Hall of Fame Nominees

[kal.majeed]

I did not have space to include most of these additional names in my book – but feel that they are too important (many of them) to ignore.

Three (basic and objective) statistical areas are the focus of this screening process; as with any screening process, it is not perfect; hence, this is the reason for the title (nominees) and not “inductions”.

The three (basic and objective) statistical areas are career stoppage losses (zero or one), world championship (one or more; unified or split) and successful world title defenses (at least seven).

In alphabetical order, the first list depicts world champions with zero career stoppage losses who had at least eight successful world title defenses (and who have been retired for at least five years).

1. Yuri Arbachakov
2. Juan Martin Coggi
3. Naseem Hamed
4. Santos Benigno Laciar
5. Henry Maske
6. Sung-Kil Moon
7. Sven Ottke (don’t say it – it’s only a 'nominee').
8. Yong-Kyun Park; Chana Porpaoin
9. Jiro Watanabe; Myung-Woo Yuh

BONUS:

1. Artur Grigorian; Joe Calzaghe (within two to three years).
2. Ronald Wright; Shane Mosley (in a few years).

In alphabetical order, the second list depicts world champions with at most one career stoppage loss and at least seven successful world title defenses (who have been retired for at least five years).

1. Vuyani Bungu
2. Antonio Cermeno
3. Yong-Soo Choi
4. Steve Collins
5. Antonio Esparragoza
6. Chris Eubank
7. Yoko Gushiken
8. Miguel Lora
9. Dariusz Michalczewski

BONUS:

10. Johnny Nelson
11. Michael Nunn
12. Mike O’Dowd
13. Ike Quartey
14. Masamori Tokuyama
15. Felix Trinidad (in a couple of years)
16. Anaclet Wamba

In alphabetical order, on the bubble (fall short in one area):

1. Bruno Arcari; Tim Austin; Nigel Benn; Markus Beyer
2. Lonnie Bradley; Simon Brown; Hector Camacho; Carlos De Leon
3. Juan Diaz; Alfredo Escalera; Luis Estaba; Vernon Forrest
4. Mike Glover; Miguel Angel Gonzalez; Virgil Hill
5. Keith Holmes; Ike Ibeabuchi; Reggie Johnson; Tom Johnson
6. William Joppy; Sumbu Kalambay; Rocky Lockridge
7. Tony Lopez; Ernesto Marcel; John John Molina
8. Michael Moorer; Tod Morgan; Saensak Muangsurin
9. Orzubek Nazarov; Sergio Victor Palma; Saen Sor Ploenchit

BONUS:

10. Ralf Rocchigiani; Gianfranco Rosi; Veeraphol Sahaprom
11. Samuel Serrano; Saman Sorjaturong; Marlon Starling
12. Johnny Tapia; Fabrice Tiozzo; Regilio Tuur; Rodrigo Valdez
13. Julio Cesar Vasquez; Wilfredo Vazquez; Ben Villaflor
14. Koichi Wajima; Charles Williams; Hilario Zapata

BONUS II (random order):

15. Petey Sarron; Jeff Smith; Charley White; Harry Jeffra
16. Al Delmont; Frankie Burns; Digger Stanley; Jimmy Walsh

From a statistical (i.e. probability) point of view, the “on the bubble” nominees (in the top 1%) are caliber enough to be inducted into the World Boxing Hall of Fame; the nominees passing the triple screening process (in the top 0.5%) and listed above are caliber enough to be inducted into the International Boxing Hall of Fame.

Notes: All statistical data are based upon what is recorded in BoxRec database.

P.S.

In no particular order, five years after they officially retire (potential World/International Boxing Hall of Famers):

1. Roy Jones Jr.; Bernard Hopkins; Paul Spadafora, Zsolt Erdei
2. Acelino Freitas; Arthur Abraham, Celestino Caballero
3. Scott Harrison; Erik Morales; Marco Antonio Barrera
4. Anselmo Moreno; Vic Darchinyan; Pongsaklek Wonjongkam
5. Omar Andres Narvaez; Ulises Solis; Ratanapol Sor Vorapin
6. Yutaka Niida; Ivan Calderon; Juan Carlos Gomez; James Toney
7. Floyd Mayweather Jr.; Manny Pacquiao; Juan Manuel Marquez
8. David Tua; Vitali/Wladimir Klitschko; Chris John; Sergio Martinez
9. Whoever finally topples Saul Alvarez (Miguel Cotto?); Evander Holyfield

[BoxBuzz]

Sven......probably shouldn't diss him too much, he should be included....if for nothing else his miracle escapes and improbable run of luck.

[Rover]

Sven......probably shouldn't diss him too much, he should be included....if for nothing else his miracle escapes and improbable run of luck.

[kal.majeed]

Sven......probably shouldn't diss him too much, he should be included....if for nothing else his miracle escapes and improbable run of luck.

I was not "dissing" him - it's just that I have read a number of negative posts about him.

I'm a statistical/historical fanatic (as I'm sure anyone can tell) and for ANYONE to pass that triple screening process (regardless of circumstances) is a major achievement....

[BoxBuzz]

I agree that YOU were not dissing him, and am simply making an effort at atoning for the many times I have used him as the butt of jokes. It's easy to make light of something difficult that we could likely have little hope to accomplish in a lifetime. I say "easy" with full recognition of my envy at his accomplishments....even if he provided me entertainment, and laughs, and opportunity to lampoon such luck (and skill) along the way.

If I met the man, I'd shake his hand, and hope he would not want to demonstrate his skill for me, simply because I have demonstrated my skill at making light of his skill.

uh....did anyone follow that. lol.

[kal.majeed]

I agree that YOU were not dissing him, and am simply making an effort at atoning for the many times I have used him as the butt of jokes. It's easy to make light of something difficult that we could likely have little hope to accomplish in a lifetime. I say "easy" with full recognition of my envy at his accomplishments....even if he provided me entertainment, and laughs, and opportunity to lampoon such luck (and skill) along the way.

If I met the man, I'd shake his hand, and hope he would not want to demonstrate his skill for me, simply because I have demonstrated my skill at making light of his skill.

uh....did anyone follow that. lol.

Got it. I don't think someone (especially a 3-time Olympian with over 250 amateur wins) could "fake" an entire professional career (as some posts have inferred).....

[MadMouse]

Sven Ottke should definitely have a place in the hall because of his title reign and undefeated record. There are many questionable decisions in boxing but at the end of the day you can't dismiss them out of hand.

Naseem should definitely be inducted in there is no questions at all about that. Eubank should also be considered and another dark horse for the hall in a few years would be Nigel Benn.

[kal.majeed]

Agreed on Ottke, Hamed and Eubank. As for the scoring system in boxing, I think (by now) punch stats should be made available to judges to assist them in scoring.

I think, however, if punch stats are used exclusively to score bouts, boxing may turn into basketball (prior to the 24 second shot clock) when team(s) would score points and then just play "keep away" - a similar scenario could happen if punch stats completely take over the 'traditional' scoring system but they can at least be used as an 'assistance'.

As for Benn - the biggest knocks are the (unavenged) four stoppage losses. The big stats in his favor are being a 2-division world champion with (9?) successful world title defenses and of course for being the only boxer to ever stop Gerald McClellan (tragedy aside) and the first boxer to defeat the forgotten great top contender Henry Wharton (never stopped in his career). Collins and Eubank would have to be in there first before he (Benn) can be considered.....

P.S.

Before I would consider Benn for either Hall (World or International), I would ‘nominate’ the four times stopped, 5/6-year world LHW champion ‘Prince’ Charles Williams. The much avoided Williams is the first and second to stop 2-division world champion Bobby Czyz and has eight successful world title defenses.

Or maybe, the five times stopped, 2-time (over a 7-year period) world JMW champion (with twelve successful world title defenses) Gianfranco Rosi, who is the first and second to defeat the eleven years younger, 2-division world titlist Darrin Van Horn.

The key aspect to pay attention to is if a boxer has more than one career stoppage loss (such as Joe Louis or Lennox Lewis) and avenges one or more of their stoppage losses, becomes or is an undisputed world champion or has a higher than the minimum world title defense requirement (hence, they significantly excel in one or more of the other areas) and possibly, have key wins over caliber opponents, they would and should be considered (for either Hall of Fame) - under a 'system' such as the one that I have designed.....

[Ambling Alp]

The criteria (Being stopped, winning a title, defensindg the title) is interesting but can very deceiving.
It is interesting because it makes you think of fighters that may be underrated.
However each category had it's limitations:

-Being stopped-you can to consider the competiton, when in a fighters career he was stopped if he was stopped has to be considered. He could lose by a premature stoppage as well.
Also, a figher can lose a competitive fight and be stopped; he can get totally dominated and lose a lopsided decision.

-Winning a title. In the last few decades, that has become less and less important. A "champion" might not be one of the top 5 fighters in his weight class.

-Title defenses. Matters who you are defending the title against. The sheer number doesn't by itself mean much.

[kal.majeed]

First , I must say that you (Ambling Alp) have given a well thought out and quality critique - and in fact quite accurate.

Remember, however, at the beginning, I stated that this is a (basic and objective) screening process and not perfect.

Fundamentally, it is a statistical/probability 'system' designed after having gone through about 50K (that's right thousand) boxer records.

Less than 3% (of the 50K) are world 'champions' (split or unified) and once title defenses (regardless of their caliber) and stoppage losses are factored in, that number shrinks down to within the top 0.5%; the statistical/probability conclusion is that these are the (ignored/missed) 'elite'.

Again, it is not perfect but it is based upon my experience from record reading and unlike the Hall of Fame committees, I at least tell you the criteria; does anyone know THEIR criteria??? (I don't)......

Also, there are 'allowances' for more than one stoppage loss but the boxer will have to excel in other areas (as noted in one of the above posts). In addition, I am still updating some names as this was done more than 2 years ago and since it was cut out of the book, I did not bother to complete it.

[sybaseball]

GEORGE CHUVALO WAS NEVER KNOCKED DOWN IN HIS LENGTHY CAREER.GREAT CANADIAN CHAMPION.ALWAYS IN GREAT SHAPE. WORTHY NOMINEE.

[kal.majeed]

GEORGE CHUVALO WAS NEVER KNOCKED DOWN IN HIS LENGTHY CAREER.GREAT CANADIAN CHAMPION.ALWAYS IN GREAT SHAPE. WORTHY NOMINEE.

Chuvalo IS in the Hall of Fame (World Boxing) - his superior peer Bob Cleroux, however, is not (I gave a synopsis on these two already - in a earlier post - I think the Corbett/Tyson comparison)......

http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/Georg ... meeting%29

http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/Georg ... meeting%29

http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/Georg ... meeting%29

P.S.

The Hall of Fame Nominee list has been revised.

[Ambling Alp]

I am guessing he meant the International Boxing Hall of Fame. The World Boxing Hall of Fame is pretty much a joke. Chuvalo was good, but he wasn't
Hall of Fame worthy.

[Ambling Alp]

First , I must say that you (Ambling Alp) have given a well thought out and quality critique - and in fact quite accurate.

Remember, however, at the beginning, I stated that this is a (basic and objective) screening process and not perfect.

Fundamentally, it is a statistical/probability 'system' designed after having gone through about 50K (that's right thousand) boxer records.

Less than 3% (of the 50K) are world 'champions' (split or unified) and once title defenses (regardless of their caliber) and stoppage losses are factored in, that number shrinks down to within the top 0.5%; the statistical/probability conclusion is that these are the (ignored/missed) 'elite'.

Again, it is not perfect but it is based upon my experience from record reading and unlike the Hall of Fame committees, I at least tell you the criteria; does anyone know THEIR criteria??? (I don't)......

Also, there are 'allowances' for more than one stoppage loss but the boxer will have to excel in other areas (as noted in one of the above posts). In addition, I am still updating some names as this was done more than 2 years ago and since it was cut out of the book, I did not bother to complete it.

Hope you didn't think that I was ripping what you have done. I was just point out some flaws (at least some of which i am guessing you had already considered. Not sure if everyone else had.)
It does at least make you consider some guys that have been overlooked. Some of those may be worthy, some not.

[kal.majeed]

I am guessing he meant the International Boxing Hall of Fame. The World Boxing Hall of Fame is pretty much a joke. Chuvalo was good, but he wasn't
Hall of Fame worthy.

From a researcher's perspective, the World Boxing Hall of Fame is rather helpful; not as recognized as the International Boxing Hall of Fame but I appreciate them.

As for Chuvalo (and Cleroux), if someone views them worthy of the IBHOF, they (Cleroux & Chuvalo) would have to go in there with Zora Folley - the several years older HW contender who takes both Chuvalo and Cleroux to school and if Folley is in, one may as well take in Johnny Summerlin - the one time HW piston who first defeats (RTD 6) Folley and twice tasks the undefeated and future world HW champion Sonny Liston. Needless to say, none of them made my list (Liston aside, since he is obviously already in there).

P.S.

Just saw your other reply - no harm, no foul, no offense taken - and believe me numerous VITAL aspects are taken into consideration - the ones you mentioned and others.....

Also, it is similar to ingredients for a cake - flour, sugar, eggs, milk, butter, etc. - each of them (by themselves) has its limitations but if you put them together - you have almost infinite (great) possibilities.....

[kal.majeed]

It does at least make you consider some guys that have been overlooked. Some of those may be worthy, some not.

To Ambling Alp: If you are willing (as this could help in the research), can you give specific details on one or two that you would deem worthy and one or two that you would deem not worthy - from the top two lists (bonus included) and NOT the "on the bubble" nominees.

If anyone else wishes to participate, that's fine (again, please, constructive/quality critiques).....

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Interesting lists, Ibeabuchi never won a world title.

[kal.majeed]

Interesting lists, Ibeabuchi never won a world title.

You're the WINNER!!! I wanted to see if anyone would notice that - ha ha ha - you got it!!!!!!

Now, check out my new Marciano post.....

P.S.

I learned that from my (school teacher) dad - he would deliberately write something wrong on the blackboard (or say something completely wrong) just to see if ANY of the kids were REALLY paying attention.....

[Ambling Alp]

It does at least make you consider some guys that have been overlooked. Some of those may be worthy, some not.

To Ambling Alp: If you are willing (as this could help in the research), can you give specific details on one or two that you would deem worthy and one or two that you would deem not worthy - from the top two lists (bonus included) and NOT the "on the bubble" nominees.

If anyone else wishes to participate, that's fine (again, please, constructive/quality critiques).....

That is a lot of guys to go through.
On your regular list (not including those on the "bonus"), there is no one that is a without a doubt a deserving Hall of Famer. Most fought in smaller weight divisions with very little depth. Many had short careers without that many outstanding wins.

I guess the best cases would be for Maske and Michalczewski. Maske only had one loss and that was close one to Virgil Hill. He had two wins over Rocchigani and also beat Williams.
Michalczewski had two losses; both were when he was old and way past and irrelevant when rating him. He had some decent wins, though nothing tremendous.
there are a few other guys who I guess you could make a case for but none are without question great fighters.

Some of the names on the "bonus list" were probably more deserving; I will have to get back to you later on them. Again, there are many names to go through.

[kal.majeed]

To Ambling Alp: Great analysis - thanks!

The one that really stands out (for me) is Mike O'Dowd - he retires almost 90 years ago and has been dead for 55 years; a 2-time world MW champion with 9 successful world title defenses, the first (and third) to stop world MW champion Al McCoy, edges out the formidable (and never stopped) Mike Gibbons in two out of three bouts, wins a split newspaper decision verdict (3-2-1) over marvel Harry Greb, goes (2-3) vs. Jack Britton and (3-2) vs. Ted Kid Lewis, wins all (five?) encounters with the formidable multi-division contender Soldier Bartfield, has two highly controversial points/decision losses to Johnny Wilson (many think O’Dowd wins both or at least the second bout) and is stopped only once in his career (final fight of his 117 bout career).

What else did he need to do (KO world HW champion Jack Dempsey)? The IBHOF completely drops the ball on this one; Mike Glover and Tod Morgan ("on the bubble") are in the same "Old Timer" category and are of a similar 'caliber' as O'Dowd and should both be seriously considered.

P.S.

Check out my Marciano article (his biography) - hope you like it (I don't know if you are a fan of the 'Rock' or not).

[Ambling Alp]

I looked at more fighters that were listed.
I agree that O'Dowd should be in. Hector Camacho is another is a no-brainer and will make it soon after he is eligible.

Never was that impressed with Virgil Hill, but I am starting to come around on him. He probably deserves to make it and most likely will, though maybe not right away after he is eligible.

Trinidad will make it; sooner than he should.
You could make a good case for Michael Nunn, but realistically there is no chance he will be voted in.
Marlon Starling is a borderline case as to whether he deserves it; don't think he has a real good chance.
Ike Quartey probably has almost almost as good of a case as Starling, but like Starling he had a lot of bad luck. Doubtful he will make it.

Vernon Forrest may make it some day, but probably shouldn't.
Could see Carlos DeLeon, Simon Brown,, and Wilfredo Vasquez making it; but wouldn't bet on it. I don't think they quite deserve it.
There are several fighters near the end of their careers (hopefully anyway) who will easily make it when they are eligible.

As mentioned on other threads in the past, I really think Rodrigo Valdez and Eddie Mustapha Muhammad should have been voted in many years ago.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Laciar is a definitive HOFer to me. His Flyweight resume was good enough, the fights with Roman at Jr Bantam should have him gliding in.

Agreed on O'Dowd, now that Booker & Newsboy Brown have made it he has to be one of the more glaring omissions. Valdez is another good call. I wouldn't vote for Camacho or Eddie.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Holyfield should be added to the 5 year list. He'll obviously be a first ballot guy. There might be a situation where a guy like Mosley has to wait if he is up with say Evander, MAB & Erik.

[kal.majeed]

OK – nice to hear from you guys (not sure if you were still ‘on it’).

I’ll take this as it was listed; first, the obvious such as O’Dowd and then the IBHOF can work down (based upon who has been retired the longest); I think O’Dowd may be retired longer than many on the top two lists combined!

Agreed on Camacho, Trinidad, Nunn and Forrest.

Now, the twice stopped Virgil Hill (I’m a little biased as I grew up watching him and felt that he was a bit underrated); Olympic MW silver medalist; 2-division and 4-time world champion (with 20 successful world title defenses); first to defeat (TKO 7) the formidable Nigerian, West African and African LHW champion Joe Lasisi; the only one to ever defeat/stop (SD 12, TKO 1) the five years younger, 2-division world champion Fabrice Tiozzo; first to defeat (UD 12) the four years younger, never stopped future world LHW champion Lou Del Valle; the only boxer to defeat (SD 12) 3-year world LHW champion Henry Maske; first stoppage loss (KO 4) was not until his 14th year as a pro to the five years younger, future world HW champion Roy Jones Jr.; in his 22nd year as a pro, Hill wins the world CW title by becoming the first to defeat the twelve years younger, top contender Valery Brudov.

Folks, if that’s not an IBHOF resume, I don’t know what is (bias aside)?

Again, I’m biased toward Starling and Quartey; the never stopped, 2-time world WW champion Starling is first – arguably the best WW in the post Leonard/Hearns era (Leonard retires then moves up in weight along with Hearns); may have been the first to defeat Curry (although Curry clearly seems to have won the rematch); first to defeat the four years younger, future 2-division, 3-time world champion Simon Brown; first to defeat/stop (TKO 11) the nearly four years younger, Olympic WW gold medalist and 2-time world WW champion Mark Breland; first to stop the one time undisputed and 2-time world WW champion Lloyd Honeyghan. Starling should be seriously considered (never really outclassed as losses were mostly SD or MD).

Next, the never stopped and highly avoided Ike Quartey (Whitaker, Trinidad and De La Hoya pull out of 1998 proposed bouts against him, causing Quartey to be stripped of his world WW title); the only boxer to ever defeat/stop (TKO 11) 2-year world WW champion Crisanto Espana; reigned for more than 4 years (scoring mostly KOs) before being unfairly stripped; along with Whitaker, may have been robbed against media star De La Hoya; the Vargas and Forrest decisions are disputed as well; the only clear loss (UD 12) of his career is against the formidable (never stopped) Ronald Wright. Quartey, like Starling, should be seriously considered.

Among (4 times stopped) Carlos De Leon, Simon Brown and Wilfredo Vazquez, I would probably vote for 3-division world champion Vazquez (but the only once stopped each Miguel Lora and Antonio Cermeno would have to proceed him) – and I don’t know if they will???

I had Rodrigo Valdez in one of my own previous posts (hence, agreed) but not Eddie Mustafa Muhammad (formidable though).

Agreed on Laciar and just added Holyfield (I had him on a previous post; hence, I somehow overlooked him) and yes, Mosley (at some point) should be in there (maybe with Wright since they retire at virtually the same time).

[Rover]

Ike was not robbed v. Oscar, whom I detest; had that fight a draw. And the Vargas loss was disputed?
Starling lost decisively to Curry the second time. Talk about someone who should be in (Curry).