Originally Posted by mr. magoo
Well since that number includes fighters who were either on the comeback trail or developing prospects, then we could just as easily say that the 70's had Ali, Foreman, Frazier, Holmes, Patterson, Liston, Norton and Quarry - though I'm not sure if the last two made the Hall of fame. Still the 90's were awesome. No doubt about it.
There are some criticisms that one can make though:
1. While there were a lot of great fights, some of the better matchups were either not made in a timely fashion or never at all.
2. You had two forty plus year old comeback champs who breached the rankings and one of them even took the lineal title.
3. You had two fighters who rose from lighter weight classes to take the crown and one of them became just about the best fighter of that decade.
4. You had two of the biggest upsets in heavyweight history with Douglas beating Tyson and McCall beating Lewis.
5. You had one of the division's best participants ( Tyson ) absent for nearly half the decade.
6. You had guys like Bruce Seldon and Frans Botha winning titles.
All in all it was a good era, but not without its flaws.
Quarry is not in the hall of fame, and Liston had less left in the 70's in comparison to Foreman and Holmes in the 1990's.
Without doing research into every decade, I think the 90's is holds the record for 8 active hall of fame heavyweights. Every era has flaws.
Not all the top talent fought each other in the 70's. We never saw Frazier vs Norton or Lyle. We never say Foreman vs. Quarry, or Foreman vs. Holmes. ( Some say Foreman didn't want the match with Quarry ). We never saw Liston vs anyone great in the 70's.