BoxRec

If fighters like Carlos Palomino, Willie Pastrano and Jose Torres are in, why not Edwin Rosario, Brian Mitchell, Sun kil Moon and Myung Woo Yuh? If you want to say none of them deserve it, you probably wont get much of an argument from me. (except for Mitchell and Yuh, who were dominant forces in their division for years.)
Letting guys like Palomino in is lowering the bar. Palomino was no greater than Rosario in my opinion.

All four that you mentioned are just as deserving as a lot that are in the Hall now. Asian boxers, in particular, get a bad deal when it comes to the Hall. There are a slew of older fighters that should be in the hall, too many to name off the top of my head. Jack Blackburn for example...he's in as a trainer, but he was one hell of a fighter who beat the best of his era and most of the time he almost always fought bigger men than himself...well at least he's in there, but there are so many that aren't in!

I wouldn't say Palomino doesn't deserve being in the hall of fame. He was active at a time when there was a lot of talent about in the division yet he still managed to pick up the title and make several defences two of which were classics of the era (vs Green and Muniz) and when he lost the title it was on a close decision to all time great Benitez.
If Palomino was fighting today he would probably be hailed as a 'great champion'.
I agree that Moon and Yuh deserve a place as well.

I wouldn't say Palomino doesn't deserve being in the hall of fame. He was active at a time when there was a lot of talent about in the division yet he still managed to pick up the title and make several defences two of which were classics of the era (vs Green and Muniz) and when he lost the title it was on a close decision to all time great Benitez.

Good point, silkov.I also agree with Barry about Blackburn. But i dont know, there still seems to be something missing from Palomino's career for me to consider him hall worthy.Maybe a longer reign, or a win against another great? i dont think he was ever considered better than his WBA counterpart Pipino Cuevas. What do you think?

Palomino was one of my favorites but I never thought he belonged in the HoF- but if Cuevas got in then why not? But there are lots in there that shouldn't be, starting with Norton and Torres is as undeserving as anybody. Pretty soon Meldrick Taylor and Julian Jackson will be in and Bowe and Moorer...it is ridiculous. If I were somebody like Ken Overlin or Freddie Steele- win over 100 fights and have people think you weren't as good as Vinny Pazienza (because someday mark my words...)- I'd be about the most bitter guy to ever live.

tiredoldngrey wrote:Palomino was one of my favorites but I never thought he belonged in the HoF- but if Cuevas got in then why not? But there are lots in there that shouldn't be, starting with Norton and Torres is as undeserving as anybody. Pretty soon Meldrick Taylor and Julian Jackson will be in and Bowe and Moorer...it is ridiculous. If I were somebody like Ken Overlin or Freddie Steele- win over 100 fights and have people think you weren't as good as Vinny Pazienza (because someday mark my words...)- I'd be about the most bitter guy to ever live.

I know what youre saying but perhaps part of the reason for voting some fighters into the hall of fame is the impact they had on the era they fought in. For instance Norton contributed a hell of a lot to the 70s era with his fights with Ali and Holmes... without Norton the history of that era would be completely different so I don't begrudge him his place at all.
Same with Bowe in a way, though he faded quickly his triology with Holifield is probably second only to that of Ali and Frazier and Ali and Norton. I agree though that a lot of the champions of the past deserve more recognition.

I can see that, somebody getting a mention because of the effect he had or the role he played...but maybe as a footnote or a snapshot in the corner of somebody else's display. I can't convince myself that a fighter should be in the HoF fore anything other than his own fighting prowess, hopefully having proven his ability against quality opposition. Norton was 4-7-1 against top ten opposition.
It seems to me that, rather than address the issues that are eating the sport alive and destroying boxing as a martial art, the "powers that be" would rather pretend there is truth in the lie of modern methods etc being better by flooding the HoF with what passes for professional boxers today. And with the inflated records littered with 1st rd kos of nobodies and a list of 15 made up championships after each name the public will start to believe that John Ruiz was great- and, if Norton is in, Ruiz, a two or three time world HW champion cannot be denied.

There was a recent discussion on this topic http://www.boxrec.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 9d442d3deb

With Norton, it's how you want to look at things. His 4-7-1 record against top 10 competition could lead you to believe he wasn't that good. However, if you look at those fights closely, you could reach a different conclusion.
Of his 7 losses, 2 (Shavers and Cooney)were after he was over 35 past his prime, as was the draw with LeDoux. 2 were close losses to Ali, and many people feel he won their third fight. 1 was a razor thin decision loss to Holmes, which could have gone his way. Another was to Foreman who was destroying everyone.

His only really unexusable loss was to Jose Luis Garcia, and he did avenge that defeat. He also beat the fighters that he was supposed to. He was 38-0 againt non-ranked fighters, and a few of them were against fringe contenders such as Henry Clark and Tex Cobb who were just outside the top 10.

Of his four wins, 1 of course was against Ali, which has to count for a lot. So although he might be a borderline pick for the Hall of Fame, there are certainly worse fighters that have been picked. For example Norton was better than Willard, Johannson, and Braddock, who are all in.

I also have a concern that in the future, paper champions such as Ruiz or Byrd will be selected. It's funny, the International Boxing Hall of Fame first opened in 1990, and for the first several years the selections were pretty good, certainly better than some of choices in the Baseball Hall of Fame.
The obvious picks like Ali, Robinson, Louis etc were voted in right away. Then other greats got in. But by the the late 1990's some questionable picks started to occur. If I'm not mistaken Carnera and Hart are the only undisputed heavyweight champions not in, and a few shouldn't be. They need to reduce the amount of selections each year. If too many guys get in, making the Hall of Fame will be meaningless.

With Norton, it's how you want to look at things. His 4-7-1 record against top 10 competition could lead you to believe he wasn't that good. However, if you look at those fights closely, you could reach a different conclusion.
Of his 7 losses, 2 (Shavers and Cooney)were after he was over 35 past his prime, as was the draw with LeDoux. 2 were close losses to Ali, and many people feel he won their third fight. 1 was a razor thin decision loss to Holmes, which could have gone his way. Another was to Foreman who was destroying everyone.

His only really unexusable loss was to Jose Luis Garcia, and he did avenge that defeat. He also beat the fighters that he was supposed to. He was 38-0 againt non-ranked fighters, and a few of them were against fringe contenders such as Henry Clark and Tex Cobb who were just outside the top 10.

Of his four wins, 1 of course was against Ali, which has to count for a lot. So although he might be a borderline pick for the Hall of Fame, there are certainly worse fighters that have been picked. For example Norton was better than Willard, Johannson, and Braddock, who are all in.

I also have a concern that in the future, paper champions such as Ruiz or Byrd will be selected. It's funny, the International Boxing Hall of Fame first opened in 1990, and for the first several years the selections were pretty good, certainly better than some of choices in the Baseball Hall of Fame.
The obvious picks like Ali, Robinson, Louis etc were voted in right away. Then other greats got in. But by the the late 1990's some questionable picks started to occur. If I'm not mistaken Carnera and Hart are the only undisputed heavyweight champions not in, and a few shouldn't be. They need to reduce the amount of selections each year. If too many guys get in, making the Hall of Fame will be meaningless.

tiredoldngrey wrote:I can see that, somebody getting a mention because of the effect he had or the role he played...but maybe as a footnote or a snapshot in the corner of somebody else's display. I can't convince myself that a fighter should be in the HoF fore anything other than his own fighting prowess, hopefully having proven his ability against quality opposition. Norton was 4-7-1 against top ten opposition.
It seems to me that, rather than address the issues that are eating the sport alive and destroying boxing as a martial art, the "powers that be" would rather pretend there is truth in the lie of modern methods etc being better by flooding the HoF with what passes for professional boxers today. And with the inflated records littered with 1st rd kos of nobodies and a list of 15 made up championships after each name the public will start to believe that John Ruiz was great- and, if Norton is in, Ruiz, a two or three time world HW champion cannot be denied.

Well I think Norton was light years ahead of Ruiz. You have to remember that Norton fought at a time where the heavyweight division was enjoying a golden era and had arguably its most talented fighters of any era before or since. Though Ken was never a 'real' world champion theres no doubt in my mind that he could have been champion if he had fought in an era without the likes of Ali, Foreman or Frazier. As for Ruiz his claim to being 'World champion' is really weaker than Nortons was... and despite operating in what I think is the weakest heavyweight division ever he's even managed to be beaten TWICE!!! by Middleweights!!!.
With respect I doubt many of todays top heavies would make the top 10 or even 20... in Nortons era.

There is no doubt in my mind that the Ken Norton of today would do no worse than fight a draw with Ruiz- the Norton of his prime would have had no trouble in defeating Ruiz. This is obviously a very poor crop of heavy weights, but at some point in the future at least one if not two or three will end up in the HoF. It is starting to get the same feel as "world titles"; lace up gloves and you are entitled to one.
This doesn't seem right to me; the Hall should be to honor the very best, but there were so many fighters that were awfully good. A friend of mine suggested that in addition to the HoF, there be a Hall of Damned Good but not Great...But now were are on a course where every guy that dehydrates himself and wins a WIBUCA title and keeps on winning them as he matures into a fat old guy will be in the HoF right next to Robinson and Louis and the rest.
There shoulkd be some type of sign that indicates that "this guy fought in an era of guys that didn't know how to fight" or something similar, or at least some standards as to who and what qualifies to be there. What we have is that everyyear so many names will be proposed and so many will be elected but we are not developing even good, much less great, fighters at ther same rate.

tiredoldngrey wrote:There is no doubt in my mind that the Ken Norton of today would do no worse than fight a draw with Ruiz- the Norton of his prime would have had no trouble in defeating Ruiz. This is obviously a very poor crop of heavy weights, but at some point in the future at least one if not two or three will end up in the HoF. It is starting to get the same feel as "world titles"; lace up gloves and you are entitled to one.
This doesn't seem right to me; the Hall should be to honor the very best, but there were so many fighters that were awfully good. A friend of mine suggested that in addition to the HoF, there be a Hall of Damned Good but not Great...But now were are on a course where every guy that dehydrates himself and wins a WIBUCA title and keeps on winning them as he matures into a fat old guy will be in the HoF right next to Robinson and Louis and the rest.
There shoulkd be some type of sign that indicates that "this guy fought in an era of guys that didn't know how to fight" or something similar, or at least some standards as to who and what qualifies to be there. What we have is that everyyear so many names will be proposed and so many will be elected but we are not developing even good, much less great, fighters at ther same rate.

I think it'd be an idea to introduce something like a 'hall of champions' where fighters of the past who won world titles when they were world titles and yet may not make the hall of fame (Champions like Freddie Steele, Bob Olin, etc) can be inducted.

Yes, there needs to be some type of separation made between the Sugar Ray Robinsons and Henry Armstrongs and the Pipino Cuevases and between those and the Fred Apostolis. And how about the fighters like Cocoa Kid and Holman Williams? It is bad enough that there is little if any at all film to remind us of how good these guys were, it would be tragic if their names and records were lost as well.

tiredoldngrey wrote:Y And how about the fighters like Cocoa Kid and Holman Williams? It is bad enough that there is little if any at all film to remind us of how good these guys were, it would be tragic if their names and records were lost as well.

Considering the 'quality' of some HOF members it is a crime that these guys are not honoured by induction.

tiredoldngrey wrote:Yes, there needs to be some type of separation made between the Sugar Ray Robinsons and Henry Armstrongs and the Pipino Cuevases and between those and the Fred Apostolis. And how about the fighters like Cocoa Kid and Holman Williams? It is bad enough that there is little if any at all film to remind us of how good these guys were, it would be tragic if their names and records were lost as well.

I definately think boxers like Williams, Cocoa, etc should have some form of recognition. These are fighters that had they got the breaks would have won world titles. Lord knows how many titles they would win today!.....