I like the thought of a Boxing Hall of Fame being reserved for true greats, but in most discussions on this forum it seems that most people think anyone who has held an alphabet title for a couple of years deserves entry. I think to be inducted into a Hall Of Fame you should have had a special career or achieved something great, not just held a title for a while and been in a high-profile fight or two. For example, from guys who have fought this century, I think this is the standard of fighter who deserves to be in there: (in no order) Lennox Lewis Oscar De La Hoya Evander Holyfield Floyd Mayweather Jr Bernard Hopkins I think these guys do not deserve a place in the Hall of Fame as their careers were not of a high enough standard: Fernando Vargas Wladimir Klitschko Arturo Gatti Naseem Hamed Kostya Tszyu Do you guys agree with what I think the HOF should be, or do you think the HOF should be open to this "second-tier" of fighter too?
Tell me which names off the resumes of Hamed and Tszyu mean they should be inducted into the Hall of Fame please.
i see what you mean. but then, Sugar Ray never held a title for that long, he only won 31 fights, lost 3. ray mancini had very few fights, as did Kosta and the prince. barry mccguigan had very few fights. so i think, there should also be slots in the hall for longevity. like archie moore. carlos monzon, jake lamotta and rocky graziano. the guys who had long careers. so here would be my criteria: at least half of fights at highest level fought as long as they could made a splash in the boxing world amteur pedigree. so de la hoya is fitting into all of those. as is lennox lewis, riddick bowe, winky wright mohamed ali, joe fazier and george foreman. those who don't fir in are: prince naseem hamed- gave up in his prime fernando vargas- amteur experience, but is a steriod cheat, but OK. Richie Woodhall- fought only few fights, though at the top level, retired prematurely. Glen McCrory fits in though. despite being only 30-8, he is the only boxing champion from Newcastle, England. so he is a record holder. hopefully this will shed some light on this thread, i put alot of thought into this post.
It´s not only about names but also about achievement and there both did enough - both were linear champs with multiple defences, both cleared out their divisions. That´s enough for the HoF.
I disagree. All those guys should be in there. You've misunderstood the standard the hall of fame is held up to. There are a lot of fighters in there that I wouldn't chose to put in my hall of fame, but the hall of fame is open to all of those guys.
Fair enough, but I just think if the HOF is going to be open to short-term alphabet title holders, then what is the point of it? If Sugar Ray Robinson and Naseem Hamed are housed in the same institution, then membership is so cheap it's not even an achievement to get in, they may as well scrap the whole thing.
That, was always the way. Every now and again, somebody comes up with the an idea for an ESB hall of fame. It's interesting, but very tough subject.
At no time did Hamed hold the 4 major titles in his division. At no time did he beat one top 10 p4p fighter, or a unified title holder, or an HOF standard fighter. He never won a world title at any weight other than featherweight. The 1st time he fought an HOF opponent, the glaring limitations in his game were exposed (he had very little boxing skills or defence, but could make up for his flaws v mediocre opposition purely by using his natural speed and power), he was beaten convincingly, then lost heart and retired. If this is what gets you into the Hall of Fame, I say demolish it now.
It's near impossible. I would say this - the decision making proccess shoud be split between Classic (Say, guys who turned pro before 1940) and General (guys who turned pro after 1940).