*Monzon - True or false, if he was American he'd be top 5 P4P all time?*

Monzons guys are clearly better, why do i get the feeling that you really dont know many of them. Emile griffith accomplished more at middleweight than hearns did, and you saying he beats griffith head to head is pure speculation. I can say that napoles woudl box durans ears off head to head, wait a minute, that would be the most likely result.

 

\
Monzon beat about 6 natural middleweights that would be abc beltholders in today's era, and he beat 2 great middleweights like valdez and benvenuti. He wouldnt fight his own friend galindez and from what i heard its conteh's management's fault as to why they didnt fight, so yeah monzon is not the king of fighting smaller guys if he beat about 6 good fighters in his own weight class. His resume is up there with benny leonard's imo. The only difference is that monzon reigned for 7 years and never lost in his prime.

 

Nope. Monzon title defences were mostly stronger. Hagler's pre-title opponents better. Griffith was a better middleweight than Hearns, that's obvious. Tommy's legs were gone after three mintues of the Hagler fight. I don't care how furious it was, that's not good.

 

Naploles was still regarded as the pfp #1 when Monzon beat him, Duran certainly wasn't when he fought Hagler.

 

Well, Valdez, Griffith and Benvenuti were more consitent middleweights than all of them, only Tommy ranks alongside those three at 160.

 

What about Frank 'the animal' Fletcher?

 

Ask redrooster, Frank le animarl would have beat Hearns, Valdez and Griffith all on the same night.

 

Damn straight he would have! Have you seen the animal in action? Thing of beauty. redrooster is a wise man

 

I have actually. I'm still astonished at the sheer amount of blood he left on the canvsas vs Roldan. The looks on Bo Derek's face at ringside are simply priceless.

 

Of course he would've beaten DLH and Duran at 160... both were former lightweights, and peaked between 135 and 147. DLH was rubbish at 160, Duran wasn't that much better. Leonard at 160 would give him a good fight, but wouldn't win. Stupid matchups. You are much better matching him with Hagler, Robinson, Hopkins, Walker, Tiger etc.

FWIW, I have him at number 2 at 160, but only top 20 P4P.

 

IMO Hagler has an argument of having a slightly better wins resume than Monzon only if you include the Ray Leonard fight as a win for him. I do, and still consider it pretty hard to split their resumes.

 

Sweet Pea,

Monzon beat better fighters then Hagler and i am a huge Hagler fan. Honestly Valdez is enough to beat anyone Hagler ever beat including Duran, Hearns and Leonard

 

Absolutely!! All the accolades Robinson gets should go to Monzon. Monzon would have whipped him. Monzon is the greatest P4P ever.

 

It isn't when concerning Monzon's reign. He had it tougher than Hagler. Better middleweights and fighting in another continent all the time.