Second greatest Central/South American boxer?

i voted chavez

i just think he has the best achievments out of the four he went 91 fights unbeaten 2 weight champion and he was a great boxer aswell as a power house

 

Probably monzon,however,as truely great as he is (best 160 man of them all IMO.) i dont think he is as good a fighter overall as duran.His dominant lightweight reign coupled with Beating ray leonard,barkley and going 15 with peak hagler as a natural 135er trumps anything monzon did,i think thats pretty clear for anyone to see...

 

:good

 

First of all, I'm not telling you why you rate Duran higher than Monzon. I'm aware that you have reasons of your own in determining your assessment of Duran, but since you mention it, why is so almighty important for a fighter to be a division jumper in determining greatness? By your reasoning then, Marvin Hagler and Bob Foster were also "inferior" champions because they too stayed put in their one division and cleaned them out. Both of them faced guys too who were "not capable" of dominating them either. When a guy stays in a single division and runs up an impressive string of defenses, and is a DOMINANT champion, it may make it seem like the guys he beat were all "unable to dominate" that particular champion.

 

Red,both duran and monzon had tremendous reigns at their best weights and dominated. Both never lost or drew a single title fight in their natural weights. So on that score they were pretty equal.
Buchanan and de jesus were durans best wins their,monzons were probably nino,valdez and griffith,so still reasonably equal,maybe monzon ahead. Now factor in robertos FANTASTIC exploits above 135 and we have a clear winner. Dominant one weight champs like hagler and monzon can be better than multi weight guys of course,but when the man in question has a very dominant reign at one single weight himself then your view doesnt wash....
Finally,durans win over leonard really blows any monzon win clean out of the window,not to mention barkley and going 15 with peak hagler,probaly equivalent to monzon beating spinks,vasiliy jirov and going 15 with cruiser holyfield.....
And im a huge monzon fan.....

 

Quite to the contary I often say how weight-jumping can cloud people's judgements. When a fighter moves weights and constantly takes risks (Duran, Sweet Pea) i.e fights the best the division has to offer, then it's a worthwhile escapade. When fighters take on the easier fights at the weight merely to gain more baubles (i.e Floyd, who I do think is great nonetheless) then iy can show that the fighter is generally good, not just dominant of fighters of the same size.

In Monzon's case, his best wins (or indeed most notable names) were really Napoles and Griffith. Unlike Hearns and Leonard, Napoles did not look like he needed to go up in weight. He was at a disadvantage over someone not only as big, but as brilliant as Monzon. The same cannot be said for Hagler in fighting smaller guys as they proved they could mvoe up succesfully.

I just think Monzon would've stamped his authority as one of the top 5-10 ATG if he'd fought someone where his physical advantages would not mean as much, as Alexis Arguello did, eventually fighting at 10 stone.

I'm not flaming you, I think you have made some valid points, just want to show you my end of the story :good

 

Well stated. We both have valid points, though from different points of view. At least these are both top-class, all-time fighters we're talking about and not some second raters posing as greats.

 

of course, and debate is why we're here my friend :good

 

Roberto Duran shouldn't even be the unquestioned choice for the greatest Panamanian fighter of all-time, nevermind for the whole Latin American continent.

Al Brown was a master boxer, a genius of a fighter. He looks phenomenally gifted on the surviving films, and his record speaks for itself.

Too many great fighters for us to fall into the mistake of assuming or wanting any sort of consensus. IMO.

 

Carlos Monzon.