That is why it is called the "hall of fame", not the "hall of ability". When Time Magazine were criticised for making Stalin "man of the year" they responded that it was not in any way meant to be an honour. I don't know if Ricky Hatton should be inducted but I would bet my last penny that he will be.
Bump. I've been thinking about this a lot more lately. Is this a general rule? Any notable exceptions either way?
There's really not much sense in most of this "pound-for-pound ratings" stuff. It's 95% meaningless hype.
This dosent work for heavies. Lennox Lewis made the rings p4p rankings at 8 in 2000 , wasnt ranked in 2001 then at 9 in 2002.
Shane got to number 1 and it'd be a stretch calling him an atg. We've had tyson, chavez, pea, oscar, shane, jones, hopkins, floyd and pac since the ring kept track. Maybe tyson is a bit out of his depth as well.
Well Shane has a similar resume to Oscar and with more longevity on his side has a few good wins in the last stages of his career. And Tyson...while lacking a stellar resume, dominated the division for a good number of years. I don't disagree strongly but I'm having trouble thinking of even more glaring examples.