BoxRec

There are will always be arguments about who should be in the Hall of Fame. It's not surprising that people might disagree when comparing say a bantamweight from the 1930s to a light heavyweight from the 1980s.

What I thought it would be interesting would be to discuss situations where there are two fighters who were very even who fought in the same weight class during the same era. It's hard to believe that one guy deserves to in the Hall of Fame while the other doesn't. However, this what has happened.

Here are some examples:

Bobby Chacon is in; Cornelius Boza Edwards is not.
Edwin Rosario is in; Jose Luis Ramirez is not.
Mathew Saad Muhammad is in; Eddie Mustapha Muhammad is not.
Holman Williams is in: Eddie Booker is not.
Freddie Apostoli is in; Ken Overlin is not.
Sixto Escobar is in; Harry Jeffra is not.

In each case, did the Hall of Fame get it right? Should both be in? Neither? Or should the guy not in be in instead of the guy who is in?

I would like to hear some comments from my esteemed colleagues.

There is a lack of consistency, but I think that is always going to come when you don't have any set requirements for those who are judged to have made the grade.

Two division champion (118 lb.; 126lb.) Harry Jeffra defeated Sixto Escobar 4 times in 5 fights. Sixto is in, Jeffra is not. Go figure.

This can NOT be measured. FAME is completely subjective.

I often kid about it NOT being the hall of SKILL.


But perhaps the very best way it can be described is

The Hall of noted boxers who have had IMPACT on the world and the sport as a whole.

lol