what if monzon...

funny you should say that.. ive just finished reading the book, based upon the danish fighter tom bogs career. and off course his fight with monzon is mentioned.

bogs said that, monzon had the attitude of a champion and knew his own worth, which he also translated into a quite arrogant personality.

but whats even funnier and which really "proves" his arrogance even moreso was, that prior to the match, at the weigh in if i recall correctly, bogs told monzon, if you beat me, this is yours, referring to his gold necklass with gold gloves attached to..

after the fight, they went to an event, bogs sitting with his friends and monzon calmly walked over, looked at bogs and said, i believe this is mine, pointing at the golden jewelery hanging around bogs neck, took it, and walked away.. now thats cool and quite arrogant behaviour, but funny ****:good

 

Monzon was a beast, plain and simple.

His reign started with a one-sided beating over Benvenuti in front of a biased crowd and he ended it nearly 7 years later with a controlled war over Rodrigo Valdez.

His only real smudge was against Griffith in the rematch, but it was a close fight, not an injustice. Other than that episode, Monzon travelled all over the globe to manhandle and batter anyone who contested him.

Monzon did not play up to the crowd or have that silky appearance, but he worked hard, played the clever shots, ate all shots and chewed you up. The right hand changed in pace and angle sporadically to eventually find all opposition.

When Monzon lost a step after a few years of his reign, mainly speed, he concentrated more on playing the clever shots and found different ways to grind you down to a halt. Napoles exploited ways to get inside, but Monzon was a brick wall, not hurried in the least to react to the Cuban's close efforts until he casually started to punch him all over the ring.

To answer the original question, yes, Monzon would be as revered at 160lbs as Robinson is at 147lbs if he had been American.

 

Is that the "Ted Spoon" from CBZ?

 

He won against a "tough guy" in Valdez? He beat the best MW of his era outside of himself and one that would've given most MW's hell if not beaten them. He'd have likely beaten every MW on Hagler's resume. And like you mentioned, he was past his prime.

And Nino didn't quit in the rematch, his corner threw in the towel to his protest. That's like saying Chico quit against Floyd.

 

Monzon really was a badass, in the ring as well as out.

 

So Pernell, where do you rate the immortal Hugo Corro who easily outboxed Valdez right after? Is he an all time great as well ? :bbb

 

Superb lil article as usual but i disagree here. I think he'd be just below. SRR was lauded by so very many as a near perfect fighting machine and oozed class, speed, power - the lot. Oh, charisma too. Not only was he the greatest but he also had all the flash to go with it. Monzon by comparison was not as flash or incredibly complete and well rounded. As effective maybe, but i think you get my point.

No doubt he would have been classed as the greatest 160 ever high and wide, but i think he still would have sat one rung below Robinson.

 

That may be the biggest pile of uneducated ignorant pish i've ever seen. I don't know where to start.

 

He's done it in the Michael Spinks thread too

 

Why not start with actual responses? A little harder than slinging insults perhaps ?

Was Griffith old ? Yes.

Was Monzon in his own prime against Valdez at 35 or 36 ? No.

Was Napolez a blown up lightweight ? Yes.

Was Nino a playboy who lacked the long term dedication to maximize his legitimate skills. Yes .

Was Licata a championship caliber fighter? No.

My point is not to rip Monzon who I like and view as an all time great. My point is that I wished there was more tape on him against a lager assortment of guys available so that I could just see how great. That was the point based on the thread. If he were American there would likely be far more footage of this man around for those who did not see him live to anaylize his career.

Back to you Smitty...which of my assessments of Carlos oponents mentioned is false? :bbb

 

There's plenty of tape.All of his title challengers were good fighters, the worst being Licata who was more nondescript than bad.Certainly he was better than most of Hopkins challengers.

Of cours, the casual fan will not know much about these fighters outside of Benvenuti and Griffith and become easily dismissive to hide gaps in knowledge.That's their problem.

 

Please tell me how this hurts Monzon that he was able to beat one of the best MW's of the era twice even while past his prime? That should say something about how good he actually was in his prime more than anything.

 

Benvenuti was actually distraught when the towel was thrown in and had the faculties to kick the towel out of the ring almost before it landed. That's far from quitting. It seems almost certain that Monzon would have stopped him anyway, but he DID NOT quit.

 

On Sugar Ray Robinson, this is my opinion as well...
I feel Monzon's size, strength, and mostly his boxing IQ make him a very hard man to beat at 160lbs. Three/Four middleweights at their very best may have been able to. Robinson,Hagler, Greb and possibly Jones Jr. But Roy might not have had the experience to win at 15 rounds against a grinder like Carlos. Monzon can be considered as the best at the weight for his consistancy...
Monzon's oppositon? The names are respectable but honestly at what point were they in their careers at the time they faced Monzon? Let's be realistic, I think it's evident by their records that they were not at their best...

Benvenuti?
Clearly in decline and ready to be taken. Losing to a badly faded Dick Tiger and Tom Bethea. Benvenuti was still champ, but was he the same man who beat Griffith two of three? I don't think so. Nino is consistantly underated at his best though.

Napoles?
A great fighter who was simply overmatched due to the size differential. Despite that difference, Napoles fought as he always did, staying in the pocket, at close range looking to capitalize on an opponent's mistakes. Suicide against a larger, extremely accurate puncher in Monzon.

Griffith?
A great fighter in his 13th or 14th year as a professional fighter at the time he fought Monzon. The first fight was an excellent exhibition from Monzon, the second Grifftith fought cleverly, using angles in a very difficult fight to score. Was Griffith at or near his peak? At 36 y/o?

I don't take Monzon's opposition lightly, but I do not feel Monzon faced anywhere near the best versions of Benvenuti, Griffith, or Napoles. Is that Monzon's fault? No. Would it have made any difference if he had faced better versions of Benvenuti,Griffith, or Napoles? No. But I feel the fights against Benvenuti and Griffith would have been harder though. Napoles being the much smaller man, and the wrong style for Monzon, would never contend against him.

 

You are looking to rip without reading what I have said, here or in the Spinks column.

I clearly have been saying Monzon was a great middlweight. I simply say I don't know how great based on who he fought and not a ton of fights on tape. The thread questions if he would be rated differently if he were an American and I say there would be more tape to judge him by. That qualifies as ignorant pish by a bunch of hard ons because they have been posting here for years? Please. Why not read what a guy writes, reflect on the thread and allow different opinions. Those who do not allow for opinions other than their own are ignorant.

In addition, I asked you to back you tude with selective responses and have received none ... still waiting ...