MW Tournament Best Of Each Decade: MONZON 1971, HAGLER 1983, JONES 1993, HOPKINS 2001

Id pick Roy Jones to out point them all...I honestly think he was THAT GOOD!

 

I'd say over 12 rounds, I'd probably favour Roy over Hagler. Over 15, I'd favour Hagler over Hopkins. I actually think Hopkins could take Monzon, and I'm not sold on Jones being effective over 15.

 

Semifinals (seeded by p4p greatness)

1. Monzon
4. Hopkins Monzon UD

2. Hagler
3. Jones Jr. Jones UD

Finals

1. Monzon
2. Jones Jr. Jones close UD or MD

 

ofcourse there is none, but just because he has never done it doesnt mean he couldnt. Calzaghe and Pacman havnt done it either, but im pretty confident they could...

 

Id add Barrera, Calderon, Margo and dozens of others to the list...:bbb

 

Over 12

Jones beats Hopkins, Monzon and Hagler
Hagler would beat Monzon with Hopkins being 50/50
Monzon would beat Hopkins
Hopkins could would have a very close 50/50 fight with Hagler

Over 15

Hagler would have close fights with everybody but win them
I think Jones would still beat Hopkins and Monzon, but would lose to Hagler close
Monzon would beat Hopkins
Hopkins would lose close to them all.

 

Cheers for that Hagler footage, never seen that fight before.

Any MWT in history would struggle badly with the marvelous one, no question.

 

i'd take Roy as long as it's not a 15 rounder

 

Monzon beats these guys over 15 rounds.:good

 

Elvis is singing "Suspicious Minds" in my head. I'm supicious about half the posters on this thread.

Before answering the question it should be required that one has seen Monzon and Hagler (prime Hagler, not the faded 1985 version). Roy Jones had about 26 fights as a MW or thereabouts. He was about 25 when he stepped up to the Super middles and had made one defense of his IBF title. That is not enough of a pedigree to have him even mentioned in the same paragraph as Monzon and Hagler who had more than twice as many fights against superior competition. Jones whipped Hopkins and Castro. Who else? Is that experience enough to deal with the hell that Monzon brings and the high water that Hagler brings?

....And yet, Jones is easily the favorite on this thread. Why? I suspect that it is explained by two things: Jones' impressive domination of Hopkins, and as Sweet Pea argues, a dearth of first hand knowledge about the best of the modern MW Kings -Monzon and Hagler.

Jones was a stylist. He was difficult because of the athletic powers he brought which including demonically fast heavy hands and timing. He was not the technician that some believe, but that is no knock. He fought well in his own way which is what a stylist is. Jones had real weaknesses too, but it was tough to see them and for some who don't know better, it's even tougher to see them when you're blinded by flash and power. Futch wasn't and he designed a plan for Montell Griffin that would have paid off well had it been implemented by even a younger MW Mike McCallum. But Monzon and Hagler? They would have been too much for Jones. The assets that both had would see Jones move into defensive mode. Once that happens, Jones' potshots may not be enough for him to remain vertical at the end of the bout, never mind win a decision. This isn't 1987 Hagler we're talking about here!

....

Hagler is king in my book. He had strength that would serve him well against the very strong Monzon, but he also had an extremely complex and versatile style that was rooted in ambi-dexterity. He had a psychology that rivals Monzon's and is far superior to Jones'. And he had power and technique to back it up.

-Hagler beats Monzon though only barely.
-Hagler stops Jones late or takes a decision.
-Hagler may run into real problems with Hopkins who's brain rivals Leonard's but who had the requisite size and style that was reminiscent of Willie Monroe.

-Monzon stops Jones. He's going to force Jones to fight after looking bad for 3 rounds.
-Monzon will bull right through all of Hopkins' strategic plans and force him to fight too. Monzon will be too strong for both of them. The Pavlik fight gave me pause for about 10 seconds because Monzon appears to be similarly stand-up and one dimensional but Pavlik is only a poor man's Monzon.

-Jones beats Hopkins all day. Too much stylistics that defy accurate reading and it's coming on with serious power and speed.

 

I think Jones would win, none of the others had the speed to even think of contending with him and he did beat Hopkins easily. Hagler second (i think he would have beaten B-Hop in a classic, iconic showdown).

 

Monzon is a sound choice, and I don't want to sound imperialistic but that choice probably is an indication that you are more of an objective analyst and historian.

Again, too many posters on Classic and especially here on General just choose Jones for the same reason that they choose Tyson to whip every HW who ever lived: they get stars in their eyes from the film. Now, there are a few posters who have chosen Jones in these types of threads and I know for a fact that they are informed and objective and I respect that --even if I stridently disagree with them and will argue all night. I see MW Jones as too green and inexperienced to cope with Hagler and Monzon. Not only that but I don't think that Jones would pose unsolvable issues for either man. As a SMW he was more of a mature force, but his style could be overcome by ATGs who knew what they were doing.

Finally, I'd encourage you not to be so secure that Monzon would beat Hagler any more than I am confident that Hagler would beat Monzon!