Minimunum qualifications for Boxing Hall of Fame: What do you think?

no, you can't judge boxing on a quantitative level many times. The people that vote on the HOF get it right most of the time

 

champion of 2 weight divisions is ridiculous - so if hopkins retired after taylor, under your criteria, he is ineligible to be inducted into the HOF?

 

couldnt agree more . /end thread

 

higher than the bar that was set to let Gatti in

 

So Ali, Lennox, and any other career heavyweight is ineligible? Ridiculous.

 

Spot On - its way to subjective - i think the judging panal will be looking at historical significance + boxing resume, which opens the doors for other candidates who were not necessarily "elite" fighters but had more to who they affected and what they actually did for boxing as oppose to some numbers and belts!

 

^ :good 'nuff said.

 

These two things have nothing to do with anything, especially the first one. In boxing, it's never ever about quantity of opposition; it's always about quality.

 

Seriously? So are you telling me an ATG like Sugar Ray couldnt be inducted in the HOF then?

 

I think there should be Minimunum qualifications before being able to post in this forum...atsch

 

Hall of fame credentials are impossible to quantify. A guy can rack up tons of title defenses (i.e. Sven Ottke), achieve 42 worthless victories (Donny Lalonde), get a 80 percent kayo ratio (Tyrone Brunson) etc.

Also a guy can earn IBHOF induction without meeting any of your requirements. In my opinion Sugar Ray Leonard had the credentials once he beat Hearns, yet he wouldn't be qualified in your eyes.