What poor crop of HOF inductees

This is how I see it. No for Mancini. Not now for Naz. Bowe? Okay, just barely and because its a weak class.

Lamps belongs.

 

True.

Gushiken is well overrated and shouldn't have got in...yet anyway.

 

R****** B**e was never a dominant champion, Mancini was the guy who wasn't the best, but fought the best. Aside from a title reign over mostly no namers, he stepped up and lost every time with the exception of Chacon and Ramirez. Hamed deserves to be in, as he was the only dominant champ being inducted. Wins over Kelley, Vasquez, McCallaugh are top notch. Overall, I agree, not the strongest bunch. Micky Ward WILL get in, I guarantee it.

 

Mancini had almost the exact type of career as Fernando Vargas. Does he get in too?

 

It's b.s.

 

I am through with predicting who is going to be inducted into any sports hall of fame after finding out that **** Allen came very close to being voted into the Baseball Hall of Fame by the Veterans Committee. Believe me, I would have bet the house that Allen wouldn't be inducted despite being one of the most talented players in history.

- Chuck Johnston

 

Is Donald Curry in yet. He was better than all these new inductees in the modern category. He faded after the Honeyghan loss but still managed to win a junior middleweight title afterwards. He held a version of the Welterweight title for almost four full years and unified it. That should be enough for the Hall of Fame. His losses to McCallum, Nunn and Norris are really nothing to be ashmed of in the big picture. He did have that dreadfull lost to Rene Jacquot though.

 

Mancini didn't really fight the best. He was WBA Champ and defended mostly against obscure WBA #1 contenders, one of whom Livingstone Bramble knocked him out. Bramble was not very highly thought of when he beat Mancini. He won the WBA title against a very mediocre Art Frias. He did beat Jose Luis Ramirez and lose to Alexis Arguello though. Those were his best fights in my opinion. I won't go into his close loss to Hector Camacho who had faded badly by the time he fought Mancini. That matchup would have been great in 1984 (Camacho would have won then too), but it was lousy in 1989.

 

Mancini belongs. John F.X. Condon does too, why they waited so long is a mystery few who knew him is around anymore. He was one of biggest, yet low key publicist for boxing all through the 1960's and 1970's, he played big part in fights like Ali Frazier 1, and never tried to put self into stories. He was liked by all fighters and managers who dealt with him, plus promotors. That's rare.

Mancini is underrated by too many people, I think they don't like his good guy image, but he was great in ring.

 

Steve Smoger and Nigel Collins are good choices. Lampley had a good voice but his boxing knowledge is pretty basic.

 

Mancini is not underrated. He had a great story and manager. He gave Arguello a decent fight and beat Jose Luis Ramirez. Other than that he held the spurious WBA title by beating one of the worst champions in modern history in Art Frias and defended against a parade of questionable WBA contenders. Even Bramble was not highly regarded when he fought him. That's why Bramble got the fight.

 

I'll be another to defend Mancini. He was nowhere near as bad as people here seem to think is chic to say all the time. He was actually a pretty good fighter.

 

That he did.

I mean really, if people want to complain about who's in the HOF, why don't they begin with Jose Torres? He doesn't belong within sniffing distance of that place as a fighter. He was painfully ordinary as a fighter. What was it about his career that was so f-ing scintillating to the voters, I wonder? His near loss to 40-year old Eddie Cotton? His heroic blowout over a fat, old, alcoholic Bobo Olson?

 

Because Hamed is/was a greater fighter.