Calzaghe UD ... I don't like Monzon though so I could be biased ... Monzon to me was just very lucky to have the career that he did ... I always thought his skills were limited and he was a bit sloppy .. In my opinion , Joe would expose those openings and Monzons slower hand speed ..
if this thread was started two weeks ago, it would've been something silly like 'Can Slappy last the distance?' now you got bandwagonners saying calzaghe wins. ::
Calzaghe, since he just won a fight last weekend and is therefore unbeatable by any fighter in history for at least a few more days.
How so? Monzon would beat every middleweight today. Hell, Rodrigo Valdez would beat every middleweight today. Your talking about Monzon as if he fought in the 30's or something. By the 70's the sport had already evolved to the skill level that its at today.
Nope. Nutrition has developed a great deal. Middleweights of today are actually light-heavies when they step in the ring. And please don't donnybrook that size has no meaning in boxing. I pick Calzaghe because he was clearly the bigger man and Monzon was troubled by skilful boxers (who wouldn't be though)
Truthfully I put it like that to get people upset :: ...but in all honestly, Monzon was no better than Kessler, i've seen a few of his fights. Kessler would have dominated the 160lb division in the 70s. Monzon was a relatively slow textbook strong fighter like Kessler. It would be the same fight....and I don't give a SHIT that his name is Carlos Monzon. Styles dictate this.
:clap: AgREED entirely, even though I am quite a fan of Monzon an' all And for the record, I would have said this a fortnight ago- the Kessler fight merely confirmed my high opinion of Joe. MTF
