Marvin Hagler
Won: 62
Lost: 3
Draws: 3
KO's: 52
World Middleweight Champ from 1980-87 (Undisputed)
Title defenses: 12
Greatest victories: Willie Monroe TKO12, TKO2, Mike Colbert KO12, Kevin Finnegan TKO9, TKO7, Bennie Briscoe W10, Bobby Watts, TKO2, Alan Minter TKO3, Vito Antuofermo TKO5, Mustafa Hamsho TKO11, KO3, William Lee KO1, Wilford Scypion KO4, Roberto Duran W15, Juan Roldan KO10, Thomas Hearns TKO3, John Mugabi KO11
Carlos Monzon
Won: 87
Lost: 3
Draws: 9
KO's: 59
World Middleweight Champion from 1970-77 (Undisputed)
Title defenses: 14
Greatest victories: Nino Benvenuti KO12, TKO3,Emile Griffith TKO14, W15, Fraser Scott TKO3, Denny Moyer TKO5, Jean Claude Bouttier TKO13, W15, Tom Bogs TKO3, Benie Briscoe W15, Jose Napoles TKO7, Tony Mundine KO7, Tony Licata TKO10, Gratien Tonna KO5, Rodrigo Valdez W15, W15
Wins over Hall of Famers:
Monzon: Napoles, Benvenuti, Griffith
Hagler: Eventually Hearns and Duran
Note: Monzon did not lose a fight from October 28, 1964 to July 30, 1977.
My pick is Carlos Monzon with all due respect to Marvin Hagler.
i said i believe Hagler would win why he was a beast at his peak thats why i even just read something Monzon made a brief comeback and was offered to fight Hagler but he turned it down saying all that Hagler would of destroyed Emile Griffith and any of the guys Monzon beat when Hagler was at his best Hagler also fought some better fighters as well he had a better chin than Monzon though Monzon had a good chin too but Haglers was better he hit harder and wore his fighters down Monzon had a good long jab a good punch but he wasnt the beast Hagler was saying all this i think it would be a good match if they both fought in their primes but i think Hagler would wear him down and ko him thats just my opinion Im not saying Monzon was a bad fighters he an all time great i just think Hagler would have the edge Do i think it would be a good fight hell yes your entitled to your own opinion and you can thumbs down me again just look up Monzon ducked Hagler when he made a brief comeback that tells me Monzon wanted no part of Marvin Hagler probably due to Monzon was at the end of his career and knew he didnt stand a chance but when he was younger it may have been a great fight you keep bringing up Vito well Hagler was robbed twice and in his third fight with Vito he knocked him out in three rounds Vito was a bum Hagler was robbed in the first two fights with Vito watch the fights again
Hearns, Leonard, Duran, Mugabi, Hamsho, Roldan, Obelmejias, Antuofermo, Minter and Seales were far better than Benvenuti, Griffith, Napoles, Mundine, Licata, Gratien, Tonna, and Valdes. Hagler did win his first title attempt, but was robbed by corrupt judging, and was robbed again against Leonard. Given that Hagler was also quite possibly the best southpaw since Frazier, and all of his records blemish's including his early losses to Watts and Monroe were all of questionable if not out right corrupt nature, I think it's obvious why Hagler is rated higher than Monzon. Hagler was simply better than Monzon. Carlos Monzon was undoubtedly an all time great middleweight but Marvin Hagler was greater.
Fulgencio Oblemejias was perhaps one of the greatest 168 lb. super middleweight champs in history, Leonard, that puffed up welterweight won titles up to light heavyweight (175 lbs) and Hearns won titles up to Cruiserweight, (190 lbs). I think Hagler beat them all irregardless of what the judges say about Ray's track meet against Hagler.
Carlos Monzon had several ties, and would not travel to fight.
Haglar's record against top fighters is better than Monzon's record.
The fact that Leonard won a decision against Haglar does not diminish his record, the fact that Leonard refused to give him a rematch probably says more about Leonard than Haglar as far as being a poor sport about it.
To say that Monzon had better competition than Haglar is not correct.
Hagler had the better opponents. Hagler was a menacing looking man. However his boxing style was counterpunching and he was always in great condition. He should have been middleweight champ a few years earlier anyhow. Monzon is no doubt top 5 of the divsion but i would say Hagler was greater. Bad Bennie Briscoe who fought both men thought Hagler was better.
Calos Monzon won the title in his first try at it, knocking out Nino Benvenuti, italy, in round 12, in Rome, Italy. He defended his belt, 14 times, he defended against the likes of Benvenuti, Emile griffith, twice, Denny Moyer, Jean-Claude Bouttier, twice, Tom Bogs, a prime Bad Bennie Briscoe, World Welterweight Champion Jose Mantequilla Napoles, Tony Mundine, Tony Licata, Gratien Tonna, and Rodrigo Valdes, twice, he then retired with his belt on July 31.1977.He had not lost a fight since Oct 9,1964, spanning 82 consecutive victories, he avenged his three decision losses. His record at retirement was 89-3-9, 61 by knockout. Marvelous Marvin Hagler was great, but he failed to win his title in his first try, a 15 round draw with World Middleweight Champion Vito Antuofermo, on Nov 30,1979, in Las Vegas. He destroyed Alan Minter for the title on Sept 27, 1980, in 3 rounds. He defended against Antuofermo, Tony Sibson, Fulgencio Oblemejias, Fran The Animal Fletcher, John The Beast Mugabi, Thomas Hearns and, Caveman Lee, He was defeated on points to a come backing Sugar Ray Leonard, on April 6,1987, a fighter who had not fought in 3 years. Hagler was a poor sport about it, maybe he should have knocked out a puffed up welterweight. Sugar Ray Leonard cannot be better than Carlos Monzon, no way. Is it because these young fans never saw Carlos? Monzon was a great counter puncher with a stiff left jab, and a paralyzing right hand, also he had an iron chin. Also his competition was better than Marvelous Marvin's.
