Carlos Baldomier into the HOF, after all he defeated......

[barry]

>>>Actually Stracey and green were very good fiighters,<<<

They were very good fighters, very good, but a fighter does not gain HOF status just by beating those two, or two like that...well they shouldn't be elected, but they sometimes are. It's never a matter of a fighter not being good, or having a successful career...it's about whether they had such a great career that others paled in comparison a career that was truly, truly HOF material! Henry Armstrong, Archie Moore, or Sugar Ray Robinson...those guys are true legends and true HOF material!

[The Great John L]

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.

Agreed on all counts.

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!

Harry Hooper also fits in with Marranville as questionable. Personally, I’d like to see Santo in there. Sorry, I’ll get back to boxing now…

BTW barry, I agree with you that HOF wise there’s little difference between Gatti, Carbajal and Gonzalez. While I personally think Carbajal and Gonzalez MIGHT be slightly more qualified than Gatti, the accomplishments of all three are historically insignificant, and none of them are in any of my ATG lists. This shouldn’t be much of an argument, because none of them deserve any passionate HOF support.

[silkov]

>>>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:

Regarding Gatti's other 'titles' the only title I put weight on is at 130... the 140 title was a paper crown... also moving up diviosns is much easier today than it was in Carbajal and Gonzarlezs time because there are various 'suppliments' and also we have this silly weighing rule which means that todays lightweights are really welters and our welters are really middleweights etc etc.... you really cant hold the fact that Gonzarlez and Carbajal stayed at the same weight against them...
Regarding confusion, I'm not confused in the slightest... your arguments have not displayed irrefutable proof that Gattis opposition was better than Carbajals and Gonzarlezs...

[barry]

>>>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.
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...<<<

So you feel that by holding one of these meaningless trinkets that say WBA, WBC, or IBF makes a fighter more worthy than the actual competition that they fought and beat in the ring?

Manley fought and beat many, many top ranked fighters...best some of the best of his division...overall, it would seem that he fought the better competition...instead of beating one Starcey, or Green...Manley beat ten to twenty of the calibur of Stracey and Green, but because he did not hold a title he is not worthy?

For the record, when Manley beat Maxie Rosenbloom in 1931, Maxie was the light heavyweight champion...so Manley beat the title holder!

[silkov]

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.

Agreed on all counts.

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!

Harry Hooper also fits in with Marranville as questionable. Personally, I’d like to see Santo in there. Sorry, I’ll get back to boxing now…

BTW barry, I agree with you that HOF wise there’s little difference between Gatti, Carbajal and Gonzalez. While I personally think Carbajal and Gonzalez MIGHT be slightly more qualified than Gatti, the accomplishments of all three are historically insignificant, and none of them are in any of my ATG lists. This shouldn’t be much of an argument, because none of them deserve any passionate HOF support.

You may feel that the lightflyweight division is unimportant but that is your opinion... but you should remember that Carbajal and Gonzarlez actually made the division attractive and created some big fights... this is really surpassing Gatti engaing in classic fights in divisions which are already widely popular and used to 'classic fights'....

[barry]

>>>This shouldn’t be much of an argument, because none of them deserve any passionate HOF support<<<

I couldn't agree more and that is part of my main point...other than the fact that Gatti is just as deserving as Carbajal and Gonzalez, but in my opinion, as I have said multiple times, based on what they accomplished, none of the three are really truly HOF worthy!

[silkov]

>>>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.
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...<<<

So you feel that by holding one of these meaningless trinkets that say WBA, WBC, or IBF makes a fighter more worthy than the actual competition that they fought and beat in the ring?

Manley fought and beat many, many top ranked fighters...best some of the best of his division...overall, it would seem that he fought the better competition...instead of beating one Starcey, or Green...Manley beat ten to twenty of the calibur of Stracey and Green, but because he did not hold a title he is not worthy?

For the record, when Manley beat Maxie Rosenbloom in 1931, Maxie was the light heavyweight champion...so Manley beat the title holder!

But it wasnt a title fight was it?... and in that period title holders losing nontitle fights wasnt exactly unheard of either. You cant really compare Palomino with Manley as the eras are so different... there were far more fighters who fought far more often etc etc.... but certainly the WBC AND WBA titles were worth more during Palominos time than they were during Gatti's.
If Manley deserves being in the hall then like I said there are plenty of others, both title holders and nontitle holders who have stronger claims to a place... you may as well vote in anyone who made the top ten in the 20s and 30s for a start...

[barry]

>>>You may feel that the lightflyweight division is unimportant but that is your opinion...<<<


That is exactly what I cannot fornicating stand! Some of you cats cannot make sense out of an issue, so you start making up shit, or stating things that I have never said. I have never said that the Jr. Flyweight class is unimportant...Jesus!!!


>>>but you should remember that Carbajal and Gonzarlez actually made the division attractive and created some big fights<<<

Sorry, but that does not make them HOF material and honestly the only big fights that they created were when they fought one another, which as I have said produced one classic brawl and two wide, lackluster point wins!

>>>... this is really surpassing Gatti engaing in classic fights in divisions which are already widely popular and used to 'classic fights'....<<<

Well if you assume that then I have to question if you have really seen many of Gonzalez and Carbajal fights! Of the truly special, classic fights that Carabajal was in...two pretty much sum it up...the first bout with Gonzalez and the bout with Arce...Gonzalez is pretty much the same...the first bout with Carbajal and his last bout with Sajorturong...other than that they were not in any classic fights and as the people that have watched most of they're fights know...both Gonzalez and Carbajal were often very lack-luster in fights against opposition that they really should have blew away...and this was not a rare occurance that only happened once, or twice in each fighters career...it happened quite often as the people who have watched most of they're fights can tell you.

For every Robinson Cuesta-type of fight, that was exciting, Carbajal would have three, or four lack-luster bouts against the likes of Marcos Pachecho and others. As I stated several posts ago, I have watched most of the fights of each fighter and though they were champion fighters...they simply were not HOF fighters...Gatti included!

[The Great John L]

You may feel that the lightflyweight division is unimportant but that is your opinion...

What the HELL are you talking about? When did I say that? All I said was that I thought Carbajal, Gonzalez and Gatti are all historically insignificant. And yes, that’s just my opinion. But where did you get that I “feel that the lightflyweight division is unimportant” comment from?

Okay, now I'll take a deep breath...

[silkov]

Some people seem to think that Gatti, Gonzales, Carbajal haivng good fights = HOF material. Are we going to open a section for every small-hall crowd pleaser?

Gatti won titles, lets give that statistic the credence it deserves. Very little. Gatti tried to step-up beyond title level and was, I'm sorry Gatti fans, humiliated. Now, Gatti also adapoted his style a little, or more truthfully he went back to an earlier ability to box a little, and used it versus Mickey Ward, now, out-boxing Ward makes you HOF-bound?

Gatti's lauded master-boxer style amounted to bouncing around, throwing 1-2 then the the left hook to the body and being unable to claim his man. I'm sorry but that is not boxing ability for me, he does not claim his man, he gets dragged into fights in which he ends-up trading and when he gets caught-up in action he does not even block or parry.

Take away his big heart, his, pre-welterweight, unnatural weight advantage and Gatti is a decent fighter vastly overblown due to the fact he's had some great fights. Great fights are usually between evenly-matched guys and both Gatti and Ward were on a similar level. When Gatti stepped-up he got pounded.

YAWN!...

[silkov]

You may feel that the lightflyweight division is unimportant but that is your opinion...

What the HELL are you talking about? When did I say that? All I said was that I thought Carbajal, Gonzalez and Gatti are all historically insignificant. And yes, that’s just my opinion. But where did you get that I “feel that the lightflyweight division is unimportant” comment from?

Okay, now I'll take a deep breath...

Hang on to your hat man!... you said Carbajal and Gonzarlez were historically insignificant and I was in my own clumsy way trying to point out that they did actually acheive quite a bit for their division and boxing during their careers... peace man!... 8)

[barry]

>>>But it wasnt a title fight was it?... and in that period title holders losing nontitle fights wasnt exactly unheard of either. You cant really compare Palomino with Manley as the eras are so different...<<<

You might not be able to, but I certainly can and I would about guarantee that if Manley were around today, then he would almost certainly hold a trinket of some sort, but since the middle 60s, titles have been cheapened so much that winning a title doesn’t take a lot to do and since the 90s…titles are really nothing but a joke, certainly nothing to gain HOF credit!

[silkov]

Some people seem to think that Gatti, Gonzales, Carbajal haivng good fights = HOF material. Are we going to open a section for every small-hall crowd pleaser?

Gatti won titles, lets give that statistic the credence it deserves. Very little. Gatti tried to step-up beyond title level and was, I'm sorry Gatti fans, humiliated. Now, Gatti also adapoted his style a little, or more truthfully he went back to an earlier ability to box a little, and used it versus Mickey Ward, now, out-boxing Ward makes you HOF-bound?

Gatti's lauded master-boxer style amounted to bouncing around, throwing 1-2 then the the left hook to the body and being unable to claim his man. I'm sorry but that is not boxing ability for me, he does not claim his man, he gets dragged into fights in which he ends-up trading and when he gets caught-up in action he does not even block or parry.

Take away his big heart, his, pre-welterweight, unnatural weight advantage and Gatti is a decent fighter vastly overblown due to the fact he's had some great fights. Great fights are usually between evenly-matched guys and both Gatti and Ward were on a similar level. When Gatti stepped-up he got pounded.

YAWN!...

Not quite as dull, or indeed sad, as you following me around quoting my posts and not saying anything.

You strike me as a chap who may have once walked past a book and thereby got some big ideas, dare I suggest next time you read one?

Actually I was on this thread before you so think its you that are following me actually. Do you actually think that you pompous insults have any affect on me?.... I'm sensitive but not stupid mate.

[silkov]

>>>But it wasnt a title fight was it?... and in that period title holders losing nontitle fights wasnt exactly unheard of either. You cant really compare Palomino with Manley as the eras are so different...<<<

You might not be able to, but I certainly can and I would about guarantee that if Manley were around today, then he would almost certainly hold a trinket of some sort, but since the middle 60s, titles have been cheapened so much that winning a title doesn’t take a lot to do and since the 90s…titles are really nothing but a joke, certainly nothing to gain HOF credit!

Well if Palomino were fighting today he would probably be a three weight champion... look at all the fuss made of Vargas, Palomino was twice the fighter Vargas was...

[silkov]

Not quite as dull, or indeed sad, as you following me around quoting my posts and not saying anything.

You strike me as a chap who may have once walked past a book and thereby got some big ideas, dare I suggest next time you read one?

Actually I was on this thread before you so think its you that are following me actually. Do you actually think that you pompous insults have any affect on me?.... I'm sensitive but not stupid mate.

Regardless of who posted on the thread first, plus I pointed out, rightly, that you constantly respond to my posts, I am entitled to post without having to endure your childishness. All you have to do is stop posting replies to my, legitimate, posts on the subject. Look, we had a discussion, initially, about Scott Harrison, I wiped the floor with you and other posters advised you that you were out of your depth. That must have been rough but you need to adjust. Good luck with that.

Well if you want to be like that forget the Xmas cards this year and dont expect those knitting patterns that you asked for!!... :x :x :x

[barry]

>>>Well if Palomino were fighting today he would probably be a three weight champion... look at all the fuss made of Vargas, Palomino was twice the fighter Vargas was...<<<

Really? His record does not point that out, nor do any of the actual FACTS of the issue. And being that you put so much emphasis on titles, Vargas won only one less title bout than Palomino...not to mention that he beat the likes of Winky Wright and Ike Quartey though he lost when he stepped up to the very elite...but then again...so did Palomino!

[silkov]

>>>Well if Palomino were fighting today he would probably be a three weight champion... look at all the fuss made of Vargas, Palomino was twice the fighter Vargas was...<<<

Really? His record does not point that out, nor do any of the actual FACTS of the issue. And being that you put so much emphasis on titles, Vargas won only one less title bout than Palomino...not to mention that he beat the likes of Winky Wright and Ike Quartey though he lost when he stepped up to the very elite...but then again...so did Palomino!

Well, if you cant see the dip in competition since Palominos time and Vargases time then you havent been looking closely enough Barry. Simple as that. Where do I put emphasis on titles?... you're the one going on about Gattis titles in different divisions... all I said was that Palominos title in the 70s was more important than winning the same title in the 90s and today...
Vargas never fought anyone as good as Duran or Benitez... and dont give me Mosely either... Wright is pretty good but the fact that someone like him has gone so far with basically just a good jab and defence shows how far standereds have fallen in todays era....

[The Great John L]

Well, if you cant see the dip in competition since Palominos time and Vargases time then you havent been looking closely enough Barry. Simple as that. Where do I put emphasis on titles?... you're the one going on about Gattis titles in different divisions... all I said was that Palominos title in the 70s was more important than winning the same title in the 90s and today...
Vargas never fought anyone as good as Duran or Benitez... and dont give me Mosely either... Wright is pretty good but the fact that someone like him has gone so far with basically just a good jab and defence shows how far standereds have fallen in todays era....

You definitely have a point. Boxing popularity and talent has fallen quickly and dramatically over the past 30 years. While I can’t imagine a valid reason why Palomino belongs in the HOF, it is certainly no stretch to think of him beating Vargas, who I think got a gift against Winky, and has never really exhibited much in the way of defense. Of course, I don’t think Vargas gets in the HOF either. At least not without a ticket.

[silkov]

To keep in with the topic of the thread I'd like to ask how it can be advocated that standards are falling, Wright is just a jab and a tight guard and yet Gatti is a HOF guy? If standards have fallen Gatti's stock falls with them. Wright has a porous guard and his jab is overrated when he throws it.

For my money Wright stays above the standard and could hang in bygone days. The quality then was not how far around the ring you could dance in a round but whether you could hold a tight guard, jab to keep your guy off-set, block and parry and then move with just enough guile to ensure that if your opponent stepped to your side you could still catch his shots on the elbows and gloves. We called it boxing when we were taught it.

Gatti is a very good fighter (for me though he is a slugger not a pressure fighter and pressure fighters are closer to boxers), as a boxer he leaves a lot to be desired.

HOF is a mess, they need to induct less often or open new catergories that seperate the great from the good in one or more areas.

I can see Wright being champion at 154 in the 70s when the division was prett slim but the best he would do at 160 would be a top 10 contender... he certainly wouldnt be standing people on their heads as much in the 70s as he has done in recent years... people like Mosely have shown that they cant deal with a decent jab which from a supposedly eilite level boxer is a shocking shortcoming and Wright is no Hearns or Mccallum... both of whom would have beaten him soundly I feel...

[silkov]

To keep in with the topic of the thread I'd like to ask how it can be advocated that standards are falling, Wright is just a jab and a tight guard and yet Gatti is a HOF guy? If standards have fallen Gatti's stock falls with them. Wright has a porous guard and his jab is overrated when he throws it.

For my money Wright stays above the standard and could hang in bygone days. The quality then was not how far around the ring you could dance in a round but whether you could hold a tight guard, jab to keep your guy off-set, block and parry and then move with just enough guile to ensure that if your opponent stepped to your side you could still catch his shots on the elbows and gloves. We called it boxing when we were taught it.

Gatti is a very good fighter (for me though he is a slugger not a pressure fighter and pressure fighters are closer to boxers), as a boxer he leaves a lot to be desired.

HOF is a mess, they need to induct less often or open new catergories that seperate the great from the good in one or more areas.

Gatti is a better boxer than you give him credit for, you need to see his early fights when he boxed rather than brawled... if he was around in the 70s he'd have been a contender and may have had a shot at winning the title at 130 though I dont think he'd have beaten either Alfredo Escalera or Alexis Arguello...

[silkov]

Well, if you cant see the dip in competition since Palominos time and Vargases time then you havent been looking closely enough Barry. Simple as that. Where do I put emphasis on titles?... you're the one going on about Gattis titles in different divisions... all I said was that Palominos title in the 70s was more important than winning the same title in the 90s and today...
Vargas never fought anyone as good as Duran or Benitez... and dont give me Mosely either... Wright is pretty good but the fact that someone like him has gone so far with basically just a good jab and defence shows how far standereds have fallen in todays era....

You definitely have a point. Boxing popularity and talent has fallen quickly and dramatically over the past 30 years. While I can’t imagine a valid reason why Palomino belongs in the HOF, it is certainly no stretch to think of him beating Vargas, who I think got a gift against Winky, and has never really exhibited much in the way of defense. Of course, I don’t think Vargas gets in the HOF either. At least not without a ticket.

Vargas should definately not get in, he must be one of the most overrated fighters of today and thats saying something. If Palomino was active today I could see him winning titles at 147 and 154 as easy as blowing his nose and wouldnt out 160 past him... he was better than Vargas at all levels and especially heart and mentality...

[barry]

>>>HOF is a mess, they need to induct less often or open new catergories that seperate the great from the good in one or more areas.<<<

That I can completely agree with!!!



>>>>Boxing popularity and talent has fallen quickly and dramatically over the past 30 years. While I can’t imagine a valid reason why Palomino belongs in the HOF, it is certainly no stretch to think of him beating Vargas, who I think got a gift against Winky, and has never really exhibited much in the way of defense. Of course, I don’t think Vargas gets in the HOF either. At least not without a ticket.<<<<

That too I couldn’t agree more on!!!!



>>>Vargas should definately not get in, he must be one of the most overrated fighters of today and thats saying something. If Palomino was active today I could see him winning titles at 147 and 154 as easy as blowing his nose and wouldnt out 160 past him... he was better than Vargas at all levels and especially heart and mentality...<<<

Vargas was a very good fighter with potential galore…that is until Trinidad ruined him…which he did. Would Vargas have had a better career if not for the beating he took from Trinidad…probably, but that is all speculation. Vargas’ career reminds me a bit of Davey Moore!

[silkov]

I've seen/have Gatti's early fights and spent an enjoyable Summer watching them with my housemates at that time. However, even when he did box well it was against limited opposition, or Patterson, he was hardly setting trends in technique. He is a meat and two veg boxer who levelled out and had many brawls, bralws that saw his stock rise and saw him enter into a C-fighter trilogy, at best, that produced A+ fights. His boxing talent is not deep and McGirt has done nothing new with him. You'd be expected to out-box some of the guys he has, if you have that little bit extra you'd be at least expected to nullify Oscar or Floyd for a round. For Arguello-Gatti read Argeullo-Rooney. Plucky KO.

As for Wright, I did say Hang not excel, he'd be a contender in any era. He boxes with a pretty solid style. Block, parry and counter is going out of fashion in favour of dance, swing and flurry. His defence would still be hard to break, I maintain that a fast enough fighter, as I said pre-Taylor, can shoot the right over that jab and counter that way.

Wright has a good jab and fast fighters like Shane often use the jab to launch a speedy assault with both hands. Pumping the jab out negates this and it is very hard to tackle for certain fighters. Certainly someone like Shae whom I feel stiffened-up as he got older and was not able to slip and parry the jab, which is a must if you wish to defeat. The jab is most underrated, I took a big awkward kid and got him out-boxing a faster, slicker guy merely on the basis of taking a half-step in with his jab. The quicker you burn the faster you burn-out. Saying that Shanes beat is such that a good jab will always kill his momentum.

Gatti is a far better fighter than Rooney was... had he fought Arguello he would have made it a tough fight till being stopped late... Gatti may not be a Leonard but he's better than the C level that you see him as....

[silkov]

>>>HOF is a mess, they need to induct less often or open new catergories that seperate the great from the good in one or more areas.<<<

That I can completely agree with!!!



>>>>Boxing popularity and talent has fallen quickly and dramatically over the past 30 years. While I can’t imagine a valid reason why Palomino belongs in the HOF, it is certainly no stretch to think of him beating Vargas, who I think got a gift against Winky, and has never really exhibited much in the way of defense. Of course, I don’t think Vargas gets in the HOF either. At least not without a ticket.<<<<

That too I couldn’t agree more on!!!!



>>>Vargas should definately not get in, he must be one of the most overrated fighters of today and thats saying something. If Palomino was active today I could see him winning titles at 147 and 154 as easy as blowing his nose and wouldnt out 160 past him... he was better than Vargas at all levels and especially heart and mentality...<<<

Vargas was a very good fighter with potential galore…that is until Trinidad ruined him…which he did. Would Vargas have had a better career if not for the beating he took from Trinidad…probably, but that is all speculation. Vargas’ career reminds me a bit of Davey Moore!

I dont really see the Trinidad fight as having ruined Vargas, he just found his level against Trinidad (another overrated fighter) ....bottom libe with Vargas is that he always had a poor defence and was pretty much one dimentional...

[barry]

>>> dont really see the Trinidad fight as having ruined Vargas, <<<

Are you serious? Vargas was a very used-up fighter after Trinidad punished him who due to his toughness was still able to do fairly well. He had good defensive skills prior to the Trinidad bout...not great, but he was a pretty solid all-around fighter...Trinidad just ruined him...as he did with David Reid. A little too much too soon for Vargas!