BoxRec

The following have been inducted into the International Boxing Hall of Fame.

Orlando Canizales
Lennox Lewis
Brian Mitchell
Gorilla Jones
Mysterious Billy Smith
Billy Soose
Tom Hyer

Your comments please.

I'll start by saying it's not one of the more deserving classes of inductees. Rocky Kansas and Newsboy Brown were better than this bunch.

The induction of Billy Smith was long overdue.

Gorilla Jones shouldnt get in in my opinion

SORRY ! I meant to say this was a rather UN-deserving class. Billy Soose and Gorilla Jones ? There's alot better out there than that.

There are several dozens of more deserving British bareknuckle boxers than Tom Hyer. And, of course, Henry Downes Miles and Sr and Jr Dowlings should have been inducted long time ago in the non-participant, far more deserving than newly-inducted Merchant, McIlvanney and 90% of others in that section.

It's a very good thing that you all have me around to remind you that this is the

HALL OF FAME

NOT

HALL of SKILL

With that said, do they have to retract Lewis if he should get back in to boxing? Or do they have that sort of rule?

What? And they didn't induct Gatti .. what a robbery.

BoxBuzz wrote:It's a very good thing that you all have me around to remind you that this is the

HALL OF FAME

NOT

HALL of SKILL

With that said, do they have to retract Lewis if he should get back in to boxing? Or do they have that sort of rule?

A Hall of Fame is a shrine to preserve an individuals name and allot him lasting fame based on what they ACCOMPLISHED in that field. Every sports HOF is based on accomplishments as it should be. If not, Butterbean should be a shoo-in.

Even if it is based on fame I ascert that Gorilla Jones should still not be enshrined. He was neither very skilled, nor very famous, nor greatly accomplished when compared with the others in boxings pantheon. But then the HOF has really had some incredibly odd entries over the last few years.

klompton wrote:Even if it is based on fame I ascert that Gorilla Jones should still not be enshrined. He was neither very skilled, nor very famous, nor greatly accomplished when compared with the others in boxings pantheon. But then the HOF has really had some incredibly odd entries over the last few years.

Totally agree.

It is a shame. In the first several years of the IBHOF, the selections were pretty good. It's voting was far more credible than the HOF's of some other sports. Then they put in people like Jess Willard and James Braddock.

Now it just seems to be the voters' personal favorites.
This past election may have been the worst.
Lennox Lewis was an obvious choice, and I guess you could argue for Canizales and Mitchell. The rest that were just elected aren't as worthy as several fighters who have been passed over for years.

It's almost like they are just putting the names of ex champions in a hat and drawing a few out.

See I dont even agree with Lewis getting in his first year of eligibility. The problem is that the people who run the hall are making themselves a small fortune by electing modern fighters who werent that good but are still alive and thus can appear and sign tons of memorabilia and shit like that for them. Its gotten away from who you were and what you accomplished to whether or not you are available to appear. As for the old timers, well, I just dont get some of their logic. They only got around to inducting the great frank klaus last year despite having several guys he beat in for years and its a friggin crime to have Gorilla Jones in before Mike O'Dowd. Oh well, I waited years to go see the hall and when I finally went I pretty dissappointed. They have some nice stuff but after brisk 15 minute walkthrough youve seen it all. Thats pretty sad for a museum.

Ambling Alp wrote:It is a shame. In the first several years of the IBHOF, the selections were pretty good. It's voting was far more credible than the HOF's of some other sports. Then they put in people like Jess Willard and James Braddock.

Now it just seems to be the voters' personal favorites.
This past election may have been the worst.
Lennox Lewis was an obvious choice, and I guess you could argue for Canizales and Mitchell. The rest that were just elected aren't as worthy as several fighters who have been passed over for years.

It's almost like they are just putting the names of ex champions in a hat and drawing a few out.

I remember first visiting the IBHOF Web site back around 1998, and, as I recall, it recited some qualifications or "ideals" for inductee consideration--aside from the criterion regarding what year the boxer had retired. The other qualifications were something about accomplishments AND being a role model of sorts. In time, those considerations seem to have been deleted. Or did I simply imagine all that?

I haven't seen that myself but I wouldn't be surprised if they have claimed th "role model" qualification.

Baseball for example,still has something like that and it's routinely ignored except if you do something really bad like what Pete Rose and Joe Jackson did,or atleast were accused of.

Of course several "non role models" were elected into the International Boxing Hall of Fame before 1998.


The International Boxing Hall of Fame elected fighters who did worse things than that in the ring; Some even threw fights.
There doesn't seem to be or have been any sort of moral code that is/was a requirement for election; at least that is/was applied universally.

With that said, do they have to retract Lewis if he should get back in to boxing? Or do they have that sort of rule?

Well I don't think he ought to be in the HOF. He really wasn't all that....