>>>but comparing the fighters Gatti beat to the fighters Carbajal or Gonzales beat? That's silly.<<<
Well instead of ignoring, or running from this challenge then why don't you enlighten us all as to how great the opponents of Carbajal and Gonzalez are so better compared to Gatti...can you do that?
Also you talk about Ivan Robinson, Angel Manfredy, who was ranked number one when he fought Gatti and Mickey Ward, yet you fail to mention Rolando Pascua, Saman Sorjaturong...Jake Matlala and Mauricio Pastrana...those fighters are no better than the guys you mentioned for Gatti! And as to Mayweather and De La Hoya...well since you seem to have no clue...a lot of the fighters they beat failed to win a round, so it's not a big thing...at least Gatti had the balls to move up and fight the very best...Carbajal and Gonzalez stayed in the safe confines of the jr. flyweights while guys like Yuri Arbachakov broke bones...gee, wouldn't it have been nice to have seen Carbajal and Gonzalez have fought other number one fighters...other than just fighting each other...which turned out one classic fight and two other dull sleepfests!
Carlos Baldomier into the HOF, after all he defeated......
re
I would take the time to do a very through comparision of the opponents that the three fighters faced, even though I already know about the fighters, to try to to present some sense to some of you, but I doubt very seriously if it would make a difference...hell those of you trying to argue now cannot seem to see the overwhelming FACTS about the topic I have already presented so why should you pay attention to any other facts...that is unless it favored Carbajal and Gonzalez, which that seems to be the only FACTS that you guys seem to be noticing...sounds like complete bias to me, or just a complete unwillingness to admit being wrong!
Re: re
Keep over-rating Gatti.barry wrote:>>>but comparing the fighters Gatti beat to the fighters Carbajal or Gonzales beat? That's silly.<<<
Well instead of ignoring, or running from this challenge then why don't you enlighten us all as to how great the opponents of Carbajal and Gonzalez are so better compared to Gatti...can you do that?
Also you talk about Ivan Robinson, Angel Manfredy, who was ranked number one when he fought Gatti and Mickey Ward, yet you fail to mention Rolando Pascua, Saman Sorjaturong...Jake Matlala and Mauricio Pastrana...those fighters are no better than the guys you mentioned for Gatti! And as to Mayweather and De La Hoya...well since you seem to have no clue...a lot of the fighters they beat failed to win a round, so it's not a big thing...at least Gatti had the balls to move up and fight the very best...Carbajal and Gonzalez stayed in the safe confines of the jr. flyweights while guys like Yuri Arbachakov broke bones...gee, wouldn't it have been nice to have seen Carbajal and Gonzalez have fought other number one fighters...other than just fighting each other...which turned out one classic fight and two other dull sleepfests!
Why did Gatti fight Ward instead of the man that beat Ward, Diaz beat Ward and Gatti gets the big money fight. Diaz would have teared Gatti a new asshole.
Many fighters didn't move up in weight so why hate so much on Carbajal and Gonzalez? You're are just hating and chosing Carbajal and Gonzalez as your target because i mentioned that Sugar mentioned Carbajal and Gonzalez, yet both you dumbasses thought Gatti beating Baldomier was a sure thing, lol. Because of you shit head argument, it brought me great, great joy to see Baldomier smash, and crush Gatti.
McCullugh was a better fighter then Gatti and showed tons of heart yet, because he was a better fighter he didn't have to take the beating Gatti had to take.
You are pathetic, you keep trying to bring down HOF fighters to try and raise Gattis stock, lol. Who are you? Bert Sugar? Cause both of you sure don't know shit!
Re: re
Barry, Barry Barry!!... you saying that Gatti fought better opposition is not a fact it is your opinion, and that is a fact. Its a shame that you cant debate sometjhing like this without losing your cool man, but we're talking opinions here and lets just agree to disagree as I've got little inclination to get into a full blown argument over this... lifes too short.barry wrote:>>>Fact is Barry what you keep saying is facts is just your opinion, its just your opinion that Gattis opposition was better than Carbajals and Gonzarlezs.<<<
I have a little opinion in it, but it is backed very solidly by actual FACTS of the issue...which some of you consistenly dodge.
The numbers that I presented are not opinions...they are cold-hard facts...such as the fact that Gatti's opponents not only have a higher winning percentage than either Carbajal and Gonzalez, but they also won more fights...around 100 to 300 more than Gonzalez' opponents an close to 600 more than Carbajals and the equalling factor is this...they all had pretty much the same amount of fights! Now if Gatti had had 20, or 30 more fights than the other two then it would be expected that his opponents would have higher totals, but that is not the case...and that is cold hard FACT...not opinion!
Also, cold hard FACT...Gatti fought more world title holders than each Carbajal, or Gonzalez...I don't recall the numbers, but they are in the last thread from about a week, or two ago, so they are there and that is not opinion...it's FACT...Gatti fought more world title holders. FACT...Gatti won titles at two different weight classes and a top ranked contender in four different division, while Carbajal and Gonzalez won titles in one and they stayed in that one division that was spearated by two other division and seven pounds. FACT...Carbajal and Gonzalez had more title fights than Gatti. Now if you have any other FACTS to counter then I would gladly like to hear it, but as the FACTS show...my opinion is based more on FACT compared to what you guys are basing your opinion on, which seems to be the FACT that Carbajal and Gonzalez fought more title fights...well Gatti fought more title holders...plus the other FACTS of the issue in favor of Gatti!
Now me saying that Gatti fought better competition is backed by FACTS, no matter how you look at it, I have based it very, very solidly on truth, while what you guys have been stating is just opinion based on opinion
And also, for the record, since you guys seem to mention this a lot...if you are going to give Carbajal extra credit for bringing attention to the lighter weights then you have to give Gatti the same kind of extra credit for bringing in millions of fans and attention to boxing in general that would not be there if it were not for Gatti. Gatti has done a lot more to popularize boxing than Carbajal and Gonzalez combined...and as the FACTS of the issue clearly point out...it sure as hell seems that he was more successful...now in Neverland that may be different, but in reality the FACTS do not lie, nor are they opinion!
Oh, shut up you poser!... you say all this crap then go and cream your pants over David Haye!!... 8)Terence wrote:When titles mean nothing.
When greatness is distilled.
When a fighter steps-up to real HOF class, loses every round and gets humiliated but is still called world-class.
When world-class means fook-all.
On that day Gatti will take his place in the HOF.
Waffle waffle waffle!!... I've nothing against you personally mate, but you say so much and yet so little at the same time... you denigrate Gatti continually yet at the same time talk up David Haye like he is the second coming... rather hypocritical I think. Where were all your fine words about the dilution of boxing after Hayes recent public sparring session???.....Terence wrote:Another insightful argument by Silkov, the perpetual hair across my arse.
Haye has great potential, Gatti hit a glass ceiling. If Haye fulfills his potential he will be right up there.
Lennox Lewis had a better pedigree than Gatti, a better resume and a great career.
If both Lewis and Gatti had to be balloted-off against one another people would grumble about Lewis and point to the fact Gatti had 'great' fights. There is a reason that Gatti gets twatted about the ring, bleeds profusely and loses big fights, he is a lower-grade fighter who has had some wars. He is not HOF material. Now, if he had a war with Floyd or Oscar maybe he'd be in with a shout, shit even a tactical battle would suffice, being used as a punch bag then going to war with fellow lower-level guys is not grounds for the HOF. Altough the HOF means increasingly little when McGuigan can get in there.
-
vagabundo55
- Heavyweight
re
>>>I think it's meaningless to compare the opposition of Gatti to the opposition of Carbajal and Gonzales when Gatti had so little success against his best opponents. What's next? Are you going to say that Marion Wilson's opposition was better than George Foreman's?<<<
I didn't think you had the know-how to do the comparision...not even a good cop-out!
>>>Barry, Barry Barry!!... you saying that Gatti fought better opposition is not a fact it is your opinion, and that is a fact.<<
Jesus...can you people not understand simple fornicating English? I said that it was my opinion, but my opinion is based very solidly on actual FACT...which if you can present evidence to say otherwise I would like to see it, but what I would like most is for some of you to pay closer attention to what you read!
>>>Haye has great potential, Gatti hit a glass ceiling.<<<
That's all I need tom hear from you!
What I would most like, other than people paying close attention is to see some opinion based on actual FACTS on thekissue instead opinions based entirely on what you wish to be correct...yet the only fact anyone has ever presented in the couple of weeks of this arguement is the fact that Carbajal and Gonzalez had more title fights...yet you fail to acknowledge the other important issues.
Also, Ferocity, I hear you yapping about every Mexican fighter as if they are HOF material...are you by chance Mexican?
>>>>So does anybody else thing Baldomir can possibly earn a spot in the hall of fame if he beats Mayweather?<<<
Not based on beating Mayweather alone, but if he can continue to win against top competition then he can certainly earn his way in...but then again...if fighters like Carbajal and Gonzalez can be elected based on one fight...then why can't Baldomir...or any one else who has won a big fight?
I didn't think you had the know-how to do the comparision...not even a good cop-out!
>>>Barry, Barry Barry!!... you saying that Gatti fought better opposition is not a fact it is your opinion, and that is a fact.<<
Jesus...can you people not understand simple fornicating English? I said that it was my opinion, but my opinion is based very solidly on actual FACT...which if you can present evidence to say otherwise I would like to see it, but what I would like most is for some of you to pay closer attention to what you read!
>>>Haye has great potential, Gatti hit a glass ceiling.<<<
That's all I need tom hear from you!
What I would most like, other than people paying close attention is to see some opinion based on actual FACTS on thekissue instead opinions based entirely on what you wish to be correct...yet the only fact anyone has ever presented in the couple of weeks of this arguement is the fact that Carbajal and Gonzalez had more title fights...yet you fail to acknowledge the other important issues.
Also, Ferocity, I hear you yapping about every Mexican fighter as if they are HOF material...are you by chance Mexican?
>>>>So does anybody else thing Baldomir can possibly earn a spot in the hall of fame if he beats Mayweather?<<<
Not based on beating Mayweather alone, but if he can continue to win against top competition then he can certainly earn his way in...but then again...if fighters like Carbajal and Gonzalez can be elected based on one fight...then why can't Baldomir...or any one else who has won a big fight?
Re: re
How is your opinion based on actual fact Barry???.... can't you see the contridiction in that statement??.... its just your opinion that Gatti fought better opposition than Carbajal and Gonzarlez... so what if Gatti fought more 'title holders' that doesnt mean that the fighters were better pound for pound ability wise, you of all people should know that titles are more or less meaningless now, but as usual you seem willing to turn things around in order to win an argument... which is rather sad at the end of the day...barry wrote:>>>I think it's meaningless to compare the opposition of Gatti to the opposition of Carbajal and Gonzales when Gatti had so little success against his best opponents. What's next? Are you going to say that Marion Wilson's opposition was better than George Foreman's?<<<
I didn't think you had the know-how to do the comparision...not even a good cop-out!
>>>Barry, Barry Barry!!... you saying that Gatti fought better opposition is not a fact it is your opinion, and that is a fact.<<
Jesus...can you people not understand simple smeg English? I said that it was my opinion, but my opinion is based very solidly on actual FACT...which if you can present evidence to say otherwise I would like to see it, but what I would like most is for some of you to pay closer attention to what you read!
>>>Haye has great potential, Gatti hit a glass ceiling.<<<
That's all I need tom hear from you!
What I would most like, other than people paying close attention is to see some opinion based on actual FACTS on thekissue instead opinions based entirely on what you wish to be correct...yet the only fact anyone has ever presented in the couple of weeks of this arguement is the fact that Carbajal and Gonzalez had more title fights...yet you fail to acknowledge the other important issues.
Also, Ferocity, I hear you yapping about every Mexican fighter as if they are HOF material...are you by chance Mexican?
>>>>So does anybody else thing Baldomir can possibly earn a spot in the hall of fame if he beats Mayweather?<<<
Not based on beating Mayweather alone, but if he can continue to win against top competition then he can certainly earn his way in...but then again...if fighters like Carbajal and Gonzalez can be elected based on one fight...then why can't Baldomir...or any one else who has won a big fight?
re
>>>How is your opinion based on actual fact Barry???<<<
I base my opinion on the FACT that Gatti's opponents not only had up to 100+ more wins and less losses than either Carbajal and Gonzalez and Gatti's opposition had a higher winning percentage than either Carbajal, or Gonzalez...I base my opinion of the fact that Gatti fought more title holders than either Carbajal, or Gonzalez...I base my opinion on the fact that Gatti was a top ranked fighter and was very successful in four different divisions and also won titles in two of those divisions. My opinion is based on the FACT Carbajal and Gonzalez had more title fights than Gatti.
Now if I were basing my opinion on something like I thought that Gatti was a more skilled fighter than either Carbajal, or Gonzalez just because I think so...well that would be entirely opinion and there are really no actual FACTS that would concur with that opinion, which is the route that I have seen people like ferocity take, which I don't think that Gatti was a more skilled, or a better fighter either Gonzalez, or Carbajal, but he was just as successful if not more so.
I know when I am stating my opinion and I do not try to present my opinion as FACT, unlike a lot of others, but my opinion is almost always backed by some very solid FACTUAL evidence...as is the case in this debate!
I base my opinion on the FACT that Gatti's opponents not only had up to 100+ more wins and less losses than either Carbajal and Gonzalez and Gatti's opposition had a higher winning percentage than either Carbajal, or Gonzalez...I base my opinion of the fact that Gatti fought more title holders than either Carbajal, or Gonzalez...I base my opinion on the fact that Gatti was a top ranked fighter and was very successful in four different divisions and also won titles in two of those divisions. My opinion is based on the FACT Carbajal and Gonzalez had more title fights than Gatti.
Now if I were basing my opinion on something like I thought that Gatti was a more skilled fighter than either Carbajal, or Gonzalez just because I think so...well that would be entirely opinion and there are really no actual FACTS that would concur with that opinion, which is the route that I have seen people like ferocity take, which I don't think that Gatti was a more skilled, or a better fighter either Gonzalez, or Carbajal, but he was just as successful if not more so.
I know when I am stating my opinion and I do not try to present my opinion as FACT, unlike a lot of others, but my opinion is almost always backed by some very solid FACTUAL evidence...as is the case in this debate!
re
Terrence---Although I think trying to compare David Haye to someone that has been tested and passed, such as Gatti, is a bit silly I agree with you about no one putting together anything meaningful, or solid about the Gatti/Carbajal/Gonzalez debate!
re
>>>I'm not saying Haye is better now, Silkov tried to insinuate that<<<
I can certainly sympathize with that as many people insinuate and make up shit when trying to debate with me…which Silkov…I’m not taking his side in this matter, nor am I trying to attack you!
>>>Gatti is not HOF, do they have to induct every year? Sure it worked at first but do we want to see Judah and the like in there? Are we going to call it The Hall of Losing Crucial Fights? They should make it every two years or so and the skipped year can be a celebration of the men they have inducted so far, get them back and get them to speak to boxers about what it means to them. It might encourage boxers to work hard for the HOF.<<<
I don’t think Gatti is HOF material either, but if fighters like Carbajal and Gonzalez can be elected based on the very little that they actually accomplished in the ring…then fighters like Gatti deserves to be there as well.
Personally, I think the IBHOF is a sham to start with as there are too many fighters that should be in there which aren’t and there are many that are in there who really shouldn’t…and Carbajal and Gonzalez are two of those, which as I have repeated numerous times, but that there are still a couple of people who either cannot read it, or chose not to and instead make up shit, but as I have said, it does not mean that they were not very successful, or that they were not very good fighters because they certainly were…they just did not put together a career that was truly HOF caliber and anyone that really thinks otherwise just simply don’t know what they are talking about, or are just too over-bias to see the actual truth and FACT of the issue…and yet again I must repeat for dumbass idiots like ferocity…that doesn’t mean that they were not successful and that they did not have a hell of a career…just not HOF!
I can certainly sympathize with that as many people insinuate and make up shit when trying to debate with me…which Silkov…I’m not taking his side in this matter, nor am I trying to attack you!
>>>Gatti is not HOF, do they have to induct every year? Sure it worked at first but do we want to see Judah and the like in there? Are we going to call it The Hall of Losing Crucial Fights? They should make it every two years or so and the skipped year can be a celebration of the men they have inducted so far, get them back and get them to speak to boxers about what it means to them. It might encourage boxers to work hard for the HOF.<<<
I don’t think Gatti is HOF material either, but if fighters like Carbajal and Gonzalez can be elected based on the very little that they actually accomplished in the ring…then fighters like Gatti deserves to be there as well.
Personally, I think the IBHOF is a sham to start with as there are too many fighters that should be in there which aren’t and there are many that are in there who really shouldn’t…and Carbajal and Gonzalez are two of those, which as I have repeated numerous times, but that there are still a couple of people who either cannot read it, or chose not to and instead make up shit, but as I have said, it does not mean that they were not very successful, or that they were not very good fighters because they certainly were…they just did not put together a career that was truly HOF caliber and anyone that really thinks otherwise just simply don’t know what they are talking about, or are just too over-bias to see the actual truth and FACT of the issue…and yet again I must repeat for dumbass idiots like ferocity…that doesn’t mean that they were not successful and that they did not have a hell of a career…just not HOF!
-
The Great John L
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 4351
- Joined: 26 Jul 2005, 19:37
Re: re
barry, everybody's opinion is based on facts, or at least what they believe to be facts. And while I think most of us agree that you have a LOT of facts at your disposal, that doesn't mean that the opinions you derive from all of these facts are always logical. Unfortunately you sometimes make pompous and defenseless statements that are totally illogical and then defend them long after any reasonable person would have come to realize that they made a mistake.barry wrote:Jesus...can you people not understand simple smeg English? I said that it was my opinion, but my opinion is based very solidly on actual FACT...which if you can present evidence to say otherwise I would like to see it, but what I would like most is for some of you to pay closer attention to what you read!
And try taking a few deep breaths. This is just a smegin boxing forum.
Re: re
Just because Gatti's competition may have more collective wins and less losses than Carbajals and Gonzarlez's doesnt mean that they are better fighters. Surely you know that the lighter weight fighters generally have a higher percentage of losses because the divisions are generally more competitive and also the lighterweight fighters tend to be far less protected than their higher weight counterparts. If you simply look at the fighters with world class ability that Carbajal/gonzarlez and Gattio faced then the edge goes to Carbajal and Gonzarlez... irrespective of numbers of losses. Quite simply I have watched most of Carbajals and Gonzarlezs and Gattis fights and to say that Gattis opposition is better just becasue they have less losses is rather ludicrous... I judge by the ability I see in the ring and dont hide behind statistics when it suits me...barry wrote:>>>How is your opinion based on actual fact Barry???<<<
I base my opinion on the FACT that Gatti's opponents not only had up to 100+ more wins and less losses than either Carbajal and Gonzalez and Gatti's opposition had a higher winning percentage than either Carbajal, or Gonzalez...I base my opinion of the fact that Gatti fought more title holders than either Carbajal, or Gonzalez...I base my opinion on the fact that Gatti was a top ranked fighter and was very successful in four different divisions and also won titles in two of those divisions. My opinion is based on the FACT Carbajal and Gonzalez had more title fights than Gatti.
Now if I were basing my opinion on something like I thought that Gatti was a more skilled fighter than either Carbajal, or Gonzalez just because I think so...well that would be entirely opinion and there are really no actual FACTS that would concur with that opinion, which is the route that I have seen people like ferocity take, which I don't think that Gatti was a more skilled, or a better fighter either Gonzalez, or Carbajal, but he was just as successful if not more so.
I know when I am stating my opinion and I do not try to present my opinion as FACT, unlike a lot of others, but my opinion is almost always backed by some very solid FACTUAL evidence...as is the case in this debate!
-
The Great John L
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 4351
- Joined: 26 Jul 2005, 19:37
Re: re
I personally have a tougher time accepting Palomino than Carbajal or Gonzalez. But unfortunately, HOF selections in all sports have oddities. Anyone here know who Rabbit Maranville is?barry wrote:I don’t think Gatti is HOF material either, but if fighters like Carbajal and Gonzalez can be elected based on the very little that they actually accomplished in the ring…then fighters like Gatti deserves to be there as well.
Re: re
'I SAID IT WAS MY OPINION, BUT MY OPINION IS BASED VERY SOLIDLY ON ACTUAL FACT!' ...The Great John L wrote:barry, everybody's opinion is based on facts, or at least what they believe to be facts. And while I think most of us agree that you have a LOT of facts at your disposal, that doesn't mean that the opinions you derive from all of these facts are always logical. Unfortunately you sometimes make pompous and defenseless statements that are totally illogical and then defend them long after any reasonable person would have come to realize that they made a mistake.barry wrote:Jesus...can you people not understand simple smeg English? I said that it was my opinion, but my opinion is based very solidly on actual FACT...which if you can present evidence to say otherwise I would like to see it, but what I would like most is for some of you to pay closer attention to what you read!
And try taking a few deep breaths. This is just a smegin boxing forum.
Re: re
Don't start on Palomino dude!.. :x :x :x . least he held half the world title as opposed to a quarter, which is most 'champions' lot today....The Great John L wrote:I personally have a tougher time accepting Palomino than Carbajal or Gonzalez. But unfortunately, HOF selections in all sports have oddities. Anyone here know who Rabbit Maranville is?barry wrote:I don’t think Gatti is HOF material either, but if fighters like Carbajal and Gonzalez can be elected based on the very little that they actually accomplished in the ring…then fighters like Gatti deserves to be there as well.
-
The Great John L
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 4351
- Joined: 26 Jul 2005, 19:37
Re: re
Yeah, but HOF?silkov wrote:Don't start on Palomino dude!.. :x :x :x . least he held half the world title as opposed to a quarter, which is most 'champions' lot today....The Great John L wrote:I personally have a tougher time accepting Palomino than Carbajal or Gonzalez. But unfortunately, HOF selections in all sports have oddities. Anyone here know who Rabbit Maranville is?barry wrote:I don’t think Gatti is HOF material either, but if fighters like Carbajal and Gonzalez can be elected based on the very little that they actually accomplished in the ring…then fighters like Gatti deserves to be there as well.
He was a very good fighter, but he's a pretty ridiculous HOF selection. That's my opinion, but it's based on irrefutable FACTS!!!
re
>>>Just because Gatti's competition may have more collective wins and less losses than Carbajals and Gonzarlez's doesnt mean that they are better fighters.<<<
Of course not, but add those numbers with who the fighters actually are and it makes pretty good sense…wouldn’t you agree?
>>>Surely you know that the lighter weight fighters generally have a higher percentage of losses because the divisions are generally more competitive and also the lighterweight fighters tend to be far less protected than their higher weight counterparts.<<<
No doubt…lightweights and featherweights historically have had an abundance of talent and very good competition, but you know as well as I do that the flyweight division has been a division where there just are not a whole hell of a lot of fighters to choose from, which is not necessarily due to lack of talent, but instead just a plain lack of fighters. There had always been, at least in modern times, very few fighters at the flyweight limit and the jr. flyweight is even worse in simply just not having enough fighters. For instance, say that there are 4000 licensed welterweights, the total number of fighters for each division below that usually dwindles…especially from below featherweight…there might be 2000 licensed featherweights, 1500 bantamweights, 1000 flyweights and 500 jr. flyweights. Now if they strawweight and jr. flyweight division were done away with then there would be a hell of a lot of competition for flyweight, but as it is, since the advent of all the jr. weight classes, there usually is just not a whole hell of a lot to choose from in terms of talent for 17 divisions, which is a lot more relevant to the lightest of weights.
>>>If you simply look at the fighters with world class ability that Carbajal/gonzarlez and Gattio faced then the edge goes to Carbajal and Gonzarlez... irrespective of numbers of losses.<<<
As I have said, I would love for someone to do a comparison…just stating it is completely opinion, but you can have a really solid opinion if you do a comparison of the fighters, which I guess since no one else is going to take on the task then I will and I think those who are sensible, such as you, will get a pretty good awakening as to the level of each fighters competition!
>>>Quite simply I have watched most of Carbajals and Gonzarlezs and Gattis fights and to say that Gattis opposition is better just becasue they have less losses is rather ludicrous... I judge by the ability I see in the ring and dont hide behind statistics when it suits me...<<<
As I have said…what is ludicrous is to say that a Robinson Cuesta is far ahead of a Pete Talieffero, or to say that a Muangchai Kittikasem is levels above a Tracy Patterson, or to say that a Julio Coronell is levels above a Joe Hutchison! As I have said from the beginning, which some seem to try to dispute is that the three have faced very similar opposition, but from the actual evidence of each fighter’s career it would seem that Gatti has faced the better competition…which I will now a complete comparison of!
>>>I personally have a tougher time accepting Palomino than Carbajal or Gonzalez. But unfortunately, HOF selections in all sports have oddities. Anyone here know who Rabbit Maranville is?<<<
Palomino is another, in my opinion, who did not really accomplish enough in the ring…so is Harry Harris and Ken Norton and several others.
Rabbit Maranville is one of the baseball HOFers who I personally feel does not deserve to be in the HOF ahead of players that were held out for years…such as Tony Perez and Orlando Cepeda…though they both got in eventually, but there are many others who are more so deserving than Maranville in my opinion. Maranville was a good fielder, but his bat left a lot to be desired and though he got a lot of total hits his was almost entirely a “singles” hitter…and got a good one at that!
Of course not, but add those numbers with who the fighters actually are and it makes pretty good sense…wouldn’t you agree?
>>>Surely you know that the lighter weight fighters generally have a higher percentage of losses because the divisions are generally more competitive and also the lighterweight fighters tend to be far less protected than their higher weight counterparts.<<<
No doubt…lightweights and featherweights historically have had an abundance of talent and very good competition, but you know as well as I do that the flyweight division has been a division where there just are not a whole hell of a lot of fighters to choose from, which is not necessarily due to lack of talent, but instead just a plain lack of fighters. There had always been, at least in modern times, very few fighters at the flyweight limit and the jr. flyweight is even worse in simply just not having enough fighters. For instance, say that there are 4000 licensed welterweights, the total number of fighters for each division below that usually dwindles…especially from below featherweight…there might be 2000 licensed featherweights, 1500 bantamweights, 1000 flyweights and 500 jr. flyweights. Now if they strawweight and jr. flyweight division were done away with then there would be a hell of a lot of competition for flyweight, but as it is, since the advent of all the jr. weight classes, there usually is just not a whole hell of a lot to choose from in terms of talent for 17 divisions, which is a lot more relevant to the lightest of weights.
>>>If you simply look at the fighters with world class ability that Carbajal/gonzarlez and Gattio faced then the edge goes to Carbajal and Gonzarlez... irrespective of numbers of losses.<<<
As I have said, I would love for someone to do a comparison…just stating it is completely opinion, but you can have a really solid opinion if you do a comparison of the fighters, which I guess since no one else is going to take on the task then I will and I think those who are sensible, such as you, will get a pretty good awakening as to the level of each fighters competition!
>>>Quite simply I have watched most of Carbajals and Gonzarlezs and Gattis fights and to say that Gattis opposition is better just becasue they have less losses is rather ludicrous... I judge by the ability I see in the ring and dont hide behind statistics when it suits me...<<<
As I have said…what is ludicrous is to say that a Robinson Cuesta is far ahead of a Pete Talieffero, or to say that a Muangchai Kittikasem is levels above a Tracy Patterson, or to say that a Julio Coronell is levels above a Joe Hutchison! As I have said from the beginning, which some seem to try to dispute is that the three have faced very similar opposition, but from the actual evidence of each fighter’s career it would seem that Gatti has faced the better competition…which I will now a complete comparison of!
>>>I personally have a tougher time accepting Palomino than Carbajal or Gonzalez. But unfortunately, HOF selections in all sports have oddities. Anyone here know who Rabbit Maranville is?<<<
Palomino is another, in my opinion, who did not really accomplish enough in the ring…so is Harry Harris and Ken Norton and several others.
Rabbit Maranville is one of the baseball HOFers who I personally feel does not deserve to be in the HOF ahead of players that were held out for years…such as Tony Perez and Orlando Cepeda…though they both got in eventually, but there are many others who are more so deserving than Maranville in my opinion. Maranville was a good fielder, but his bat left a lot to be desired and though he got a lot of total hits his was almost entirely a “singles” hitter…and got a good one at that!
re
>>>which is most 'champions' lot today....<<<
Hence the reason most fighters of today do not deserve to be in the Hall!
And Palomino...he only beat two title holders...period and he never beat anyone that would merit him being anywhere near the Hall, but being that you are UK I can see where you would have a soft-spot being that Palomino beat Stracey and Davey Green, but they were not the kind of fighters to send someone to the HOF! Does that mean that he sucks, or that his career was no good...NO, IT DOESN'T, but HOF worthy...not in my eyes...as I have said...a fighter should really have accomplished something, preferably a lot of things, but the manner that some fighters are being elected today is done so for the reason that I mentioned prior...fighters who are alive are elected because it makes the owners of the HOF more money and some fighters are elected pretty much due to financial reasons instead of what they actually did in the ring...Palomino for example!
Hence the reason most fighters of today do not deserve to be in the Hall!
And Palomino...he only beat two title holders...period and he never beat anyone that would merit him being anywhere near the Hall, but being that you are UK I can see where you would have a soft-spot being that Palomino beat Stracey and Davey Green, but they were not the kind of fighters to send someone to the HOF! Does that mean that he sucks, or that his career was no good...NO, IT DOESN'T, but HOF worthy...not in my eyes...as I have said...a fighter should really have accomplished something, preferably a lot of things, but the manner that some fighters are being elected today is done so for the reason that I mentioned prior...fighters who are alive are elected because it makes the owners of the HOF more money and some fighters are elected pretty much due to financial reasons instead of what they actually did in the ring...Palomino for example!
Re: re
No it doesnt.... all in all I dont think there is much to choose between the opposition of Carbajal, Gonzalez, and Gatti... but if I had to choose I believe Carbajal and Gonzarlez have a slight edge... but the bottom line is that thats my opinion and your view is your opinion, what I really dispute is you saying that your opinion is based on fact because it isnt...barry wrote:>>>Just because Gatti's competition may have more collective wins and less losses than Carbajals and Gonzarlez's doesnt mean that they are better fighters.<<<
Of course not, but add those numbers with who the fighters actually are and it makes pretty good sense…wouldn’t you agree?
>>>Surely you know that the lighter weight fighters generally have a higher percentage of losses because the divisions are generally more competitive and also the lighterweight fighters tend to be far less protected than their higher weight counterparts.<<<
No doubt…lightweights and featherweights historically have had an abundance of talent and very good competition, but you know as well as I do that the flyweight division has been a division where there just are not a whole hell of a lot of fighters to choose from, which is not necessarily due to lack of talent, but instead just a plain lack of fighters. There had always been, at least in modern times, very few fighters at the flyweight limit and the jr. flyweight is even worse in simply just not having enough fighters. For instance, say that there are 4000 licensed welterweights, the total number of fighters for each division below that usually dwindles…especially from below featherweight…there might be 2000 licensed featherweights, 1500 bantamweights, 1000 flyweights and 500 jr. flyweights. Now if they strawweight and jr. flyweight division were done away with then there would be a hell of a lot of competition for flyweight, but as it is, since the advent of all the jr. weight classes, there usually is just not a whole hell of a lot to choose from in terms of talent for 17 divisions, which is a lot more relevant to the lightest of weights.
>>>If you simply look at the fighters with world class ability that Carbajal/gonzarlez and Gattio faced then the edge goes to Carbajal and Gonzarlez... irrespective of numbers of losses.<<<
As I have said, I would love for someone to do a comparison…just stating it is completely opinion, but you can have a really solid opinion if you do a comparison of the fighters, which I guess since no one else is going to take on the task then I will and I think those who are sensible, such as you, will get a pretty good awakening as to the level of each fighters competition!
>>>Quite simply I have watched most of Carbajals and Gonzarlezs and Gattis fights and to say that Gattis opposition is better just becasue they have less losses is rather ludicrous... I judge by the ability I see in the ring and dont hide behind statistics when it suits me...<<<
As I have said…what is ludicrous is to say that a Robinson Cuesta is far ahead of a Pete Talieffero, or to say that a Muangchai Kittikasem is levels above a Tracy Patterson, or to say that a Julio Coronell is levels above a Joe Hutchison! As I have said from the beginning, which some seem to try to dispute is that the three have faced very similar opposition, but from the actual evidence of each fighter’s career it would seem that Gatti has faced the better competition…which I will now a complete comparison of!
>>>I personally have a tougher time accepting Palomino than Carbajal or Gonzalez. But unfortunately, HOF selections in all sports have oddities. Anyone here know who Rabbit Maranville is?<<<
Palomino is another, in my opinion, who did not really accomplish enough in the ring…so is Harry Harris and Ken Norton and several others.
Rabbit Maranville is one of the baseball HOFers who I personally feel does not deserve to be in the HOF ahead of players that were held out for years…such as Tony Perez and Orlando Cepeda…though they both got in eventually, but there are many others who are more so deserving than Maranville in my opinion. Maranville was a good fielder, but his bat left a lot to be desired and though he got a lot of total hits his was almost entirely a “singles” hitter…and got a good one at that!
re
What I hear some saying is that Carbajal, or Gonzalez should be in the HOF based on they're skill as a little man...well Howard Davis was about as skilled and talented as they came...should that make him HOF worthy just because of his skill? I don't think so!
I have a question for some of you...
Do you think that a fighter like George Manley should be in the HOF?
http://www.boxrec.com/boxer_display.php?boxer_id=12062
And please, give a reason!
I have a question for some of you...
Do you think that a fighter like George Manley should be in the HOF?
http://www.boxrec.com/boxer_display.php?boxer_id=12062
And please, give a reason!
Re: re
Actually Stracey and green were very good fiighters, I'd pick Green to beat Hatton if they'd fought... but thats another story/argument... my point is that it was still an accomplishment in itself to win a world title in the 70s... so if your talking acheivements then Palomino has one right there... then he made some excellent defences before losing to Benitez... no disgrace there.... I actually rate Cuevas over Palomino so my soft spot isnt totally biased... 8)barry wrote:>>>which is most 'champions' lot today....<<<
Hence the reason most fighters of today do not deserve to be in the Hall!
And Palomino...he only beat two title holders...period and he never beat anyone that would merit him being anywhere near the Hall, but being that you are UK I can see where you would have a soft-spot being that Palomino beat Stracey and Davey Green, but they were not the kind of fighters to send someone to the HOF! Does that mean that he sucks, or that his career was no good...NO, IT DOESN'T, but HOF worthy...not in my eyes...as I have said...a fighter should really have accomplished something, preferably a lot of things, but the manner that some fighters are being elected today is done so for the reason that I mentioned prior...fighters who are alive are elected because it makes the owners of the HOF more money and some fighters are elected pretty much due to financial reasons instead of what they actually did in the ring...Palomino for example!
re
>>>No it doesnt.... all in all I dont think there is much to choose between the opposition of Carbajal, Gonzalez, and Gatti... but if I had to choose I believe Carbajal and Gonzarlez have a slight edge... but the bottom line is that thats my opinion and your view is your opinion: what I really dispute is you saying that your opinion is based on fact because it isnt...<<<
So you are saying that it is my opinion that Gatti's opponents had a higher winning percentage and more wins and less losses than either Carbajal and Gonzalez...that Gatti holding titles in two divisions while Carbajal and Gonzalez holding titles in one is my opinion...or that Gatti fought more total title holders than Carbajal and Gonzalez that's my opinion also? Or that Carbajal and Gonzalez had more title bouts than Gatti...opinion? Sorry, but those are actual, honest FACTS of the issue and that is what I base my opinion on!
That is what my opinion is based on while on the other side, you are basing your opinion of what you think...you say that Carabajal was better skilled because you think so, or that they fought the better competition because that is what you think, you're not bringing up any names of they're opponents and comparing them to the fighters that Gatti fought and you are not bringing out any actual FACTS about the issue to support your view.
I think you may be a little confused about the difference between an opinion based on fact and an opinion based entirely on what a person thinks thinks...though I would be glad to hear how it is that I am not basing my opinion on actual FACTS to support my argument...I would like to hear a breakdown of the logic behind how I am not using FACTS!
My stance from the very beginning has been simple…it has been that Gatti, Carbajal and Gonzalez all three had very similar career’s in accomplishment and in competition and if Carbajal and Gonzalez can be elected to the HOF based on what they did, then Gatti deserves it just as much, which that simple paragraph and statement has been a little difficult for the likes of ferocity to understand, but that has been my stance all along. Of course it is my opinion, just as the oppositioin is someone else’s opinion, but I have came up with my opinion by looking over the actual FACTS of the issue, which you seem to have an issue with:
So you are saying that it is my opinion that Gatti's opponents had a higher winning percentage and more wins and less losses than either Carbajal and Gonzalez...that Gatti holding titles in two divisions while Carbajal and Gonzalez holding titles in one is my opinion...or that Gatti fought more total title holders than Carbajal and Gonzalez that's my opinion also? Or that Carbajal and Gonzalez had more title bouts than Gatti...opinion? Sorry, but those are actual, honest FACTS of the issue and that is what I base my opinion on!
That is what my opinion is based on while on the other side, you are basing your opinion of what you think...you say that Carabajal was better skilled because you think so, or that they fought the better competition because that is what you think, you're not bringing up any names of they're opponents and comparing them to the fighters that Gatti fought and you are not bringing out any actual FACTS about the issue to support your view.
I think you may be a little confused about the difference between an opinion based on fact and an opinion based entirely on what a person thinks thinks...though I would be glad to hear how it is that I am not basing my opinion on actual FACTS to support my argument...I would like to hear a breakdown of the logic behind how I am not using FACTS!
My stance from the very beginning has been simple…it has been that Gatti, Carbajal and Gonzalez all three had very similar career’s in accomplishment and in competition and if Carbajal and Gonzalez can be elected to the HOF based on what they did, then Gatti deserves it just as much, which that simple paragraph and statement has been a little difficult for the likes of ferocity to understand, but that has been my stance all along. Of course it is my opinion, just as the oppositioin is someone else’s opinion, but I have came up with my opinion by looking over the actual FACTS of the issue, which you seem to have an issue with:
Re: re
Not really, he looks like he was a useful boxer and has good wins over Jeff Smith and Maxie Rosenbloom but there must be dozens of fighters more 'deserving' who havent been elected to the hall.barry wrote:What I hear some saying is that Carbajal, or Gonzalez should be in the HOF based on they're skill as a little man...well Howard Davis was about as skilled and talented as they came...should that make him HOF worthy just because of his skill? I don't think so!
I have a question for some of you...
Do you think that a fighter like George Manley should be in the HOF?
http://www.boxrec.com/boxer_display.php?boxer_id=12062
And please, give a reason!
If you compare Manley to Palomino, Carlos was for a time a world champ and amonsgt the elite of his weight and that puts him a few rungs up to Manley and makes him more 'deserving' of being in the hall...