View Full Version : Fact or Fiction: If Mosley doesn't win the to DLH fights


SCtrojansbaby
04-13-2011, 04:35 AM
If Mosley doesn't win the to DLH fights he no chance he makes the Hall of Famer.

Assume every part of his career goes exactly the same way except the judges give Oscar both decisions(which could have easily happend).

Jack Napier
04-13-2011, 04:39 AM
those are his 2 biggest wins
take them away and Shane loses clout
he really lost to Oscar in the rematch anyway

Wild Blue Yonda
04-13-2011, 06:45 AM
those are his 2 biggest wins
take them away and Shane loses clout
he really lost to Oscar in the rematch anyway

He certainly did.

bojangles1987
04-13-2011, 08:25 AM
You can't give Oscar the first fight unless you can't score a fight.

IMDAZED
04-13-2011, 10:40 PM
Well at the very least, he did win that first fight convincingly. Can't really take that away from him, which this thread is trying to do. But let's say you take that away, he'd still be on the cusp. You'd still have an established lightweight champ who was ranked among the world's best, moving up and beating the #1 welter (Margarito) at the peak of his career. Throw in some secondary wins and you have a very strong case.

joseph5620
04-13-2011, 11:23 PM
Well at the very least, he did win that first fight convincingly. Can't really take that away from him, which this thread is trying to do. But let's say you take that away, he'd still be on the cusp. You'd still have an established lightweight champ who was ranked among the world's best, moving up and beating the #1 welter (Margarito) at the peak of his career. Throw in some secondary wins and you have a very strong case.

Exactly....

Wild Blue Yonda
04-14-2011, 02:26 AM
Well at the very least, he did win that first fight convincingly. Can't really take that away from him, which this thread is trying to do. But let's say you take that away, he'd still be on the cusp. You'd still have an established lightweight champ who was ranked among the world's best, moving up and beating the #1 welter (Margarito) at the peak of his career. Throw in some secondary wins and you have a very strong case.

Honestly, I disagree. He was never an established Lightweight Champ --- he was an exciting belt-holder at the weight, & he never progressed beyond that point at 135. There was a hypothetical case for him being the best at the weight during his heyday, but that isn't going to get you into the HOF. There's a reason he wasn't that well-known prior to beating De La Hoya in 2000, despite being a 29-year-old pro of seven or eight years' experience. In another thread, we have people questioning Michael Moorer at Light-Heavyweight, because he looked like a beast but fought underwhelming opposition. It ain't much different for Mosley at 135. Looked great, fought less-than-stellar opposition.

He did win the first fight with De La Hoya, no question, & it was a great win over a certain HOFer at the peak of his career (more or less). He was also the first man to legitimately beat De La Hoya, & the only one to do so while De La Hoya was arguably in his pomp.

Still, for his profile within the sport, he's surprisingly thin on the ground with resume. As stated, I do not see any respectable case for his LW days contributing, realistically, to a HOF nomination. After that, between 1999 & now, you have two excellent wins --- De La Hoya (2000) & Margarito (2009). He has admitted to knowingly cheating for at least the return fight with De La Hoya, which he plainly lost as I saw it anyway, but even if you had him nicking it, there's no real way you can count that in his favour, given the BALCO debacle.

The rest of his competition is of a high standard, but it's almost all loss, loss, loss. Forrest twice (convincingly at least once), Cotto, Mayweather (convincingly), mixed in with victories over Mayorga & Vargas, neither of whom were A-level. He did have a resurgent win over Margarito, & credit to him for that.

Really, is he a HOFer? I think he will get in, but I hardly see him as anything approaching a sure bet (on his merits, that is --- I have no doubt name-recognition alone will see him through).

IMDAZED
04-14-2011, 10:42 AM
Honestly, I disagree. He was never an established Lightweight Champ --- he was an exciting belt-holder at the weight, & he never progressed beyond that point at 135. There was a hypothetical case for him being the best at the weight during his heyday, but that isn't going to get you into the HOF. There's a reason he wasn't that well-known prior to beating De La Hoya in 2000, despite being a 29-year-old pro of seven or eight years' experience. In another thread, we have people questioning Michael Moorer at Light-Heavyweight, because he looked like a beast but fought underwhelming opposition. It ain't much different for Mosley at 135. Looked great, fought less-than-stellar opposition.

He did win the first fight with De La Hoya, no question, & it was a great win over a certain HOFer at the peak of his career (more or less). He was also the first man to legitimately beat De La Hoya, & the only one to do so while De La Hoya was arguably in his pomp.

Still, for his profile within the sport, he's surprisingly thin on the ground with resume. As stated, I do not see any respectable case for his LW days contributing, realistically, to a HOF nomination. After that, between 1999 & now, you have two excellent wins --- De La Hoya (2000) & Margarito (2009). He has admitted to knowingly cheating for at least the return fight with De La Hoya, which he plainly lost as I saw it anyway, but even if you had him nicking it, there's no real way you can count that in his favour, given the BALCO debacle.

The rest of his competition is of a high standard, but it's almost all loss, loss, loss. Forrest twice (convincingly at least once), Cotto, Mayweather (convincingly), mixed in with victories over Mayorga & Vargas, neither of whom were A-level. He did have a resurgent win over Margarito, & credit to him for that.

Really, is he a HOFer? I think he will get in, but I hardly see him as anything approaching a sure bet (on his merits, that is --- I have no doubt name-recognition alone will see him through).

I don't disagree with anything you said. And I still think he'd have a good case without the Oscar win. How many fighters win titles at 135 and 147 who don't have a good case?

RubenSonny
04-14-2011, 10:59 AM
Though Mosley lightweight resume isn't amazing, I still think its clearly greater than Moorers light heavyweight resume. He fought a few ranked guys, which is something Moorer never did.

Wild Blue Yonda
04-14-2011, 03:26 PM
I don't disagree with anything you said. And I still think he'd have a good case without the Oscar win. How many fighters win titles at 135 and 147 who don't have a good case?

I cant see it, being honest. He had a paper title at LW where he looked amazing but fought next to nobody. If you did take away that fine first win over De La Hoya, he has nothing beyond a gift in their rematch (while knowingly using PEDs) and a very good win over Margarito on which to base a HOF nomination on. Used-up iterations of Vargas and Mayorga are no match for defeats to all his best competition, especially when you consider three of those were absolute thrashings (Forrest I, Wright I, Mayweather). The only time he even got legitimately near to beating anyone else significant was Cotto (in a very good effort from a past-it Mosley).

Ziggy Stardust
04-14-2011, 03:48 PM
I cant see it, being honest. He had a paper title at LW where he looked amazing but fought next to nobody. If you did take away that fine first win over De La Hoya, he has nothing beyond a gift in their rematch (while knowingly using PEDs) and a very good win over Margarito on which to base a HOF nomination on. Used-up iterations of Vargas and Mayorga are no match for defeats to all his best competition, especially when you consider three of those were absolute thrashings (Forrest I, Wright I, Mayweather). The only time he even got legitimately near to beating anyone else significant was Cotto (in a very good effort from a past-it Mosley).

The problem is, though, that unlike the HOFs of other sports the IBOF has no real relation to greatness as a basis for getting in. In boxing, saying someone is a "hall-of-famer" is essentially meaningless: It's a populartity contest pure and simple. If a fighter has a real fan base he'll get in. Arturo Gatti is a lock for the IBOF. Now whether it SHOULD be that way is a different story but that's fodder for another thread. The question here is whether Mosley belongs in the IBOF based on the standards the Hall actually uses. In that case he's a lock unless he somehow gets barred for the 'roid use.

Poet

joseph5620
04-14-2011, 04:25 PM
The problem is, though, that unlike the HOFs of other sports the IBOF has no real relation to greatness as a basis for getting in. In boxing, saying someone is a "hall-of-famer" is essentially meaningless: It's a populartity contest pure and simple. If a fighter has a real fan base he'll get in. Arturo Gatti is a lock for the IBOF. Now whether it SHOULD be that way is a different story but that's fodder for another thread. The question here is whether Mosley belongs in the IBOF based on the standards the Hall actually uses. In that case he's a lock unless he somehow gets barred for the 'rhoid use.

Poet

Exactly.This gets overlooked too much. Based on that, Mosley has done more than enough to get in. I'll throw out an example: Jose Torres. If he's in, Mosley's in and deserves to be.

Scott9945
04-14-2011, 09:46 PM
Exactly.This gets overlooked too much. Based on that, Mosley has done more than enough to get in. I'll throw out an example: Jose Torres. If he's in, Mosley's in and deserves to be.

Here's another one. Ingemar Johansson had 26 wins, only one of them in world title fight. Jess Willard is another who got in off one big win. If they're in the HOF then Shane absolutely has to be.

Wild Blue Yonda
04-14-2011, 11:07 PM
The problem is, though, that unlike the HOFs of other sports the IBOF has no real relation to greatness as a basis for getting in. In boxing, saying someone is a "hall-of-famer" is essentially meaningless: It's a populartity contest pure and simple. If a fighter has a real fan base he'll get in. Arturo Gatti is a lock for the IBOF. Now whether it SHOULD be that way is a different story but that's fodder for another thread. The question here is whether Mosley belongs in the IBOF based on the standards the Hall actually uses. In that case he's a lock unless he somehow gets barred for the 'roid use.

Poet

Yes, I already acknowledged briefly at the tail of one of my posts here that I don't doubt for a second Mosley gets in. Even though he did, in fact, struggle for a fanbase & the ability to pull big crowds, he still has enough recognition.

I am loathe to go down the route now being touched on in the posts above, however, of, "If Fighter X is in, Mosley should be in, too," that is facetious & flawed thinking, to my eyes. One mistake should not mandate another.

Scott9945
04-14-2011, 11:11 PM
Yes, I already acknowledged briefly at the tail of one of my posts here that I don't doubt for a second Mosley gets in. Even though he did, in fact, struggle for a fanbase & the ability to pull big crowds, he still has enough recognition.

I am loathe to go down the route now being touched on in the posts above, however, of, "If Fighter X is in, Mosley should be in, too," that is facetious & flawed thinking, to my eyes. One mistake should not mandate another.


That's very reasonable. But with these type of things the bar usually gets lowered rather than raised. Once Gatti gets in you can't excuse keeping Shane out.

I will say that Mosley shouldn't get in before Naseem Hamed does however.