Why is the Hall of fame such a disgrace ???

Haven't they got knowledgeable Boxing people running the damn thing.....

Barry Mcguigan in......Lloyd Honeyghan not in...Excuse me but didn't he beat the p4p no 1 and future champion Maurice Blocker as well as winning the title back after he lost it!! Mcguigan beat an old man in Eusebio and albeit he beat a quality Taylor his record doesn't compare..

Daniel Zaragoza??? Yes Daniel Zaragoza in .....and the only number 1 p4p fighter not to be inducted Donald Curry out...A guy that cleaned out the welters taking Starling twice, Mccrory, Larocca and unifying the title....Zaragoza actually lost to Paul Banke...and believe me that takes some doing..

I could go on but best to let you go to the modern link on the hall of fame page to see the discrepancies..

Hall of fame is just a disgrace and should be scrapped..

I half agree with you, Truss.

I believe that it is a wonderful idea and a wonderful institution. However, some of the inductees who have made the cut and a good few who haven't defy all logic, in my opinion.

You sound heartbroken, maybe Curry will get in next year.

It is a little open for my liking, because they have to find someone every year. Yet I don't think Cocoa Kid is in?

I think with McGuigan it's his contribution to Irish unity, however small it may appear: his impact on his home country.

For me one of the problems is I believe they commit themselves to inducting five people every year and the talent pool some years is simply not deep enough. For me a better system would be to either have it every year but not commit to a specific number of inductees. Alternatively have induction every four years or something to allow the talent pool to replenish.

And to put my natural instinct to goad you aside for one side when you see some of the guys in there (Barry M springs to mind) the fact Curry and Naz are not in there is a farce.

Totally agree, believe it or not. I've said this before, but the best thing is to demolish the Hall and build it again, this time on proper foundations.

No-one does this type of thing better than baseball. The H of F panellists, something like 40 or 50 in number, consider players five years after they retire. If they then pick up less than 10% (perhaps it's 5%) of the vote for the Hall, their name never appears on the ballot again. Anyone who achieves the necessary minimum has 15 years to get the necessary percentage of votes to be elected to the H of F. That percentage is deliberately high - 75%.

It may sound tough, but what you then have is a Hall of Fame worthy of the name. The current numbers would be reduced by a half - possibly even more, with my proposed system, which I don't think would be a bad thing. Exclusivity and elitism should be the name of the game here.

Is it favoritism or what... I don't see how the hell Mcguigan can have a better case than Honey..


You know how I feel about Curry..but Zaragoza?? instead...

Maybe the board is full of Irish and Mexicans.

I've not really studied the ins & outs of the HOF, but I agree with what you say, rowley-inducting five people every years is a bit steep as it effectively means that in each year five active boxers will need to replace those five inductees. Can you pick five future inductees from each of the last five years? Twenty-five guys is a bit of a challenge.

Call me an old softy, but I find it sad that Carnera hasn't been inducted. He and Marvin Hart are the only lineal, ( bit of a stretch, in Hart's case, but you know what I mean, ) heavyweight champs to be overlooked. Before anybody jumps on me, the criterion is ' Hall of FAME ' so, regardless of what we think of Carnera as a fighter and champion, he should be a dead cert as an inductee. I find his omission sad and disrespectful as well as downright stupid. The man was a huge character and his story is an interesting one.

Captain the baseball system is infinitely better. They also have a zero tolerance policy on drugs. So Mcguire and Bonds will not get a look in. This is something boxing is going to have to address pretty soon, because can only comment for myself but the idea of a guy like Toney sitting along side Armstrong and Greb makes me sick

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Is it favoritism or what... I don't see how the hell Mcguigan can have a better case than Honey..


You know how I feel about Curry..but Zaragoza?? instead...

Maybe the board is full of Irish and Mexicans.

Probably incorporates services to boxing as well as what happens inside the ring. McGuigan is very much still involved in the sport.

Honeyghan? Couldn't tell you what he's doing these days.

Is Henry Cooper in the Hall of Fame.

This years boxers: JCC, Kostya Tszyu, Mike Tyson, Memphis Pal Moore, Jack Root, Dave Shade, John Gully.

How many would people like to see inducted?

For me JCC and Tyson are certs, Moore probably but not the others.

Is Buster Douglas in there ??? He was lineal.

I am heartbroken Scotty....Curry has always mant alot to me especially Vindaloo...

I can kind of take Barry to a certain extent he was very popular around the world..but Zaragoza???

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Is Buster Douglas in there ??? He was lineal.

Right you are, Truss. My apologies. Leon Spinks would be another, of course.

I'd certainly check in JCC, Tyson and Gully (a massive influence on boxing in his day), Scott. As for the others, I'd want some convincing, so would not give them the nod this year.

Windy, there aren't that many of the lineal heavyweight champs who would get my vote to be in the H of F. The definites for me would be Sulivan, Corbett, Fitz (but more for his p for p efforts), Jeffries, Johnson, Dempsey, Tunney (again, mostly in recognition of his efforts lower down the scale), Louis, Charles (once again, largely because of his l-h achievements), Marciano, Ali, Frazier, Foreman, Holmes, Spinks (l-h work the factor), Tyson, Holyfield and Lennox Lewis.

Now, does this mean I'm leaving out Liston? Yup, he's not a first ballot man for me. Too much stinks about the Ali fights to begin with - can we say that his career really demands elite recognition? Not sure, but we need to be really exacting about the whole exercise. Burns, Carnera, Braddock, Baer, Sharkey, Patterson etc etc - I can see the arguments, but I'm not wholly convinced. Does Patterson really deserve inductance just because he was 21 when he won the title against boobies? Again, I'm not convinced.

For me, it's better to hold off rather than to succumb to the temptation of inducting anyone who ever wore an undisputed crown. They can always go in later if one is totally persuaded. I see no evidence, for example, that Tommy Burns' career constitutes the elite of the elite, which is what the H of F should be about, in my opinion.

So which currently active boxers do you consider hall of fame worthy?

Genuine question; not trying to WUM.

captain carrantuohil wrote:I'd certainly check in JCC, Tyson and Gully (a massive influence on boxing in his day), Scott. As for the others, I'd want some convincing, so would not give them the nod this year.

Yeah, meant to say with Gully, I've still only read bits and pieces about bareknuckle and not really sure how to compare them.

Sam Floyd and Manny for me, controversial but think the ped's thing probably excludes Jones and Mosley. Of others of a recent vintage if he is not yet in there Lopez should be a lock but other than that would not have too many getting close.

Mayweather, Pacquaio, Holyfield and maybe Jones Junior.

In terms of quality I would agree 100%, captain. However, this is yet another inconsistency blighting the HOF. The induction of Sylvester Stallone would suggest that the term ' fame ' is to be interpreted literally, in which case, by comparison, the exclusion of Carnera is insulting.

I would much prefer to see the HOF reserved for the true elite.

No Hopkins?

I always find it hard to be totally objective about active boxers, Sam, which is why the five-year period of waiting is very useful. Not only do you ensure that a fighter is retired, but you can also properly appraise his achievements.

However, whatever happens in the future, Mayweather and Pacquiao would be nailed-on certainties for my Hall, assuming that there is no confirmation of drug involvement anywhere. I'm with Jeff on no tolerance of that kind of cheating, so that means no RJJ, Toney or Mosley for me, I'm afraid. All three would be in on their achievements otherwise. Holyfield's still fighting, so he'd be in as well, and I'm as certain as I can possibly be that Donaire will be too. A coming all-time great, in my opinion, young Nonito. Wonjongkam is pretty much a certainty too, I would imagine, and Hopkins booked his ticket well before last Saturday, of course. Everyone else has it all to prove.

Would you really consider Mosley good enough, drugs or not? Not for me in an ideal Hall.

Morales and Barrera?

ODLH and Lopez are just waiting for 5.

Mosley's a top 15-20 lightweight all time for me, Scott - outstanding at that weight. Coupled with his achievements at other weights (which would not, I agree, in themselves be H of F worthy), that would give him my nod.

Forgot that Barrera and Morales were still going, so yep, they'd be in.

DLH has retired, and will justly be in - thought Lopez had recently been inducted. If not, he's just waiting for the qualification period to expire. Same for Tommy Hearns, of course.

Yeah, bit insane that Hearns still hasn't made the qualifying period.

Wow also forgot about Morales and Barrera, and indeed BHop.

I should say that part of the deal is that you get the 40 or 50 Hall judges together so that they can debate and argue about the pros and cons of each particular fighter on the slate before they retire and make their choices. It's that listening to evidence that you hadn't considered, or a point of view that you hadn't heard expressed previously, that leads to changes of mind or a last push towards either selecting someone or finally removing them from consideration for good.

Dare I say, Wlad? He's a cert I reckon, and Cotto will too under the current system.

Jones jr is a must for me......Olympic gold medal as well as all his achievements (Gold in all but name)....drugs can't give you that skill, footwork etc......

I'd induct him on the Toney/Hoppo fights alone..

I'd add Jones in Truss, for a combination of his rare talent and some of his achievements.

Why is vlad a certainty..........who's he ever beat????

should he beat Haye I'd think about it...

if beating world class operators like Jones, Starling twice and mcrory and cleaning up your division to become undisputed..can't get you in.. why should stiff after stiff...........

As I said, Truss, zero tolerance with drugs. Doubt that drugs alone accounted for what Bonds did, but he won't be in the Hall for baseball and neither, for all his vast talent, would Jones make mine. I suspect you're right - he didn't need drugs to display that talent, but he took them just the same and deserves no special consideration. Out, I say.

Under the current system, Scott, Wlad, Vitali and Cotto would be in. Under mine, none of them would make it - well, that is to say that I wouldn't be voting for them at this stage.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Why is vlad a certainty..........who's he ever beat????

Not saying I think he should on merit, but look at how long the Heavyweight HOF list is. He's been the best for years.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Jones jr is a must for me......Olympic gold medal as well as all his achievements (Gold in all but name)....drugs can't give you that skill, footwork etc......

I'd induct him on the Toney/Hoppo fights alone..

We're inducting based on 2 fights now then, and you accuse the HoF being a disgrace?!?!

Skills don't win fights unfortunately, the whole package does. Look at Garcia in golf - can hit any shot in the book and yet isn't even in the top 50.

Dragging boxing through the dark ages fighting b-class fighters one after the other don't get him near the HoF in my book. DLH has done far more for the sport as at least he stepped up to the plate as a superstar rather than pad his record with patsy after patsy. Did far more for boxing in its darkest hour than RJJ ever did.

Perhaps we should have a HoF for those P4P'rs that bought boxing to its knees in the late 90s/early 00s? RJJ would then be a shoe-in for that accolade

You're right there is positive discrimination when it comes to heavies.....

Have no doubts he will make it along with his brother..Imagine if Tubbs/Witherspoon were around they'd have cleaned up the mess too.

Life is about timing.

Also agree with your first post..about shelving and starting again..

Can you confirm coxy, did you join RJJ's fan club or not?

Sam missed Hopkins, genuine oversight, he is an absolute certainty. With the captain on Jones, he took them and got caught, for that he is out. Zero tolerance has to mean just that.

Fact is Captain I believe drugs are widespread..Look at Ben Johnson he's still the poster boy and yet half the guys he beat in that race have either admitted cheating or been nailed in some way..

Tour de france, Athletics are rife and these athletes should be rightly condemned..

Just feel that jones never used his muscle mass etc to win...but his skill to evade and land punches from all angles..footwork etc.

Not sure steroids are as effective in Boxing..can't strenghten your chin..also believe they are widespread too..

i'm not sure how apart from bulking up in the higher divisions...steroids could have helped him beat the likes of Toney and Hoppo at a lighter weight..

It's a contentious issue and I see where you are coming from.

They might have cleared up the mess, Truss, although you can't guarantee that Witherspoon wouldn't have taken six months off to eat a lorry-load of pies and then gone out and got stopped by a modern-day equivalent of Bonecrusher, maybe a Chris Arreola.

You also can't predict that Tubbs wouldn't have continued his close acquaintance with Uncle Charlie and got turned over by any heavyweight able to place one foot in front of another.

In short, it was dedication that was the problem with those boys, not talent, and I suspect that they'd have lacked it today as surely as they did in the 80s.

Scottrf wrote:Can you confirm coxy, did you join RJJ's fan club or not?

I've got a court injunction saying i can't go within 500m of him, especially when i'm wearing my RJJ fan shirt and have my mic with big speakers chanting "i love you Roy!"

RJJ should be in it for the amount of brutal KO's he's received alone.

Jones is a great commentator too.

Hopkins, Mayweather, Pacquiao are nailed on certainties for me.

I would also include Morales, I think.

If Mosley, Toney and RJJ are out, then so probably should be Holyfield, if we are being fair.

Think Tyson was the problem as well....

I thought Tubbs beat Bowe which suggests without Tyson there was another piece of pie waiting for him in the heavyweight pass the parcel game of the 80's..

I'll declare an interest...Yes these guys ate all the pies but they were schooled boxers who were distinguished amateurs and knew how to box..

Seeing these two robots dominate for me has been bad for the game......

Never thought I'd long for the Weaver, Dokes, Page days so much...

Not sure, Holyfield has taken drugs, but it hasn't been proven beyond doubt. He is still technically innocent at this stage.

I think he took drugs to bulk up.....Guess It's cheating but like the tour de france I think it's rife in sport....

Don't tell me guys at welter/feath etc... haven't used illegal diuretics to make weight in the past....

Cotto. Meh.

A very good fighter, but if you are inducting the very, very best; he is not amongst the 5 or 10 best fighters of the past ten years.

Carbajal, canizales..................The list is endless......frighteningly bad!

As Scott says, the Holyfield case is still unproven, at least as far as I'm aware. However, if it is proved, out goes the God-fearing one as well. It may well be that others have also breached the rules in the past, but it's not the Hall's job to check fighters' bathrooms. We can only go with what we know - same as other sports. All we can do is throw the book at the proven cheats, not tar every unconvicted fighter with the same brush.

Sam, think that you're broadly right about Cotto, whose career is increasingly reminding me of a slightly cut-price De la Hoya's. He also lacks DLH's massive career peaks (with the possible exception of Mosley, I suppose). Very good does not mean elite, so Cotto's out for me as well.

Cotto has not achieved as much as DLH and I don't believe he should be inducted.

An excellent fighter but not an all time great for me.

Be honest I thought he did Mosley twice.........

Has to be taken into context the Mosley defeats....Holmes lost the second Spinks fight on the cards........

DelaHoya and Cotto's careers are like light and day...

Oscar could have ruled at 135 for ten years if he'd wanted.