Fair points - Although it's worth noting that Benvenuti was not a million miles away from Monzon, in terms of physical dimensions. Naturally, Monzon/McCallum is a different match-up, with a different set of challenges, but that doesn't take away from the quality of Monzon's wins over either Griffith and Benvenuti, which is why I brought them into the discussion, initially. Like I say, McCallum could well be considered the better win (for Kalambay). McCallum/Benvenuti is a pick 'em bout, for mine. So, I see McCallum on roughly a par with Benvenuti, in terms of the level of challenge posed to Monzon. All of that aside - Does Monzon fall into Kalambay's fight, as did McCallum? I find it hard to imagine Kalambay having anywhere near the success McCallum afforded him, against Monzon.
Absolutely and it's also worth noting Nino was comfortably on the decline by the time he fought Monzon. Yes they were quality wins for sure tho i still rate Sumbu's win over McCallum a little higher. I was surprised you didn't mention Rodrigo when talking best quality wins as i consider him a better win than either of those two. I like McCallum personally and if pitted against the version that Monzon actually beat I'd favor him clearly. A year prior Nino had struggled with a declined Luis Rodriguez despite a very lenient hometown referee and was countered often. I just see McCallum as a better fighter than Nino. It wouldn't be an issue as i don't see Monzon Struggling as much as McCallum vs that particular style. Agreed. He'd be slippery and awkward but Monzon would draw him in and bang away with that excellent variety of punches and counters. If he had to he would also move forward and pressure him. I think Kalambay would be a decent chance of going the distance.
I was thinking more in terms of Griffith demonstrating his ability to overcome Nino's size advantages. On Benvenuti being on the other side of his peak against Monzon, you're right. The question of how 'comfortably' over the hill he was is another matter, though. The Valdez wins are certainly my favorites and could quite probably be considered Monzon's best wins, given where Carlos was in his career, at this point. They were great victories to retire on. I perhaps hold Monzon's wins over Benvenuti and Griffith higher than most others do. I was also looking at this from an ATG Middleweight stature perspective, in response to Kalambay's win over McCallum, rather than the fights themselves. An oversight on my part, perhaps. Fair enough. When you take where Benvenuti was in his career, by then, into consideration I can take your point. Although, I wouldn't necessarily agree that McCallum was a better fighter than Nino. Agreed. It was interesting to watch McCallum maintain his desire to go at close quarters, rarely attempting to establish an offensive position at range. This suited the slightly shorter-framed Kalambay, whose countering and movement, off the McCallum offensive, was just too consistent to for him to be nailed down. No such joy with Monzon, I suspect. That's how I see it. The distance over 12 is doable for Kalambay, depending on how successful he can be during the early to mid stages of the bout and how much punishment he can take from Monzon, along the way. I think it ends in a desperate situation for him, in any event.
Kalamby was a terrific fighter .. the Nunn fight was a bit of a fluke and the only time he lost by KO in close to 60 fights .. he was a very fast, very tricky, decent punching natural 160 pounder .. Monzon still had advantages in height and reach but I feel that Kalamby had the style , speed and strength as a natural middleweight to give him a terrific match, better than an older Griffith did for sure ..,
I thought McCallum had some awesome wins of his own going into the fight so yes, Sumbu's win over Mike was much better than a win over a Bennie Briscoe, or the others
15 rounds is a long time to spend in the ring with Monzon. It's not that he did anything especially magical. His fights are actually, for the most part, underwhelming. However his ring generalship and control of range were magnificent. Obviously he had defense and power, it just wasn't in spades; certainly, he did nothing to "wow" the audience. That kind of control and applied strategy, however, meant he made the most of the time given and worked out his opponents problems. Kalambay was an entirely different fighter, though. He was bigger and defensively-minded. Instead of waging in like everyone else, he would sit back and pick his shots. Carlos liked to lead, Kalambay would deny him that. Carlos enjoyed considerable size advantage over opponents, Kalambay would deny him that. The Nunn fight is a black mark on Kalambay's career, but Nunn was a tremendous fighter. He had his demons outside the ring, and he was not a perfectly polished fighter. He seemed committed to relying on his natural talents and the skills that had brought him to the top, rather than refining himself further and developing new ones. That keeps him from being remembered as an ATG. But Nunn was one of the very best of all-time. On par with Carlos for sure. Obviously he lacked the professionalism and passion for greatness that made Carlos one of the ring's finest. I just cannot see why citing the Nunn fight in any way disparages Kalambay. In that era the smaller gloves, extra rounds, and judges' penchant for punishing defense-first fighters makes me think Carlos pulls out the win no matter what. And I cannot see him failing to connect with Kalambay's chin, which might have been just short of world class. Also, while his boxing was indeed world class, it is slightly overrated. It's not like we are sending a Middleweight version of Willie Pep or Mayweather into the ring with Monzon.
Again and again, a fighter can only fight the best fighters of their era's, not from the future or past. So Nino Benvenuti was a nobody? The same can be said about Emile Griffith, Tony Mundine, Bad Bennie Briscoe, Jose Mantequilla Napoles, and Rodrigo Valdes, Twice. You are in love with near current fighters. I have been watching boxing since 1965, so McCallum and Michael Nunn were better?, neither retired as champion, Carlos did.
I really like your synopsis, true Carlos did nothing special, but bottom line, he knew how to win, and got the job done, he was not a boastful whiney flashy fighter, he usually fought in Europe and South America, displaying his winning ways to the World.
Yeah, he did a lot of things that folks today just cannot appreciate. I really believe he's one of the fighters who moved the sport forward. There's fighters fans look to as idols. Then there's fighters that trainers look to as exemplars to model their charges after. Carlos was clearly the latter.
Not on McCallum's level. Napoles, really? Briscoe was a perennial contender. Valdez is Monzon's greatest win. You can have your argument for ATG ranking at MW but H2H there is nothing to suggest Monzon would stop Sumbu or even beat him.
There's plenty of film evidence. So, given McCallum is Kalambay's best win, what comparison is there between McCallum and Monzon, in terms of their style and tactics? What could Kalambay capitalize on against Monzon in the same way he did against McCallum?
Answering a question with a question... ...That's ok, I can understand why you might find it difficult to explain the advantages Kalambay has over Monzon and how he can use them to win. I've already been clear in that I don't think Kalambay brings anything new to Monzon's table. So, let me know when you can put a case together for Sumbu, which doesn't rest entirely on his win over McCallum.
Michael Nunn at 6' 2", a southpaw with a 77" reach and all kinds of talented when focused , at his best would be a nightmare for Carlos ..
