Hagler short if you think Monzon easily beats him. It also probably wouldn't resemble the 2nd briscoe fight because Hagler was always a better fighter than Briscoe..

 

Of course Hagler is better than Briscoe but they have very similar style(small middle weights, great stamina, power left hands, elite chins). Styles make fights

 

I would still favor Hagler against the majority of the boxers that you listed, do to the fact that may of them came to be greater fighters after the moved up from middleweight. Jones, Moore, and Charles to be exact. There isn't enough footage for me to favor Greb or Burley over him, I think he outboxes Lamotta as well. I'll be honest enough to say I haven't seen enough of Walker to make an assumption, and when it comes to Robinson I think they could very likely trade wins. That leaves Monzon as the only sure fire candidate in my opinion.

 

not really.

you are making the mistake of thinking that Hagler is a 1 dimensional slugger like Briscoe was.

Briscoe isn't even in the same class. You think Monzon will just 100% control Hagler with his jab? I don't think so.

 

Oh so if I differ with you ,I would be making in your word "excuses". ? So here is the facts sir. Harry Greb , beat Flowers the first time, and by the time Greb lost 2 controversial decisions to Flowers in 1926 Harry Greb with over 290 fights, yes I said TWO HUNDRED AND NINETY FIGHTS was a SHOT fighter, a shell of himself who retired immediately...How sir do you think Marvin Hagler would have fared if he had fought another 225 fights
against LHs and HWs, and with one eye. ? And to quote you sir, "no excuses"...?

 

Hagler had more going for him than Bennie, but Monzon beats him just the same....and not easily either. I'm a huge Monzon fan, yet I never have implied that beating Hagler would be easy. When ever Hagler fought a guy who he respected too much, like Duran or Leonard, Hagler wasn't at his indomitable best. Duran took advantage of Hagler's unusual relative hesitation and resolve...enough to make it an interesting fight....closer than anyone ever thought it would be...and this perception of a closer than expected fight was exacerbated by Tommy Hearn's easy blowout of Duran. Hagler should have won more decisively than he did. Vs Leonard, and taking in consideration that Marvin had seen better days, his ring generalship was in question more than anything else. A "Should I fight southpaw or should I not?" kinda thing was going on, like SRL was playing with Marvin's head or something. Regardless of who you think won that fight,....and I called it a draw, ...a clever, thinking fighter like Leonard had Marvin thrown off a bit. Again, a bit of "over respect" at fault from Hagler. No other challengers of Hagler's could match Duran and Leonard in terms of craftiness. Hearns was the only other elite challenger of Hagler's that was the exception to the rule....Hagler was uniquely disposed to overwhelm Tommy, despite Hearn's certain physical advantages.
Carlos Monzon was a GREAT middleweight champion who didn't lose a fight in his last 13 years of his career. Monzon didn't have the same power and style, but had height and reach advantages like Hearns, only a much, much better ring IQ and a far superior chin and recooperative powers than Tommy. More than anything else I think, was Monzon's almost unnatural cool, his calmness. This coupled with the reach, IQ and world class 15 round stamina, I have always believed that he would have discombobulated Hagler enough, when it counted, to win a hard fought, fairly close decision of 15. No one fought tall better than Monzon, even the taller Hearns, and no one ever navigated the 15 round distance any better than Carlos.

 

Monzon would have succeeded in frustrating Hagler...he would have been effective at tying up Marvin when it was necessary and he was every bit as strong, if not stronger than Marvin, despite that long, gangling build of his. Left jabs, one-twos and the occasional hard right hand...sort of a "**** off" type of deal, as McGrain once put it, would have been the simple, but effective tools used by the Argentine to accomplish winning the decision. Monzon was highly unusual for a Latin fighter in that he wasn't ruled by emotion in his fighting style.

 

Hagler was my favorite MW of all time...Being from New England that's no surprise but I don't see him as unbeatable. If Marvin fought all of the previous greats he would lose some of course but overall he would come out on top I believe. No fighter is unbeatable but some are harder to beat than others and Hagler was one of those fighters. The only other ATG MWs I would favor in a battle with him are Robinson and Greb.....but it wouldn't be a walk in the park for either of them.

 

Is Bennie a southpaw who frequently works a right jab?


looks like you ****yzed this wrong but you are right, styles make fights, and Hagler, moving to Monzon's left, would score with his jab while making Monzon miss with his jab

what's Monzon got left to hit?

In addition, Hagler's faster, sharper, more versatile and every bit the stylist Monzon was plus every bit the body puncher Monzon wasn't

 

I have no way of knowing so I cant say. nobody does

but to repeat my first question, have you ever seen him fight and if so, what was his style like? and if not, how do you know his losses to Flowers were bad decisions?

 

Well he's not going to counter punch Monzon and he's not going to box him from the outside, so yeah against Monzon, Hagler would be a 1 dimensional slugger like Briscoe.

 

Jesus christ you really dont respect Hagler's skills at all, do you? As good and effective as Monzon's jab was, Hagler had an ATG jab of his own and would not just be easily outpointed on the outside. Imo Hagler wins a decision. For sure. It may be close as Monzon was always very conditioned and had a good work rate. But i think hagler's skillset would be beyond anything monzon ever seen.

Remember that Hagler was a boxer puncher, outside fighter first and a slugger second. Monzon would not just boss around hagler like he did briscoe. It wouldnt be anything like that fight. Hagler was not only much more creative than Briscoe, but he was more consistent, better on the outside, quicker on his feet and just a better overall fighter. I am honestly shocked with the simple and idiotic comparison.

 

Frim recent times, I think Hopkins and Jones would beat him. And Ward at 168. Calzaghe would be a toss-up although I hate to say it.

 

I completely agree with that.

Hagler is more consistant than Briscoe but still had his fair share of mental lapses, he is better on the outside than Briscoe but still no where near good enough to out box Monzon on the outside, he is quicker on his feet than Briscoe but still very slow compared to Monzon. But the point is Hagler and Briscoe do have a very similar style with similar attributes and would fight Monzon the same way.

Also saying Hagler had an ATG jab is laughable. His jab was solid but no where near ATG.

 

How do I know if Greb's loss to Flowers was a bad decision ?
I have been following boxing many moons and it was a very controversial decision and besides that was not the "real" Harry Greb in there but a tired, shopworn old fighter with THREE HUNDRED fights under his belt...Like a car with one million miles and ready for the junk heap...