BoxRec

If the International Boxing Hall of Fame decided to induct between Donald Curry and Iran Barkley, who would you want to see get inducted first? Donald Curry was a great pound for pound fighter and winning both the welterweight and light middleweight titles to his resume. For Iran Barkley, he won three divisional titles at middleweight, super middleweight and light heavyweight and he scored two upset victories over the legendary Hall of Famer Thomas "The Hitman" Hearns. Tell me your opinion.

Between the two, Curry was much better. Of course the Duran fans like to puff up Barkley, but he was not that good of a fighter. Barkley, lost several times in embarrassing fashion. Just because he won three paper titles doesn't mean he is deserving. He was never the best fighter at any weight class. For a short period of time, Curry was a a great fighter.

Having said all that, Barkley could get in some day. The way that fighters are voted in is flawed. It simply lets the highest vote getters. This helps well known fighters who don't deserve to get in. In baseball for example, a player has to get 75% of the vote.

I'm begging you buzz, don't say what you always say about the Hall of Fame.

To me, it's close, Donald was the better fighter for a minute, but Iran was a warrior who had been in several memorable fights. His two wins over Hearns, and his fight with Duran may push him through.

Curry better prime.....but Iran may have had the better career.....close call

Curry was easily the more naturally gifted and talented of the two, no question, but he doesn't have any wins on his ledger as significant as Barkley's W's over Hearns.

I've campaigned for years for Don Curry's inclusion. Its a travesty.

From late 1983 to late 1986 Curry was one of boxings greatest fighters....I would rate his two wins over Marlon Starling just slightly below Barkleys beatings of a fading Hearns and a Hearns with one hand.

Curry beat a very good calibre of fighter Mccrory, Jones, Starling and Larocca....its a testamount to how good Don actually was that even as a terribly shot worn fighter he was capable of making mccallum, nunn and at times Norris look his inferior in their fights........enough for me to say the 1985 Donald Curry would have beaten all 3.

Curry is one of these guys who didn't get a lot of breaks. 1980 Olympics was called off. No gold medal. No bloated uninterested Duran or old chavez to beat on .....instead a fellow all time competitive in any eras top 10boxer who people don't recognise in Starling to deal with........

Neither one deserves to be in the IBHOF because they just lack the credentials. Santos Laciar was a contemporary of both guys and he's more deserving and still hasn't made it.

If you win 3 world titles in 3 different weight classes, you gotta be in the hall of fame. Especially, in that era, which was waaaayyy more talented than today's. Iran Barkley got the credentials than many fighters that are in it. If Barry McGuigan is in the hall, Barkley definitely should be in it. Why not?

Donald Curry at one time was considered the best fighter in the world by 1986, but he wasn't the greatest superstar. The superstar was the great Marvelous Marvin Hagler at the time. Then, the great Iron Mike Tyson took over after Curry's loss to Lloyd Honeyghan. It was a stunning upset at the time. Should he be in the hall? Yes!

Addressing the first point: If you win 3 world titles in 3 different weight classes, you gotta be in the hall of fame. Especially, in that era, which was waaaayyy more talented than today's. Iran Barkley got the credentials than many fighters that are in it. If Barry McGuigan is in the hall, Barkley definitely should be in it. Why not?:

No you don't automatically gotta be in the Hall for winning titles in three different weight classes. They were paper titles. Barkley was never the best fighter in any weight class. One was for beating frikkin Darrin Van Horn.

Donald Curry was the best welterweight in the world at one time. He was probably one of the Top 5 fighters in the entire world for a short time. He was a much better fighter than Iran Barkley.
Barry McGuigan was a better fighter than Iran Barkley. At least he was the best featherweight tile in the world for a short time. Not nearly as many embarrassing defeats like Barkley had.

McGuigan is one of the least deserving fighters in. He was better than Iran Barkley. Maybe Curry should not be in. He was better than Iran Barkley.

Unfortunately, both Donald Curry and Iran Barkley fought in the same era as the Fab 4 (SRL, Hagler, Hearns and Duran), Tyson, Holmes, Arguello and Pryor just to name who are in the IBHOF. They would mostly induct bigger name fighters in their first year of eligibility unless both Curry and Barkley caught a break if there are no big name fighters in the future for the International Boxing Hall of Fame.

Curry over Barkley - but maybe neither. - Wait, I second guess myself: Curry will get in; Barkley won't. No. wait again, neither will get in, I'm certain of it (maybe).

Ok, seriously, Curry is a really tough call; Barkley does not deserve to get in. Being Hearns' nemesis is not enough, and on his record there isn't much other than Hearns.

In a legit scenario, neither gets in. But in a scenario like this, both could get in. I remember seeing Iran in a fight with someone unmentionable where he lost. He also beat James Kinchen, and had that good losss to Robbie Sims. I think he peaked at the right time. We all know how Curry could have been great under the right circumstances, but his weight issues, and Leonard were just to much to overcome. Again, I think Iran just edged it in.

Sure both could get in. It would not be that surprising at all.
with Barkley we will hears about the two wins over Hearns and the paper titles. all the embarrassing losses will be swept under the rug. (Just forget the early losses, the BS desciion he got over the legendary Mike Tinley, the loss to an an ancient Duran, the meltdown against Benn, the loss to flippin Adolpho Washington.)

scorpio83 touched on something earlier. that is worth discussing. There are windows of opportunity to get in. Some election years are full of great fighters better than them. Others aren't. Barkley and/or Curry might not come close one year because there are at least three great fighters on the ballot who get elected instead. However, there are years where there is slim pickings.

The Top 3 vote getters get in regardless of how many votes they get. Controversial picks (like Barkley) almost always get in. People that really know the sport know he isn't worthy. They know there are dozens of other guys hardly anyone talks about who have been passed over for years that should get in.
Unfortunately, others will quote WBS titles and one notable opponent they beat and cherry pick him in.

Thanks Alp I appreciate it and yes, when great fighters were not eligible, Curry, Barkley and other fighters who were borderline would have the opportunity to get inducted.

Iran Barkley is a hall of famer in my book. He won 3 world titles in 3 different weight classes. He did it in a tougher era.

He had two wars with the great Thomas Hearns, who was not in his prime, but still formidable. He had a war with the great Roberto Duran who was washed up, but had an incredible performance win or lose. Barkley vs Duran was 1989 Fight of the Year by The Ring.

It wasn't his fault that the boxing commissions added the super middleweight division. If Barry McGuigan is in, then Barkley should be in also. Barkley had also a long career. Let's give The Blade credit where its due. He was not a great boxer, but a very good one.

Donald Curry at one period of time was considered the best fighter in the world. He unified the welterweight crowns. He was the Undisputed World Welterweight King when he destroyed champion Milton McCrory in 3 rounds with an extraordinary left hook. He beat Marlon Starling twice. He beat top European contender Nino La Rocca of Italy, who was undefeated in more than 40 fights and was also European Welterweight Champion. Curry also won the WBC World Super Welterweight Championship. So he was a two-time champion in two different weight classes in a tougher era than this one.

If Overrated Barry McGuigan is in, then Iran Barkley and Don Curry, that did more to the sport of boxing than he, should be in.

If talent alone was the criteria then Curry would be a first ballot inductee. But it isn't the only criteria. I would love to see him get in, but I don't think it will ever happen.

Two of Barkley's title winning efforts were against and ATG in Hearns. Doesn't get much more impressive than that, but the rest of his career isn't HOF worthy in my opinion.

In sum, I don't see either getting in. But to answer the question IF one of them had to get in I would choose Curry.

If anything McGuigan is now underrated.
People say that Curry was weight drained against Honeyghan...but even at 154 he never rediscovered the hand speed he showed earlier in his career. Drug abuse took its toll...

Curry one on one would be a handful for any welterweight ever.

In addition to Santos Laciar, who really deserves to be in the IBHOF, contemporaries Michael Nunn and Sumbu Kalambay have better credentials than Barkley and Curry,

All I know if Barry McGuigan is in, then Iran Barkley and Donald Curry should be in also.

McGuigan beat Pedroza, who you are always going on about. Though I sure there is some sort of excuse since you like Pedroza.

Seamus wrote:In addition to Santos Laciar, who really deserves to be in the IBHOF, contemporaries Michael Nunn and Sumbu Kalambay have better credentials than Barkley and Curry,

I'm always reluctant when it comes to flyweights. However, surely he deserves to go in before Barkley. One thing they may help Laciar's chances is the paper title defenses.

Nunn and Kalambay seems to have have better careers than Starling and certainly Barkley. Nunn actually beat Kalambay, Starling, and Barkley. Wonder if he is even on the voter's radar.

Ambling Alp II wrote:

Seamus wrote:In addition to Santos Laciar, who really deserves to be in the IBHOF, contemporaries Michael Nunn and Sumbu Kalambay have better credentials than Barkley and Curry,

I'm always reluctant when it comes to flyweights. However, surely he deserves to go in before Barkley. One thing they may help Laciar's chances is the paper title defenses.

Nunn and Kalambay seems to have have better careers than Starling and certainly Barkley. Nunn actually beat Kalambay, Starling, and Barkley. Wonder if he is even on the voter's radar.

We all talked earlier about Mancini and how popularity can add to an ATG's image. - With Nunn I believe the opposite is at play here; style, personality, and the absence of a mega fight have all played against his legacy. I suspect he will get passed cover. (Not really sure if I think that right or wrong.)

I want to add: Why no mega fight? - What happened to Nunn's big day, was it there with Roy Jones if he had gotten pass Toney?

elmersalsa wrote:All I know if Barry McGuigan is in, then Iran Barkley and Donald Curry should be in also.

I think McGuigan is there for his impact - his fame and popularity with both sides of the divide in Ireland. It's not just about his ring exploits (great as they were). It is called the Hall of Fame after all.

Whether Curry or Barkley gets inducted or not in the next 10 years or so, this subject has a good argument. You guys have good cases.

Ambling Alp II wrote:McGuigan beat Pedroza, who you are always going on about. Though I sure there is some sort of excuse since you like Pedroza.

And that's all he did? He beat a ready to be taken great Eusebio Pedroza?

Iran Barkley beat Tommy Hearns!....Twice!