Can someone explain to me why the Hell Gatti is in the hall of Fame?

LOL! Your Iphone doesn't make grammatical errors that are clearly intentionally applied improperly. Don't worry, I'm done with this silly pissing match, but please do tell me where you obtained your BS from. They obviously don't have emphasis on the basic there and I want to make sure my kids never consider them.

 

cause it's not the hall of all time greats. it's the hall of fame, gatti was famous....there were only 3-4 active guys more famous when gatti was at his peak popularity.

 

Stallone was inducted as a non-participant
And deservedly so,as he probably got more kids into boxing than any boxer during the 80's and to an extent, beyond that.
And another point, Gatti is getting in for all the wrong reasons and I suspect that were he alive,he wouldn't be a first ballot.
Johnny Tapia was a far better boxer than Gatti,and I feel he'd have a better chance of being a first ballot in the first year of inductability were he still alive.You'd probably find it'd depend on the strength of fellow inductees though.
This is a joke entry to boost numbers IMO.I have a ton of respect for Gatti,but this puts him in the same bracket as Leonard and Hagler et al,and that's a travesty.

For those emphasising the word FAME,that's a term used for all mainstream sports acknowledgement of excellence,and should not be taken so literally.

 

is bc he is famous + he was a multi-weight champion. Crude skills but still he captured some titles.

 

The Ward fights, mostly.

 

Hall of Fame isn't measured by success but also what you type of impact you make on the sport as a whole.

Which is what Gatti did.

 

:rofl

 

Gatti (rip) was a warrior, he gave us all great fights. He puts everything in the ring.

 

No,I don't get it the way you're saying it.
My problem is that Gatti is a first ballot,which means he goes in under the same banner as Leonard,Hearns,Ali et al.
These guys are in at the first time of asking because they were the very best.If Gatti is going in as a first ballot,then the criteria should be changed,and it should not be about being an absolute supreme exponent,but rather the fact that you have no defence which therefore leads to exciting fights,which in turn means you are good box-office.
How many average fighters have been in FOTY?
I'll tell you two,Gatti and Ward.
Exactly.Now you get it.Don't thank me,I'm always happy to educate those in need.

 

So the criteria for being a first ballot(like how you choose to ignore my argument on that point) is to be exciting and in FOTY's and a good trilogy,(albeit completely overrated BTW) meaning that you are on the same level as the fighters I mentioned?
Hamed was exciting,a world champ and in great fights and he still can't get in.And I mentioned Tapia because he was a better boxer than Gatti, a multi-weight champ and died tragically young,so are you saying that because he wasn't in FOTYs he shouldn't be a first ballot?
This is a biased,nostalgic induction and a hall of fame first ballot should not come down to excitement or box office.