Hearns vs. Monzon

[laxpdx]

I pick Monzon, but........

[redrooster]

I wouldn't put money on this one.

[achillesthegreat]

Monzon is given ABSOLUTE HELL but I'm guessing the consensus will be he realises the trouble, turns it on and looks for the stoppage.

[bumdujour]

this is a bad match stylisticly for monzon. he is the sturdier.......but hearns has the skills to outbox him and the power to keep him at bay.

but in 15 rounds i think monzon can slow him down and beat him down in round 14. but hearns would be ahead on points.

[Bad_Intentions]

tough match up.

monzon would give hearns trouble in a couple of rounds, but i see hearns taking this one. UD

[Street Lethal]

I pick Hearns, too, but this would be a very tough fight for him.

[Bummy Davis]

Monzon was a more solid middleweight but he would get hit a few times,Carlos had solid chin

[Manassa]

Carlos Monzon? Slow, methodical, predictable, somehow effective.

No.

That was the Monzon of '75, '76, '77. If you watch a peak Monzon from around 1970, it's much more obvious why he was so good - strong, active, heavy handed, rough, offensive - even athletic.

As Monzon's career wore on and he became a bit less concerned with training, he became slower and more calculated. This is the man who was still great enough to pick apart Rodrigo Valdez, but this was a different version from the young terror who brutalized Nino Benvenuti.

In his title winning days and around that time, Monzon was more aggressive (though he boxed passively and excellently against Bennie Briscoe) - especially against taller opponents, or ones that equalled him in height or boxing ability.

Against Hearns, we could probably lay money on the fact Monzon would press the action. His aim would be literally to smack the life out of Hearns with the right hand; his attacks would come in the form of aggressive one-twos, with a bit of strong jabbing in between, and the odd bit of inside work.

I think Hearns would catch Monzon a fair bit at the start, but he wouldn't have the firepower to take Monzon out, who took some hellish shots in his career but was never felled for the full count. A windmill right hand from Valdez, that was as hard as any middleweight punch Hearns ever delivered, decked Monzon for a fleeting second. It was right on the button, but that's all Valdez, a notorious hitter, could manage. Monzon was up in the blink of an eye and continued to fight his fight, treating Valdez with his usual disdain.

And this is precisely where the two differ the most - Hearns was courageous when hurt and there was always a sense he could pull something out of the bag, but with Monzon, there was a sense of impending doom; you knew you couldn't take him out, you knew you couldn't fluster him, and you knew he wanted your head on a spike. Monzon didn't fight bravely when hurt, he just fought as he always did. Maliciously and malevolently.

Hearns would fight gallantly as always and probably even outbox Monzon for portions of the fight, but would soon be weakened by Monzon's debilitating attack from both inside and out. Monzon's sheer strength, for which he was renowned for, heavy handedness and imposing mentality would almost certainly take its toll on the spindly Hearns, who was never known as particularly durable.

Hearns would likely give Monzon something big to think about, and he might even achieve something out of the ordinary - like cutting Monzon or dropping him for a second, but even in these stages we would always know who the boss is, as the ever-sinister and blank expression of Monzon constrasts with the aggressive but somehow hopeful look on Hearns' face.

Hearns would be stopped, I'm sure of that. It's a question of when - I say Monzon needs a few more rounds to do it than Marvin Hagler since he's not as explosive, but he gets the job done as usual. Monzon TKO10.

[redrooster]

Very well thought out post Manassa with plenty of backup and totally believable yet lacking tha bias of a SuzieQ argument.

[brooklyn1550]

Monzon late TKO

[Manassa]

Very well thought out post Manassa with plenty of backup and totally believable yet lacking tha bias of a SuzieQ argument.

Thank you - talking of Nick, where is he?

[Sonny Carson]

Tommy Hearns is one of my favorite fighter's but Monzon knocks Tommy out late.

[Executioner]

Monzon beats him down late after getting outboxed for a couple rounds.

[redrooster]

Thank you - talking of Nick, where is he?

I cant say I know MM. I'm more concerned with getting H. Hank, Mr. Writer and PI back on the board.

[Seamus]

Hearns fragility would ultimately be exposed in the middle to latter rounds but somewhere before Monzon would have to prove his world class whiskers and recuperative powers. Still, at middleweight, I pick Monzon over Hearns 8 or 9 times out of 10.

[tgchungmj]

Hearns and Monzon are in different level at least at middleweight division. Hearns cannot avoid being knocked out.

Monzon has a really solid chin. He rose up again very quickly after being knocked down by horrible puncher Valdez.

Monzon has no difficulty in dealing with so simplistic style boxing of Hearns' It is possible Monzon has a difficulty in early rounds because Hearns is very fast, but it is only until before 7 or 8 rounds. Monzon was best at making the game at his will. At least at middleweight, Hearns will surely be knocked out by Monzon in the late rounds.

At jab and cross-(especially timing and making chances), Monzon is better than Hearns.

[heerko koois]

this is a bad match stylisticly for monzon. he is the sturdier.......but hearns has the skills to outbox him and the power to keep him at bay.

but in 15 rounds i think monzon can slow him down and beat him down in round 14. but hearns would be ahead on points.

deja vu

[Marciano Frazier]

Carlos Monzon? Slow, methodical, predictable, somehow effective.

No.

That was the Monzon of '75, '76, '77. If you watch a peak Monzon from around 1970, it's much more obvious why he was so good - strong, active, heavy handed, rough, offensive - even athletic.

As Monzon's career wore on and he became a bit less concerned with training, he became slower and more calculated. This is the man who was still great enough to pick apart Rodrigo Valdez, but this was a different version from the young terror who brutalized Nino Benvenuti.

In his title winning days and around that time, Monzon was more aggressive (though he boxed passively and excellently against Bennie Briscoe) - especially against taller opponents, or ones that equalled him in height or boxing ability.

Against Hearns, we could probably lay money on the fact Monzon would press the action. His aim would be literally to smack the life out of Hearns with the right hand; his attacks would come in the form of aggressive one-twos, with a bit of strong jabbing in between, and the odd bit of inside work.

I think Hearns would catch Monzon a fair bit at the start, but he wouldn't have the firepower to take Monzon out, who took some hellish shots in his career but was never felled for the full count. A windmill right hand from Valdez, that was as hard as any middleweight punch Hearns ever delivered, decked Monzon for a fleeting second. It was right on the button, but that's all Valdez, a notorious hitter, could manage. Monzon was up in the blink of an eye and continued to fight his fight, treating Valdez with his usual disdain.

And this is precisely where the two differ the most - Hearns was courageous when hurt and there was always a sense he could pull something out of the bag, but with Monzon, there was a sense of impending doom; you knew you couldn't take him out, you knew you couldn't fluster him, and you knew he wanted your head on a spike. Monzon didn't fight bravely when hurt, he just fought as he always did. Maliciously and malevolently.

Hearns would fight gallantly as always and probably even outbox Monzon for portions of the fight, but would soon be weakened by Monzon's debilitating attack from both inside and out. Monzon's sheer strength, for which he was renowned for, heavy handedness and imposing mentality would almost certainly take its toll on the spindly Hearns, who was never known as particularly durable.

Hearns would likely give Monzon something big to think about, and he might even achieve something out of the ordinary - like cutting Monzon or dropping him for a second, but even in these stages we would always know who the boss is, as the ever-sinister and blank expression of Monzon constrasts with the aggressive but somehow hopeful look on Hearns' face.

Hearns would be stopped, I'm sure of that. It's a question of when - I say Monzon needs a few more rounds to do it than Marvin Hagler since he's not as explosive, but he gets the job done as usual. Monzon TKO10. I agree. I just watched a couple rounds of Monzon against Napoles, then against Benvenuti, and Monzon seemed noticeably faster and sharper in the latter outing(and by the way, Howard Cosell was stunningly biased towards Benvenuti). I think a lot of people have in their minds the picture of the older Monzon(who I think would actually probably do all right anyway) when they discuss him in these kinds of match-ups. He's not so ponderous at all in his early title days.

[Titan1]

Monson would wear Hearns down en route to an 11th round ko.

[JIm Broughton]

Tough one to call in my opinion. Hearns would certainly be the biggest and most powerful opponennt Monzon ever faced that's for sure. Carlos usually had the luxury of facing men who were smaller than him which allowed Monzon to land his bombs from a distance. He would'nt have that luxury against Hearns. Carlos would also have to deal with Tommy's speed which was impressive for a someone as big as Hearns and probably better than any of Monzon's opponents. Hearns also had a great jab which I'm sure he would employ with annoying frequency against Carlos in an effort to set up a booming right hand. Monzon had a good chin but if a small man like Valdez could drop him then a big fast powerful man like Hearns could drop him as well. I think the deciding factor in this fight would be the whiskers or chin and Carlos has the edge here, If he can survive an early onslaught by Tommy and bring him into the later rounds then I think he takes Hearns out late in the fight but it's no cakewalk. Carlos will have to step up the pace some and back Tommy up. He won't be able to dictate the pace as easily as he is used to doing against smaller opposition and he will have to deal with Hearn's considerable reach, boxing skills and power. Still I think Monzon would probably take it via late stoppage but I would'nt put any money on this one. Strictly a gentleman's bet.

[Ezzard]

I love Hearns but Monzon would systematically break him up. Monzon is an elite MW. Tommy, as much as I love him, was just a very good one.

[hdog]

Monzon is just too tough and when Tommy goes it's not gonna be pretty.

[dpw417]

I'm going with the consensus on this one...15 rounds is a long time for Tommy to coexist with Monzon...I believe Hearns would create problems for Carlos with his speed and power...Hearns would come at Monzon harder than any of his title defenses...It's true that Valdez was devastating, but he was often nonchalant with his approach...Hearns could come at him alot faster and with very comparable power...Monzon may take some punishment in this one...But you always have to question Hearns' durability, you never can question Monzon's durability...Hearns did win a couple of light heavy baubles, one against a good champion in Virgil Hill who had an excellent left jab...Hearns used his own jab to spear Hill allnight...So that must be considered...
But I feel that Monzon reels him in late in the fight.
Monzon TKO 14
One thing I've noticed with Monzon that I want to bring up...It's true he did punish his opponents with accumulative damage, but he did not appear to have devastating power....He caught the smaller Napoles with flush right hands and could not put the stationary welterweight down!

[BUDW]

Carlos late KO

[Lefty Supremacy]

I'm going with the consensus on this one...15 rounds is a long time for Tommy to coexist with Monzon...I believe Hearns would create problems for Carlos with his speed and power...Hearns would come at Monzon harder than any of his title defenses...It's true that Valdez was devastating, but he was often nonchalant with his approach...Hearns could come at him alot faster and with very comparable power...Monzon may take some punishment in this one...But you always have to question Hearns' durability, you never can question Monzon's durability...Hearns did win a couple of light heavy baubles, one against a good champion in Virgil Hill who had an excellent left jab...Hearns used his own jab to spear Hill allnight...So that must be considered...
But I feel that Monzon reels him in late in the fight.
Monzon TKO 14
One thing I've noticed with Monzon that I want to bring up...It's true he did punish his opponents with accumulative damage, but he did not appear to have devastating power....He caught the smaller Napoles with flush right hands and could not put the stationary welterweight down!

True, he didn't have 1-punch KO power. Then again, it isn't necessary with his stamina, durability, and strength. I think his good but not great power worked out qute well for him.

[prime]

For thirty years, Monzon has been considered one of the greatest middleweights champions of all time. Hearns has never been. Manassa has broken it down very well.

At middleweight, Hearns brings to mind fragility; Monzon, steely strength.

Hearns could outbox Monzon for 3 minutes, but not for 15, or even 12 rounds. Monzon would wear him down and probably stop him.

[round15]

This is a hard fight to pick the winner. I'd have to go with Monzon by a very close decision. In fact, it probably could go either way because Hearns displayed great boxing skills the first time against Sugar Ray Leonard, winning the majority of the rounds, only to get knocked out late in the fight. Monzon's fought more 15 round fights than Hearns which makes conditioning the main factor in the outcome. Monzon was dropped by an early right hand from Rodrigo Valdes and Hearns' right hand is arguably better. One skill that Monzon was great at was tying up his opponents arms and throwing body punches in the clinches. If he's able to do this and stay away from Hearns' power, he wins the fight. If Tommy's able to box and counter and get to Monzon early in the fight, he's quite capable of scoring a decision win.

[bill poster]

I love Hearns but my head says Monzon

[youngmonzon]

Carlos Monzon? Slow, methodical, predictable, somehow effective.

No.

That was the Monzon of '75, '76, '77. If you watch a peak Monzon from around 1970, it's much more obvious why he was so good - strong, active, heavy handed, rough, offensive - even athletic.

As Monzon's career wore on and he became a bit less concerned with training, he became slower and more calculated. This is the man who was still great enough to pick apart Rodrigo Valdez, but this was a different version from the young terror who brutalized Nino Benvenuti.

In his title winning days and around that time, Monzon was more aggressive (though he boxed passively and excellently against Bennie Briscoe) - especially against taller opponents, or ones that equalled him in height or boxing ability.

Against Hearns, we could probably lay money on the fact Monzon would press the action. His aim would be literally to smack the life out of Hearns with the right hand; his attacks would come in the form of aggressive one-twos, with a bit of strong jabbing in between, and the odd bit of inside work.

I think Hearns would catch Monzon a fair bit at the start, but he wouldn't have the firepower to take Monzon out, who took some hellish shots in his career but was never felled for the full count. A windmill right hand from Valdez, that was as hard as any middleweight punch Hearns ever delivered, decked Monzon for a fleeting second. It was right on the button, but that's all Valdez, a notorious hitter, could manage. Monzon was up in the blink of an eye and continued to fight his fight, treating Valdez with his usual disdain.

And this is precisely where the two differ the most - Hearns was courageous when hurt and there was always a sense he could pull something out of the bag, but with Monzon, there was a sense of impending doom; you knew you couldn't take him out, you knew you couldn't fluster him, and you knew he wanted your head on a spike. Monzon didn't fight bravely when hurt, he just fought as he always did. Maliciously and malevolently.

Hearns would fight gallantly as always and probably even outbox Monzon for portions of the fight, but would soon be weakened by Monzon's debilitating attack from both inside and out. Monzon's sheer strength, for which he was renowned for, heavy handedness and imposing mentality would almost certainly take its toll on the spindly Hearns, who was never known as particularly durable.

Hearns would likely give Monzon something big to think about, and he might even achieve something out of the ordinary - like cutting Monzon or dropping him for a second, but even in these stages we would always know who the boss is, as the ever-sinister and blank expression of Monzon constrasts with the aggressive but somehow hopeful look on Hearns' face.

Hearns would be stopped, I'm sure of that. It's a question of when - I say Monzon needs a few more rounds to do it than Marvin Hagler since he's not as explosive, but he gets the job done as usual. Monzon TKO10.

This is spot on.

In my view, what makes Monzon the greatest middleweight of all time was his amazing mental strength in the ring and his coolness under fire.

Hearns could not handle the great one.

[red cobra]

Monzon would have roughed up Hearns, like he did Benvenuti, taken all his punches like Hagler did, and would have stopped him in 8 or 9 rounds, EASILY.

[JohnThomas1]

Monzon would have roughed up Hearns, like he did Benvenuti, taken all his punches like Hagler did, and would have stopped him in 8 or 9 rounds, EASILY.

You're being plain silly now. NOBODY stops a good version of Thomas Hearns "EASILY". Hearns will definitely have his moments vs Monzon, both punching wise and boxing wise. This would be an excellent fight.

[RoccoMarciano]

NOBODY stops a good version of Thomas Hearns "EASILY".

Hagler did :smoke

[JohnThomas1]

Hagler did :smoke

You sure? Being rocked in the first round, cut pretty deeply and copping plenty of right hand bullets early make this an easy win? You and i see easy as two different things, early on it was a holocaust in there. Why do you think many still name it fight of the century. KO etc rated it at the very least "Fight of the Decade", how could it be easy and straightforward?

:smoke

[80s champs]

Hagler stopped Hearns early because he was basically fighting a one handed fighter,and what a fight it truly was.. Not to say Hagler would'nt have one,but Tommy should have put up a much better fight than he did,and he did give it his best with what he had.. His knockouts over middleweights at the time also were sort of suspect. To this day,I often would have loved to have seen these two rematch a year or so after With Tommy filling out more as a middleweight and Hagler on the decline. I had heard that the two have become friends.

[RoccoMarciano]

You sure? Being rocked in the first round, cut pretty deeply and copping plenty of right hand bullets early make this an easy win? You and i see easy as two different things, early on it was a holocaust in there. Why do you think many still name it fight of the century. KO etc rated it at the very least "Fight of the Decade", how could it be easy and straightforward?

:smoke

Well maybe not easy... Well then again, Hagler made it look easy immediately after the fight doc took a look at that cut :smoke

[dpw417]

Hagler did :smoke
I didn't see anything easy about the Hagler/Hearns fight. Looked pretty rough to me.

[RoccoMarciano]

I didn't see anything easy about the Hagler/Hearns fight. Looked pretty rough to me.

Considering Hagler had blood squirting out of his head I'd have to say yep, it was tough for as long as it lasted.

[JohnThomas1]

Well maybe not easy... Well then again, Hagler made it look easy immediately after the fight doc took a look at that cut :smoke

So the fight didn't begin until after the cut was inspected?

:smoke

[JohnThomas1]

Considering Hagler had blood squirting out of his head I'd have to say yep, it was tough for as long as it lasted.

Good to see you warming to the facts :smoke

So if there was no cut and no blood you'd think the fight was easy?

:smoke

[RoccoMarciano]

So if there was no cut and no blood you'd think the fight was easy?

:smoke

No...:nut

[JohnThomas1]

No...:nut

Now we're on the same page

:lol:

:happy

[RoccoMarciano]

Now we're on the same page

:lol:

:happy

That'll never happen again :cool:

[JohnThomas1]

That'll never happen again :cool:

Probably

:lol:

[sthomas]

I love Hearns but his chin will lose to Monzon

[RoccoMarciano]

Probably

:lol:

There is a good possibility, we'll have to see how it goes :lol:

[red cobra]

You're being plain silly now. NOBODY stops a good version of Thomas Hearns "EASILY". Hearns will definitely have his moments vs Monzon, both punching wise and boxing wise. This would be an excellent fight.
Yeah, you're forgetting that Hagler did. Hagler, by all standards wasn't even what you'd call a killer puncher, but he did the job on Hearns. I'd say that the big right hand Monzon finished Nino with would have done the same to Hearns. You think that if Barkley could do it, and James Kinchen could deck him, etc., that Monzon wouldn't either? Hearns wasn't durable or tough enough to withstand the greatest middleweight champion of all time, and that was Monzon.

[JohnThomas1]

Yeah, you're forgetting that Hagler did. Hagler, by all standards wasn't even what you'd call a killer puncher, but he did the job on Hearns. I'd say that the big right hand Monzon finished Nino with would have done the same to Hearns. You think that if Barkley could do it, and James Kinchen could deck him, etc., that Monzon wouldn't either? Hearns wasn't durable or tough enough to withstand the greatest middleweight champion of all time, and that was Monzon.

Hagler did? The fight of the decade was an easy win? Not likely. I'd hardly be taking the Hearns from the Kinchen fight. Monzon wasn't no offensive monster who decimated opponents, he wore them down and quite often stopped them later. Just because you consider him the greatest middleweight doesn't mean he's doing to Hearns what you describe. Hearns had great power at middleweight and delivered it far more sharply than Briscoe and co. It's very concievable Hearns could put Monzon on his arse at some point.

[dpw417]

Yeah, you're forgetting that Hagler did. Hagler, by all standards wasn't even what you'd call a killer puncher, but he did the job on Hearns. I'd say that the big right hand Monzon finished Nino with would have done the same to Hearns. You think that if Barkley could do it, and James Kinchen could deck him, etc., that Monzon wouldn't either? Hearns wasn't durable or tough enough to withstand the greatest middleweight champion of all time, and that was Monzon.
You're looking at two very different tacticle approaches, Hagler knew he wanted to rush Tommy,forcing him to fight a battle he didn't want to...Hagler wanted to dictate pace, he didn't want Hearns on the outside setting shots up with the jab...So he made it a war. Hagler had built an extreme dislike for Hearns following a cancelation in '82, I believe...The way Hagler came at him, Hearns could not have changed the progression of the fight. He did not have any choice.
Monzon would never engage in a firefight like that...He knew in this hypothetical that he would eventually 'get to' Hearns...Doing what he does best, which is methodically breaking people down...Would it be easy? In my opinion....No. Hearns was an excellent boxer.
Monzon was an efficient offensive machine, not a devastating puncher at all...but a punishing fighter. Who used his physical tools of height and strength to perfection...His record speaks for itself. But for number 1 in a head to head sense...I'll take Robinson over Monzon

[Bummy Davis]

Monzon loses his normal advantage in height and reach and power, but I think his toughness,tecnique and stamina and late power would be a problem for Hearns, Monzon was the most durable of the 2, Hearns more exsplosive but this is an interesting matchup. IMO Monzon by late stop or close decision

[Dostoevsky]

Hearns outboxes the slowfooted Monzon. Even at Monzons fastest he was slower than Hearns.

Hagler only got the knockout because he basically bumrushed Hearns the whole fight and took it to war.
I could see Hearns on his toes outjabbing Monzon.