HOF voter Ottke should be in ,Fraizer shouldn't

pong · Oct 21, 2011

By Lyle Fitzsimmons

This is a fun time of year.

Around the first week of October, I can usually count on the annual International Boxing Hall of Fame ballot arriving from the boys in Canastota which ultimately yields both a 1,200-or-so word column in which I announce my votes, and an inbox full of emails telling me Im a blubbering idiot.

But in 2011, its the gift that wont stop giving.

Rather than simply tucking the most colorful emails into my recycle bin and waiting for next years batch to arrive, I decided this time to at least try to turn the cyber lemons into lemonade.

As a general rule, the responses to voting columns can be characterized one of two ways: Either 1) the readers claim the guys Ive chosen have no earthly business on a Hall of Fame ballot to begin with (See: Ottke, Sven circa 2009, 2010); or 2) they insist that those Ive turned thumbs-down on have a clear and irrefutable reason to be included (see: Johnson, Mark circa 2011).

In truth, there are really no right or wrong answers. Itll always boil down to one persons opinion against anothers. And when you think about it, thats really part of the fun of being a fan, right?

But more so this year than any others, I noticed that people made their cases for fighters based less on their own merits and more on similarities to or successes against fighters already enshrined.

And, funny, the more of those reasonings I received, the less sense they made.

Hey Lyle, Fighter X is in the Hall of Fame. And because Fighter Y beat him once in three fights and had a similar record against left-handed power-punchers between 1989 and 2002, he belongs in, too, get it?

Well, in a word no.

In fact, such logic got me thinking how the overall quality of the Hall has been winnowed down from a true collection of the best of each generation, instead to a gathering of those same all-time greats alongside a bunch of guys whove too often been mere shadows in their spotlights.

Call it Six Degrees of Trevor Berbick and a fun game-night exercise with friends.

But its got no real place in determining whos in and whos out.

So Ive taken another tack.

Rather than rehashing the few on 2011s ballot whod actually add to the buildings aura, heres a quick list of five culprits guilty of lowering the standards from all-time great to all-time good.

Take them out, make room for others and watch the property value rise.

Bobby Chacon (inducted 2005): I get it. The guys back story was ridiculously compelling. Frightful beatings. Dramatic comebacks. Life reinventions. But look beyond the obvious action value of his fights and theres not much to warrant an immortal tag. A one-defense reign at 126 pounds, KO losses to a pair of 130-pound champions followed by another one-defense reign a decade later. Wrap it up with a three-round beatdown by Ray Mancini and its thanks for the memories, but no bronze plaque.

Pipino Cuevas (inducted 2002): Quick whats your most vivid memory of the former WBA welterweight champion? My guess is anyone who didnt say his spaghetti-legged KO loss to Thomas Hearns in August 1980 had it second only to the four-round stoppage by Roberto Duran in a battle of ex-titlists 29 months later. In my eyes, if your two biggest moments in the ring were blowout losses to actual Hall of Famers, perhaps you shouldnt really be called one yourself.

Joe Frazier (inducted 1990): If theres a more criminally overrated modern fighter, Id love to hear the case. And as great a trilogy as Smokin Joe put on against Muhammad Ali yes, Im aware that he won the first one theres simply not enough to translate Frazier from North Philadelphia to Central New York. Five fights against Hall-inducted heavies yielded one competitive win, three KO losses and a lifetime of overblown acclaim. Go ahead, take away March 8, 1971 and convince yourself he belongs.

Ken Norton (inducted 1992): Somewhere, when they build the Hall of All-Time Good, the awkward ex-Marine from San Diego will have a front-hallway shrine right alongside Fraziers. But when it comes to the actual Hall, he, too, just doesnt deserve his own place. Winning one of three close ones against Ali and none against any other enshrinees not to mention three KO losses in two rounds or less might make him a Top 5 contender, but hes not close to a Hall of Famer.

Dwight Muhammad Qawi (inducted 2004): I wont lie. This dude was one of my favorites. His KO Magazine poster was on my wall. I never missed a fight between Saad Muhammad and Spinks and I looked on with prurient interest when he kept grinding against Holyfield and Foreman. But lets be serious. He erased a fading action hero, beat two retreads and laid an egg in a chance at 175-pound glory on HBO. Winning a cruiser title and beating Leon Spinks hardly makes a mountain of that molehill.
Click to expand...

:blood:cus

Jack · Oct 21, 2011

Frazier had a very good career when you take into account his physical state after the Ali fight. People can look at BoxRec and come back with an ignorant opinion but the fact is, Frazier being able to compete at a high level after 1971 shows he was such a good fighter. He had a bad back which impaired his style, he was essentially blind in one eye, he had diabetes, he had high blood pressure...people forget, or don't know, that he almost died after the first Ali fight when he visited the hospital.

There's a line in the HBO Chavez vs. Taylor documentary which is true. A guy says "once it's beaten out of you, it's gone forever". Frazier's prime ended in 1971 and he was never close to the same fighter again. If you want to ignore that fact then, yeah, you can argue he shouldn't be there, but a more telling fact is: In the biggest division in boxing, the biggest fight in history, for the richest prize in boxing and against the best fighter the world has ever seen, Joe Frazier won.

the cobra · Oct 21, 2011

My God that guys sucks.

JMP · Oct 21, 2011

Jack said: ↑

Frazier had a very good career when you take into account his physical state after the Ali fight. People can look at BoxRec and come back with an ignorant opinion but the fact is, Frazier being able to compete at a high level after 1971 shows he was such a good fighter. He had a bad back which impaired his style, he was essentially blind in one eye, he had diabetes, he had high blood pressure...people forget, or don't know, that he almost died after the first Ali fight when he visited the hospital.

There's a line in the HBO Chavez vs. Taylor documentary which is true. A guy says "once it's beaten out of you, it's gone forever". Frazier's prime ended in 1971 and he was never close to the same fighter again. If you want to ignore that fact then, yeah, you can argue he shouldn't be there, but a more telling fact is: In the biggest division in boxing, the biggest fight in history, for the richest prize in boxing and against the best fighter the world has ever seen, Joe Frazier won.
Click to expand...

GREAT post.

demigawd · Oct 21, 2011

Ah, the good ol "who did he beat?" game where you can discredit - literally - every fighter in history simply by saying, "Yeah, but who did he beat?" about his opponents, his opponent's opponent's, or his opponent's opponent's opponents until you find a stack of guys you've never heard of.

"Ali was a bum. Who did he beat?"
"Joe Frazier"
"Frazier? Pfft. He was a bigger bum! Who did he beat?"
"Oscar Bonavena"
"HAHAHA! Don't make me laugh! Who did HE ever beat?"

jeffjoiner · Oct 21, 2011

Failey's real name is Lyle Fitzsimmons?

jeffjoiner · Oct 21, 2011

Jack said: ↑

Frazier had a very good career when you take into account his physical state after the Ali fight. People can look at BoxRec and come back with an ignorant opinion but the fact is, Frazier being able to compete at a high level after 1971 shows he was such a good fighter. He had a bad back which impaired his style, he was essentially blind in one eye, he had diabetes, he had high blood pressure...people forget, or don't know, that he almost died after the first Ali fight when he visited the hospital.

There's a line in the HBO Chavez vs. Taylor documentary which is true. A guy says "once it's beaten out of you, it's gone forever". Frazier's prime ended in 1971 and he was never close to the same fighter again. If you want to ignore that fact then, yeah, you can argue he shouldn't be there, but a more telling fact is: In the biggest division in boxing, the biggest fight in history, for the richest prize in boxing and against the best fighter the world has ever seen, Joe Frazier won.
Click to expand...

:deal Great Post.

EDDIE FUTCH · Oct 22, 2011

Proud to read your post, Jack

MrOliverKlozoff · Oct 22, 2011

This was posted in a couple other threads, I think. This guy is baiting people. End of.

cesare-borgia · Oct 22, 2011

Jack said: ↑

Frazier had a very good career when you take into account his physical state after the Ali fight. People can look at BoxRec and come back with an ignorant opinion but the fact is, Frazier being able to compete at a high level after 1971 shows he was such a good fighter. He had a bad back which impaired his style, he was essentially blind in one eye, he had diabetes, he had high blood pressure...people forget, or don't know, that he almost died after the first Ali fight when he visited the hospital.

There's a line in the HBO Chavez vs. Taylor documentary which is true. A guy says "once it's beaten out of you, it's gone forever". Frazier's prime ended in 1971 and he was never close to the same fighter again. If you want to ignore that fact then, yeah, you can argue he shouldn't be there, but a more telling fact is: In the biggest division in boxing, the biggest fight in history, for the richest prize in boxing and against the best fighter the world has ever seen, Joe Frazier won.
Click to expand...

very good post:thumbsup

diamondDave · Oct 22, 2011

Jack said: ↑

Frazier had a very good career when you take into account his physical state after the Ali fight. People can look at BoxRec and come back with an ignorant opinion but the fact is, Frazier being able to compete at a high level after 1971 shows he was such a good fighter. He had a bad back which impaired his style, he was essentially blind in one eye, he had diabetes, he had high blood pressure...people forget, or don't know, that he almost died after the first Ali fight when he visited the hospital.

There's a line in the HBO Chavez vs. Taylor documentary which is true. A guy says "once it's beaten out of you, it's gone forever". Frazier's prime ended in 1971 and he was never close to the same fighter again. If you want to ignore that fact then, yeah, you can argue he shouldn't be there, but a more telling fact is: In the biggest division in boxing, the biggest fight in history, for the richest prize in boxing and against the best fighter the world has ever seen, Joe Frazier won.
Click to expand...

Nice post, too often a fighters previous accomplishments are overlooked.

This guy just drank a whole jug of the hater-aide before he wrote that article.

TG1 · Oct 22, 2011

"Take away March 8th 1971" < Why should we? It's there you ****in ******!

As long as this guy dies, relatively soon, we should all be cool!

pong · Oct 22, 2011

Frazier overrated I could see some borderline abstract argument for that, especially in a h2h sense but to add "Let Ottke in." pure bs

general zod · Oct 22, 2011

Frazier lost to two top 10 atg hw's in Ali and Foreman - How many other fighters could of had 5 fights with those guys and come out with a winning record?

El Terrible · Oct 22, 2011

Jack said: ↑

Frazier had a very good career when you take into account his physical state after the Ali fight. People can look at BoxRec and come back with an ignorant opinion but the fact is, Frazier being able to compete at a high level after 1971 shows he was such a good fighter. He had a bad back which impaired his style, he was essentially blind in one eye, he had diabetes, he had high blood pressure...people forget, or don't know, that he almost died after the first Ali fight when he visited the hospital.

There's a line in the HBO Chavez vs. Taylor documentary which is true. A guy says "once it's beaten out of you, it's gone forever". Frazier's prime ended in 1971 and he was never close to the same fighter again. If you want to ignore that fact then, yeah, you can argue he shouldn't be there, but a more telling fact is: In the biggest division in boxing, the biggest fight in history, for the richest prize in boxing and against the best fighter the world has ever seen, Joe Frazier won.
Click to expand...

Log in or Sign up

HOF voter Ottke should be in ,Fraizer shouldn't

pong Boxing Addict Full Member

Jack Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

the cobra Awesomeizationism! Full Member

JMP Champion Full Member

demigawd Boxing Addict Full Member

jeffjoiner Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

jeffjoiner Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

EDDIE FUTCH Push nose into the brain Full Member

MrOliverKlozoff The guy in shades Full Member

cesare-borgia Übermensch in fieri Full Member

diamondDave Boxing Addict Full Member

TG1 Boxing Addict Full Member

pong Boxing Addict Full Member

general zod World Champion Full Member

El Terrible Active Member Full Member

Log in or Sign up

Forums

HOF voter Ottke should be in ,Fraizer shouldn't

pong Boxing Addict Full Member

Jack Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

the cobra Awesomeizationism! Full Member

JMP Champion Full Member

demigawd Boxing Addict Full Member

jeffjoiner Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

jeffjoiner Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

EDDIE FUTCH Push nose into the brain Full Member

MrOliverKlozoff The guy in shades Full Member

cesare-borgia Übermensch in fieri Full Member

diamondDave Boxing Addict Full Member

TG1 Boxing Addict Full Member

pong Boxing Addict Full Member

general zod World Champion Full Member

El Terrible Active Member Full Member