For me,personally..beat two hall of famers and some couple of good/very good fighters,and that's alright. 1 hall of famers beaten kinda depends on the dude's status, whenever it's a borderline HOF or an actual ATG beaten,but thinking again IBHOF would have a load of a list if that was the standards,so yeah the first one.
For me he has to be dominant for a few years against at least good competition. A fighter must separate himself from the field. Unless it happens to be an era of supreme talent which is pretty rare. Winning a title at one time would have been enough but not these days. Championships belts have been cheapened.
Oscar Delahoya ….any fighter ranked lower than Oscar Delahoya on an all time pound for pound list …isn’t a legitimate hall of famer
It depends... In the old times, anyone who was good enough to be a top ten for a long time or a world champion, and who beat other top ten challengers constantly (and by challenger, I dont mean title challengers as understood today, but as in 'I challenge you to a fight') Since the 1960s, to me, multiple time world champions or those who defended at least one title about ten times, even if combined into two reigns, should be a shoo-in. But this is very subjective. If a person falls short in their one reign by two or three defenses, Im ok with their being voted in Leaving someone out because of the quality of opponents can be unfair since for example, in Sugar De Leon's or Santos Laciar's case, .that is one of the main reasons they are being left out, but its not their fault, they could only fight the best available to them, and both did.
Yeah,and it's not like Laciar had all bad opponents. He was the first person to stop Gilberto Roman,beat Juan Herrera who had a win over Betulio Gonzalez, also beat Betulio himself,had wins over a terrific puncher in Cardona and a win vs Zapata.
Also lost to Charlie Magri and beat a good puncher in the until then undefeated Ramon Neri! As far as Sugar, people forget Marvin Camel was champion twice and a very solid contender, St. Gordon hit like a mule, Alfonso Ratliff and Bernard Benton were very good at Cruiserweight, Jose Maria Flores Burlon was a long time contender who was popular in latin America (thanks in part to Ring's Spanish edition) and lets not even talk about Evander Holyfield. He too fought all of them. Yaqui Lopez I admit was faded when he and Sugar faced.
The idea of having to beat two Hall of Famers skews way in favor of old-timers, since people in that category have multiple chanced to get in above the chance to get in as ‘modern’ fighters in any balloting year. In a sense, those guys become retroactive Hall of Famers, and they get in after a while so everyone who beat them suddenly picks up a Hall of Fame win that’s not as available to someone on a first, second or third ballot. For instance, Manny Pacquaio is in the current class and Vinny Paz. If we look back 40-50 years from now, a lot of their contemporaries who are not in currently will have been inducted as old-timers. Meanwhile, Rodrigo Valdez just got in as an old-timer, and there are tons of guys from his era already in. At some points, we reach a situation where every really good (not necessarily great) fighter from the 1920s is in, but not true yet of every really good (not necessarily great) fighter from the 1990s is in yet. The bar is lower for long-ago fighters because they will have had chances to get in as ‘modern,’ ‘old-timer’ AND ‘pioneer’ inductees.
For other instances,I think @ETM 's point is solid,atleast won a belt and defended it many times vs good contenders or overall very good fighter for their era.
Get Gatti and....maybe, Trinidad too lol I have Tito and Oscarito at 114-114 or 115-113 for Oscarito which means Tito is right there with him.
I always say people who will help the place make money, and who are good for a good weekend. People who are well liked and well known.
Besides 2 or 3 guys most Hall of Famers are well above the borderline because the Hall of Fame has been around 35 years and the HOF hasn't really gotten to fighters who'd demonstrate the minimum standards. The Hall had a 100 year backlog to fill. Everyone who gets in except a Vinny Paz here or Gatti there was always going to get in and was not borderline. If you freeze the HOF by its current standards(mostly) it will run out of fighters to elect. Any long reigning champion is going to make it even now with so many belts. The problem here is that various statistical benchmarks are much harder/easier to get in certain eras. Today being champ as a hard requirement is pretty fair. In most eras it is not. You would be able to do it by a certain amount of guys from one era in a division make it(like 6) with strong eras getting a few more and weak ones getting less. Tweener divisions really kills that whole concept because fighters don't stay in weight classes.
Longevity. Whether they were a one division champion or multiple, how long did they stay at the top level and what top level fighters did they beat. If they were a top level guy for a decade and beat a lot of top fighters, it's an easy decision. If they had a two or three year stretch, the ONLY possible way I would consider them a HOF is if in those years they beat some ATG's. So there is some nuance but overall, how long did they remain a top level fighter is the biggest thing for me.
