What if Marvin Hagler had gotten a title shot in 1977?

Absolutely! Valdez was a tough hombre but I would have favored Hagler in that fight.

 

I'm with a Hagler win all the way, but by clear decision mind you. I think Valdez may have had enough left to make a fight out of it, but I think after 5 or 6 rounds Valdez would just get brutalized, it might have to be stopped on second thought in the later rounds. If Hagler reigned from '77 to '87, I would put Hagler up above Monzon.

 

Hagler was green in 1977 . Monzón would have kicked his ass in 1977 and prime vs prime too .

 

In all fairness, I think that Marvelous Marvin Hagler wins the vacant World Middleweight title in Italy, on Nov 5 1977, Rodrigo Valdes would have met Marvelous Marvin Hagler instead of Bad Bennie Briscoe in that match, (Briscoe suffers an injury while sparring). Rodrigo Valdes was a spent fighter following his two brutal wars against Carlos Monzon in 1976 and 1977. But still, he was a former WBC champion. Fpr this fight, Harry Gibbs of Great Britain would be the referee. Hagler would be very cautious in the early going, keeping his distance, using that snappy right jab to keep a yet dangerous Valdes at bay. By mid fight Rodrigo's face would begin to swell as it did both times against Monzon. Though, Valdes would counter Marvelous when he came into range and tag him with that ever so dangerous right hand, even rocking Marvin at times. By round 15, Valdes realizing that he is behind on points rattles Hagler again with another solid right hand, Hagler holds, then pins Rodrigo in a corner startling an exhausted Rodrigo with combinations to close the show. The Italian announcer gives the verdict over the loudspeaker, all three judges cast their vote for the new World Middleweight Champion of The World, Marvelous Marvin Hagler. Valdes offers his congratulations to the victor, Carlos Monzon climbs into the ring to shake hands with the new champion. Carlos then puts the belt around Hagler's waist. This fight was shown on The CBS Sports Spectacular,Tim Ryan and Jerry Quarry were the commentator's.

 

Monzón was the champion until he retired in 1977

 

Thank you, I saw the Valdes vs Briscoe III, on Nov 5 1977, was the same day that Norton fought Jimmy Young, but the Valdes fight was earlier in the day. Briscoe looked on the verge of winning it in the later rounds, Valdes looked spent with his mouth hanging open.

 

Nov 7 1970 until Aug 29 1977, when he announced his retirement, 14 successful title defenses.

 

Monzon had had four fights in three years in 1977. The same year, Hagler fought Willie Monroe twice and Roy Jones. The previous year he had fought Seales, Watts (albeit a disputed loss) and Cyclone Hart among others. He was taking on better opposition. If Hagler was still green in 1977, Monzon was going mouldy.

I can't really comment on Monzon as I don't enjoy his fights and I don't watch them. To me he is slow, predictable, very hittable. But he kept winning and you can't argue with that. But, in his prime, he struggled to convincingly beat a 37 year old Emile Griffith. That bodes very badly for him kicking Hagler's ass prime for prime and even more badly for him kicking his ass in 1977 when he (Monzon) was on the slide.

Anyway, the OP asked how he would have fared against Rodrigo Valdez so not sure what Monzon has to do with the debate.

 

With all due respect, I think that it might have to do with Carlos Monzon defeating Rodrigo Valdes twice in 1976 and 1977. Valdes did look shopworn by the two brutal wars with Monzon by 1977. Valdes did not look overly impressive in winning the vacant World Middleweight Title in Italy. But To each their own,

 

Monzón has to do here everything what my balls want. And he would beat any version of Hagler

 

Not sure you know quite what you said there but, essentially (and I'm not twisting your words here) you just said 'Monzon must do whatever my balls desire'. Now, I'm wondering what you meant. Was it, as it appears, a homo-erotic reference? I initially thought that. Let's be honest, with an avatar that shows you forcing a man to keep his head between your legs along with your long standing 'interest' in George Foreman's body, you do strongly give out that vibe.

Then I realised it was likely a comment that acknowledged a reasonable response to one of your own brainfarts and, rather than try to debate meaningfully, you decided to just be offensive. And so, rather than discuss boxing and boxers sensibly and respectfully as you might expect on a boxing forum, we end up trading insults from the safety of our keyboards, a familiar scenario for you where you feel comfortable. Silly me for ever thinking that might not be what you were doing. It's what you do. It's what you've done for nearly ten years in your various usernames.

Don't you find it boring? I know I do.