Tszyu v Gatti

Originally Posted by ipswich express

Tszyu was inducted last year on his first ballot. The HOF has nothing to do with someones level of fame, otherwise a New York Middleweight named Tony Danza would be in there.

Gatti was involved in great fights, but he was far from a great fighter. Still, it's not like the IBHOF haven't slipped up before... Barry McGuigan, Ingo Johannson etc.

No?

There's a Philadelphia heavyweight in the IBHOF who was inducted entirely because of his fame. He never had a pro fight.

[peterm]

Not rocky?

Originally Posted by peterm

Not rocky?

Sylvester Stallone. Not a professional fight to his name and inducted into the IBHOF in 2011. Fair to say fame had everything to do with his induction

[ipswich express]

You will also notice he was inducted into the non-participant part of the Hall.

[peterm]

Was very tough fighter but hadno defence.

Originally Posted by ipswich express

You will also notice he was inducted into the non-participant part of the Hall.

A member none the less and propelled there by fame

[ipswich express]

If you're talking non-participants then fine. The reason given for Stallone's induction was his services to boxing through the Rocky movies that inspired kids to go to a gym, not necessarily his fame, per se. Levels of fame should have nothing to do with any participant. There are plenty of boxers I could name who are far more deserving of HOF status than Arturo Gatti.

Originally Posted by ipswich express

Tszyu was inducted last year on his first ballot. The HOF has nothing to do with someones level of fame, otherwise a New York Middleweight named Tony Danza would be in there.

Gatti was involved in great fights, but he was far from a great fighter. Still, it's not like the IBHOF haven't slipped up before... Barry McGuigan, Ingo Johannson etc.

This is what I was correcting

Without Stallone's fame he would never have been in a position to be inducted. It's his fame that allowed him to contribute to boxing

[ipswich express]

In a non-participant's role, yes. In a contributors role, no. Despite all that, Gatti will probably get voted in first time, although I know some who are polling against him. When you consider some of the other names on this years ballot and some that still haven't gotten in from years past, it would be a bit of a disappointment.

Originally Posted by ipswich express

In a non-participant's role, yes. In a contributors role, no. Despite all that, Gatti will probably get voted in first time, although I know some who are polling against him. When you consider some of the other names on this years ballot and some that still haven't gotten in from years past, it would be a bit of a disappointment.

You didn't initially make the distinction about the IBHOF and fame getting you into it clear though did you

As far as Arturo Gatti goes, I would probably leave him out personally. But I think it only fair he come under consideration at least. The common problem with the hall of fame concept across all sports is where, and at whom, to draw the line.

[rusty nails]

Originally Posted by ipswich express

Tszyu was inducted last year on his first ballot. The HOF has nothing to do with someones level of fame, otherwise a New York Middleweight named Tony Danza would be in there.

Gatti was involved in great fights, but he was far from a great fighter. Still, it's not like the IBHOF haven't slipped up before... Barry McGuigan, Ingo Johannson etc.

but tony danza wasnt drawing hundreds of thousands of people to his boxing matches. thats why gatti is there, he brought people to boxing and his fighting heart was FAMED throughout the world
theres not a fight fan in the world who doesnt know who arturo gatti is

Originally Posted by rusty nails

but tony danza wasnt drawing hundreds of thousands of people to his boxing matches. thats why gatti is there, he brought people to boxing and his fighting heart was FAMED throughout the world
theres not a fight fan in the world who doesnt know who arturo gatti is

Fighting hearts don't come bigger than Gatti's and his fights created enormous interest and were thoroughly entertaining. I see him as a borderline case and that's the problem with these hall of fames across all sports. Where you draw the line? Would you for instance have Micky ward in?

[rusty nails]

Originally Posted by The Spider

Fighting hearts don't come bigger than Gatti's and his fights created enormous interest and were thoroughly entertaining. I see him as a borderline case and that's the problem with these hall of fames across all sports. Where you draw the line? Would you for instance have Micky ward in?

yes i think theres a case for mickey. the hall is for those who distinguish themselves in the sport or whose contributions and efforts raise the sport as a whole.
you could make the case that the guy with the most losses ever has a spot in the hall of fame because it can be argued that hes given more to the sport than anyone. ultimately its about whether or not they deserve to be remembered. no ones saying mickey deserves his own wing in the hall but his fights with gatti earn him a spot imo as they are a testament to everything boxing stands for. no one will EVER forget those fights and thats what its about.
people act like its some holy shrine to boxing but its not. it the hall of FAME.. not the hall of boxing excellence..

Originally Posted by rusty nails

yes i think theres a case for mickey. the hall is for those who distinguish themselves in the sport or whose contributions and efforts raise the sport as a whole.
you could make the case that the guy with the most losses ever has a spot in the hall of fame because it can be argued that hes given more to the sport than anyone. ultimately its about whether or not they deserve to be remembered. no ones saying mickey deserves his own wing in the hall but his fights with gatti earn him a spot imo as they are a testament to everything boxing stands for. no one will EVER forget those fights and thats what its about.
people act like its some holy shrine to boxing but its not. it the hall of FAME.. not the hall of boxing excellence..

"the hall is for those who distinguish themselves in the sport or whose contributions and efforts raise the sport as a whole".

Based on that criteria only I'd have them both in without a second thought

The trouble is keeping the numbers manageable and therefore ensuring that the very most desrving aren't sharing the ultimate limelight with some they shouldn't be. I'm sure glad I'm not on the selection commitee.

[Crusher]

Originally Posted by rusty nails

yes i think theres a case for mickey. the hall is for those who distinguish themselves in the sport or whose contributions and efforts raise the sport as a whole.
you could make the case that the guy with the most losses ever has a spot in the hall of fame because it can be argued that hes given more to the sport than anyone. ultimately its about whether or not they deserve to be remembered. no ones saying mickey deserves his own wing in the hall but his fights with gatti earn him a spot imo as they are a testament to everything boxing stands for. no one will EVER forget those fights and thats what its about.
people act like its some holy shrine to boxing but its not. it the hall of FAME.. not the hall of boxing excellence..

Exactly. Hall of fame not hall of great fighters!
Gatti & ward types don't come along often. They transcended I to main stream.