BoxRec

Rover wrote: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).

Again, I'm biased towards Starling and Quartey (the losses were disputed by some hardcore Ike fans - again a highly biased group).

If you can provide additional details on the five times stopped, 2-division world champion (with seven successful world title defenses) Curry as to why he should be in there, I would most like to see them (for I cannot find them)...

kal.majeed wrote:

Rover wrote: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).

Again, I'm biased towards Starling and Quartey (the losses were disputed by some hardcore Ike fans - again a highly biased group).

If you can provide additional details on the five times stopped, 2-division world champion (with seven successful world title defenses) Curry as to why he should be in there, I would most like to see them (for I cannot find them)...

You haven't seen Curry fight?
First off, he was the undisputed welter champ. In addition to Starling, he absolutely crushed Milton McCrory (the other unbeaten welter titlist). He clearly won every title fight he had (until Honeygan, obviously).
Even after Honeygan, he came back and beat up Gianfranco Rosi, a long-time jr. middle beltholder.
Some of the people who stopped Curry included Mike McCallum, Terry Norris and Michael Nunn. The last stoppage came v. Linten in his last fight when he was shot. Linten even told him before the fight to put down his crackpipe or something like that.
Curry decisively defeated the top welters post-Leonard/Hearns (McCrory, Starling twice, Hwang, Jones, LaRocca). He was rated as P4P one of the best in the world, and there were even calls for a fight with Hagler; just listen to the Curry/McCrory HBO telecast. Of course, Curry lost his title 9 months later.

I don't know anyone that thought Ike beat Vargas.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:I don't know anyone that thought Ike beat Vargas.

Even Ike didn't claim he'd won, right?
I just remember from the post-fight interview that he said "116-111 is too much." (At least that's what the interpreter said; I don't speak Ike's language.)
Vargas clearly won that fight; anyone who thinks Ike won is a hack not worth listening to on the issue.

It sounds as though you are as much a Curry fan as I am for Starling and Quartey; hence, I will leave it alone.

P.S.

Saad: Maybe, it was just Quartey (lol); check out the video link below (fast forward to about 7:05 into the video).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jswm4zhi3Q

BTW, here are the fighters Ike KO'd during his reign:
Andrew Murray
Jung-Oh Park
Ralph Jones
Vince Phillips
Alberto Cortes
He also drew with Lopez and decisioned Carr, whom Trinidad had stopped in a title defense almost two years earlier.
I agree that Ike got screwed against Forrest.

kal.majeed wrote:It sounds as though you are as much a Curry fan as I am for Starling and Quartey; hence, I will leave it alone.

P.S.

Saad: Maybe, it was just Quartey (lol); check out the video link below (fast forward to about 7:05 into the video).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jswm4zhi3Q

Have you seen Curry fight (prime Curry, that is--the one who iced Iceman McCrory)? He was undisputed champion. Starling was also the legitimate champion, as he beat Honeygan, who'd beaten Curry.
Ike was a beltholder.
But Curry was rated as one of the best P4P.

Rover: I think I will leave it alone - not here to fight, just talk about/discuss them.....

In virtually any reasonably close bout where a judge can and does actively use a (10-10) score for any reasonably close rounds, either fighter may ‘win’ a decision – or it can be a ‘draw’.

Check out the video link below (fast forward to about 4:10) and listed to Al Bernstein discuss how many ‘close’ rounds in the bout plus the fact that Vargas loses a point in the fourth; it will be a tough sell but this bout (with a point loss for Vargas) and using (10-10) for a number of close rounds, can possibly be a 'draw'.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ud16OGSM ... ure=relmfu

I recently watched that fight again, Fernando clearly won.

No, it can't.
And 10-10 rounds are rare; they were much more common decades ago.
No one except Ike and perhaps a few fanatics scored it for him. He was not robbed. It was not a draw. Vargas clearly won.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:I recently watched that fight again, Fernando clearly won.

Not arguing with that or Rover (he did outland Quartey by more than 100 punches: 389 to 272) - just stating how it MAY go otherwise.....(just speaking in general).....

I disagree

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:I disagree

How can you say that with so many controversial decisions in boxing history - just look at Ray Leonard's career alone.

First Duran bout was extremely close, fight with Hagler and second bout with Hearns - look at the scores and how many on both sides of the table supporting it one way or the other (or maybe a draw).

kal.majeed wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:I disagree

How can you say that with so many controversial decisions in boxing history - just look at Ray Leonard's career alone.

First Duran bout was extremely close, fight with Hagler and second bout with Hearns - look at the scores and how many on both sides of the table supporting it one way or the other (or maybe a draw).

Who thought Leonard won the first Duran fight? I don't even think Ray claimed that. The scoring (10 even rounds) in that fight was bizarre, and fights aren't scored like that anymore.
Leonard/Hagler and Leonard/Hearns II are two of the most debated fights ever--though most think Hearns beat Leonard in the second fight. I recall zero debate about Vargas/Quartey.
Vargas clearly won the fight. Only Ike (and maybe a few rabid fans) disagree.

kal.majeed wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:I disagree

How can you say that with so many controversial decisions in boxing history - just look at Ray Leonard's career alone.

First Duran bout was extremely close, fight with Hagler and second bout with Hearns - look at the scores and how many on both sides of the table supporting it one way or the other (or maybe a draw).

This wasn't one of those controversial decisions, they got it right. Duran/leonard 1 wasn't close either.

OK - Vargas dominated and the judges voted for him (no major controversy) - a writing error on my part.

I was trying to talk about scoring (in general); let's move on to Leonard-Duran I

judge: Harry Gibbs 144-145 | judge: Angelo Poletti 147-148 | judge: Raymond Baldeyrou 144-146

Two judges had it by only one point and one judge had it by just two points (no knockdowns or point deductions) - is this not a close scoring bout?

The judges scored it close, that doesn't mean it was. I had it 10-5 and that's giving the last two rounds to Leonard.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:The judges scored it close, that doesn't mean it was. I had it 10-5 and that's giving the last two rounds to Leonard.

Let's try this in reverse - can YOU tell me one or two close scoring bouts where YOU may have thought it reasonable if others saw it the other way or maybe a draw?

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:The judges scored it close, that doesn't mean it was. I had it 10-5 and that's giving the last two rounds to Leonard.

I had it 9-6 giving the last 3 to Leonard. Duran knew he had it in the bag after 12.
A fight with close scores can still be a clear win. You were around back then, and thus you would have a better grasp of this than I, but did Ray even dispute the loss? I've seen Ray discuss the fight many times and never claim that he should've won.

kal.majeed wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:The judges scored it close, that doesn't mean it was. I had it 10-5 and that's giving the last two rounds to Leonard.

Let's try this in reverse - can YOU tell me one or two close scoring bouts where YOU may have thought it reasonable if others saw it the other way or maybe a draw?

There are hundreds of fights like that, the first 2 Marquez/Pacquiao fights are like that. I just don't think Vargas/Quartey, Leonard/Hearns 2 or Leonard/Duran 1 would qualify. Very clear victors in competitive fights.

No Rover, I don't recall Leonard claiming victory. He took a frightful beating.

Another example of a very competitive (and great) fight with a clear winner: Frazier/Ali I.

Thank you - your first sentence is the point that I was trying to make ("There are hundreds of fights like that, the first 2 Marquez/Pacquiao fights are like that.") - forget the specific bouts that I mentioned.

Rover wrote:Another example of a very competitive (and great) fight with a clear winner: Frazier/Ali I.

There are many fights that were competitive, but there really isn't much doubt about who won. Ali-FraizerI is a good example. Duran-Leonard I is another. Vargas-Quartey was another one. Quartey fought a good fight, but Vargas probably had the night of his life.

I think we are starting to get off on a tangent. Lets not hijack this thread and get off track. Lets talk about Hall of Fame here, and talk about close decisions on another thread.
If people are trying to use this as an example of why Quartey should not be elected; thhe Vargas fight is not a great example. He certainly didn't look bad in that fight.

Fighters such as Camacho, Holyfield, De la Hoya etc. are no brainers. They should and will make it soon after they are eligible.
People mentioned at the beginning of the thread like Joppy, Rosi etc. are obviously no where near close enough to deserve it.

Quartey is an interesting because becasue he is a close call of whether he deserves to make it or not.
Donald Curry is an interesting case. He does have some good wins, but he was never the same after the Honeyghan fight. Yes he beat Rosi, but Rosi simply wasn't that good. Curry is certainly better than several fighters mentioned at the beginning of the thread, but his overall career just was not quite Hall of Fame worthy.

To Ambling Alp: 100% agreed - could not have said it better myself......(thank you)......