View Full Version : Does Tarver belong with the ATG greats?


Pastrano
09-30-2011, 07:55 AM
What do you say? He beat RJJ twice, was the first to knock out Eric Harding (as well as RJJ ofc), beat Glen Johnson (twice imo!) and Montell Griffin, then at 42 reinvented himself as a cw by stopping the very tough and strong Danny Green. I think he belongs there.

I also think his loss to Hopkins shouldnt be held against him, considering the unfair circumstances, him having to drop from almost 220 to 175 in such a short time.

JAB5239
09-30-2011, 07:59 AM
What do you say? He beat RJJ twice, was the first to knock out Eric Harding (as well as RJJ ofc), beat Glen Johnson (twice imo!) and Montell Griffin, then at 42 reinvented himself as a cw by stopping the very tough and strong Danny Green. I think he belongs there.

Pound for pound.....not even close. At lightheavyweight.....he might make the top 25.

rorymac
09-30-2011, 08:06 AM
What do you say? He beat RJJ twice, was the first to knock out Eric Harding (as well as RJJ ofc), beat Glen Johnson (twice imo!) and Montell Griffin, then at 42 reinvented himself as a cw by stopping the very tough and strong Danny Green. I think he belongs there.

I also think his loss to Hopkins shouldnt be held against him, considering the unfair circumstances, him having to drop from almost 220 to 175 in such a short time.
I have Tarver as an overachiever. I definitely couldn't put him in any ATG P4P list. I'm sure we could name 500 better fighters.

IronDanHamza
09-30-2011, 08:20 AM
ATG? :lol1:

He's not even a HOF'er.

Not even close.

Pastrano
09-30-2011, 08:31 AM
ATG? :lol1:

He's not even a HOF'er.

Not even close.

NOW you're going too far.:smashfrea

IronDanHamza
09-30-2011, 08:40 AM
NOW you're going too far.:smashfrea

Antonio Tarver is not a HOF'er.

Castillo, Hatton, Cotto, Corrales, Gatti and Hernandez getting in would be ridiculous.

But Tarver? That would just make the HOF close to worthless.

If Antonio Tarver were to get in the HOF it would be one of the most undeserving inductions in History.

Right up there with Barry McGuigan and Willie Pastrano.

Sugarj
09-30-2011, 08:59 AM
A good, if inconsistent fighter who could conceivably give several ATG light heavyweights a good fight if on form, would be my assessment.

New England
09-30-2011, 09:35 AM
no way


not on my watch anyway


he was a very good light heavyweight with a good looking resume


but he's no ATG (and not competitive with other prime LHW greats.)
and i don't believe he's even getting into the hall of fame (which is easier than it should be)

New England
09-30-2011, 09:38 AM
Antonio Tarver is not a HOF'er.

Castillo, Hatton, Cotto, Corrales, Gatti and Hernandez getting in would be ridiculous.

But Tarver? That would just make the HOF close to worthless.

If Antonio Tarver were to get in the HOF it would be one of the most undeserving inductions in History.

Right up there with Barry McGuigan and Willie Pastrano.



these two are locks.


both were very good fighters at their best

cotto's also a strange case
he took a beating from a man with loaded gloves and he was never the same.

rorymac
09-30-2011, 09:45 AM
Antonio Tarver is not a HOF'er.

Castillo, Hatton, Cotto, Corrales, Gatti and Hernandez getting in would be ridiculous.

But Tarver? That would just make the HOF close to worthless.

If Antonio Tarver were to get in the HOF it would be one of the most undeserving inductions in History.

Right up there with Barry McGuigan and Willie Pastrano.
I agree with you about Tarver, but do you seriously think Hatton, Cotto and Gatti shouldn't be in the Hall? There are far less deserving people in there already.

fitefanSHO
09-30-2011, 09:53 AM
Oh come on! First ballot baby! The guy beat Rocky Balboa! ;)

http://images.usatoday.com/sports/_photos/2006/12/14/rocky-topper.jpg

IronDanHamza
09-30-2011, 10:13 AM
I agree with you about Tarver, but do you seriously think Hatton, Cotto and Gatti shouldn't be in the Hall? There are far less deserving people in there already.

And far more deserving are still waiting to be put in.

The like of; Pone Kingpetch, Tiger Jones, Eddie Booker, Cocoa Kid, Ken Overlin and many others are still waiting.

Whilst the HOF continue to induct the likes of McGugian, Pastrano and Brian Mitchell.

To then add the likes of Hatton, Cotto and Gatti. Now people are arguing Tarver. Others arguing Glen Johnson and Diego Corales.

Who's next? Ivan Calderon? Antonio Margarito? Zab Judah? Sven Ottke?

I mean, when does it stop? When will second rate good but not great fighter's stop being inducted into the HOF when actual great fighters are still waiting?

Should Hatton get in on popularity? Sure.

Gatti for excitment? Sure.

Not sure what Cotto should get in for..

But, all three of them should not get in for what they achieved. Which ultimately is what the HOF is all about. Or supposed to be.

But for the record, those 3 fighters should get in if Tarver gets in. If Tarver gets in then I don't see how almost anyone can't get in.

RubenSonny
09-30-2011, 10:28 AM
And far more deserving are still waiting to be put in.

The like of; Pone Kingpetch, Tiger Jones, Eddie Booker, Cocoa Kid, Ken Overlin and many others are still waiting.

Whilst the HOF continue to induct the likes of McGugian, Pastrano and Brian Mitchell.

To then add the likes of Hatton, Cotto and Gatti. Now people are arguing Tarver. Others arguing Glen Johnson and Diego Corales.

Who's next? Ivan Calderon? Antonio Margarito? Zab Judah? Sven Ottke?

I mean, when does it stop? When will second rate good but not great fighter's stop being inducted into the HOF when actual great fighters are still waiting?

Should Hatton get in on popularity? Sure.

Gatti for excitment? Sure.

Not sure what Cotto should get in for..

But, all three of them should not get in for what they achieved. Which ultimately is what the HOF is all about. Or supposed to be.

But for the record, those 3 fighters should get in if Tarver gets in. If Tarver gets in then I don't see how almost anyone can't get in.

This would be a good post if I wasn't 95% certain that you think Vitali Klitschko should get in.

RubenSonny
09-30-2011, 10:35 AM
Antonio Tarver is not a HOF'er.

Castillo, Hatton, Cotto, Corrales, Gatti and Hernandez getting in would be ridiculous.

But Tarver? That would just make the HOF close to worthless.

If Antonio Tarver were to get in the HOF it would be one of the most undeserving inductions in History.

Right up there with Barry McGuigan and Willie Pastrano.

I think Castillo deserves it.

IronDanHamza
09-30-2011, 10:41 AM
This would be a good post if I wasn't 95% certain that you think Vitali Klitschko should get in.

I think Vitali Klitschko is Boarderline.

I tend to change my mind on Vitali. Right now, I'm at Boardline, argubale.

I think Castillo deserves it.

I think he is the most deserving out of all the names mentioned including Ricky Hatton, Miguel Cotto and Vitali Klitschko.

New England
09-30-2011, 10:43 AM
And far more deserving are still waiting to be put in.

The like of; Pone Kingpetch, Tiger Jones, Eddie Booker, Cocoa Kid, Ken Overlin and many others are still waiting.

Whilst the HOF continue to induct the likes of McGugian, Pastrano and Brian Mitchell.

To then add the likes of Hatton, Cotto and Gatti. Now people are arguing Tarver. Others arguing Glen Johnson and Diego Corales.

Who's next? Ivan Calderon? Antonio Margarito? Zab Judah? Sven Ottke?

I mean, when does it stop? When will second rate good but not great fighter's stop being inducted into the HOF when actual great fighters are still waiting?

Should Hatton get in on popularity? Sure.

Gatti for excitment? Sure.

Not sure what Cotto should get in for..

But, all three of them should not get in for what they achieved. Which ultimately is what the HOF is all about. Or supposed to be.

But for the record, those 3 fighters should get in if Tarver gets in. If Tarver gets in then I don't see how almost anyone can't get in.



curiously, bro, how closely did you follow calderon's career?
i had a rough go at following him because he wasn't always on television, and up until a few years ago finding a real stream was nearly impossible.
basically i learned about him by reading and watching fights after they happened when i tracked them down.

he was a terrific little boxer at his best. he didn't even reach the top rope. he couldn't fluff a pillow if he had his gloves on. he had lots of skills. very much a pure boxer. he really was something.
he lost to segura (in what was called the fight of the year by the ring, and then in a blowout rematch) when his legs were largely gone. (he was, after all, a 35 year old former minimumweight [up against a true monster at light fly.])

the guy was in about 20 title fights. he won his first world title a decade ago and was only dethroned recently. that is a very long run for a small man. they usually peak very early.
he's a hall of famer according to the folks i've heard discuss him who have a vote. you need little guys in there too, and he's the best of his era at his weight (the guy was 5'0 and had 63 inches of reach. thats about as small as a healthy man can get.)



hatton and cotto are not viewed on the same rung as arturo gatti, bro. i'm sure you will agree.
they were much better fighters.
they did much more with their careers.
they never lost to the class of guys arturo to which arturo lost.


gatti might be the most exciting fighter to ever put on gloves. he was the perfect storm in terms of a TV action fighter.
that's why he's probably going to get in. after some serious time has passed.


i'm on the record around here saying that he wouldn't get my vote
now that might change in 30 years when we don't have another gatti that comes through

IronDanHamza
09-30-2011, 10:55 AM
curiously, bro, how closely did you follow calderon's career?
i had a rough go at following him because he wasn't always on television, and up until a few years ago finding a real stream was nearly impossible.
basically i learned about him by reading and watching fights after they happened when i tracked them down.

he was a terrific little boxer at his best. he didn't even reach the top rope. he couldn't fluff a pillow if he had his gloves on. he had lots of skills. very much a pure boxer. he really was something.
he lost to segura (in what was called the fight of the year by the ring, and then in a blowout rematch) when his legs were largely gone. (he was, after all, a 35 year old former minimumweight [up against a true monster at light fly.])

the guy was in about 20 title fights. he won his first world title a decade ago and was only dethroned recently. that is a very long run for a small man. they usually peak very early.
he's a hall of famer according to the folks i've heard discuss him who have a vote. you need little guys in there too, and he's the best of his era at his weight (the guy was 5'0 and had 63 inches of reach. thats about as small as a healthy man can get.)



hatton and cotto are not viewed on the same rung as arturo gatti, bro. i'm sure you will agree.
they were much better fighters.
they did much more with their careers.
they never lost to the class of guys arturo to which arturo lost.


gatti might be the most exciting fighter to ever put on gloves. he was the perfect storm in terms of a TV action fighter.
that's why he's probably going to get in. after some serious time has passed.


i'm on the record around here saying that he wouldn't get my vote
now that might change in 30 years when we don't have another gatti that comes through

I followed his career enough to know that he had a long reign of his title in which many of them were against Sub-Par opposition.

Skills aside, If Calderon is a HOF'er than anyone who can string a list of Title Defences should be. Including Sven Ottke and Johnny Nelson.

In terms of Hatton and Cotto, of course they are greater fighters than Gatti.

RubenSonny
09-30-2011, 10:57 AM
I think Vitali Klitschko is Boarderline.

I tend to change my mind on Vitali. Right now, I'm at Boardline, argubale.



I think he is the most deserving out of all the names mentioned including Ricky Hatton, Miguel Cotto and Vitali Klitschko.

If Vitali deserves to get in so does Ricky Hatton. He doesn't deserve tog et in and its not even arguable, his best win was against a flabby journeyman.

New England
09-30-2011, 11:03 AM
I followed his career enough to know that he had a long reign of his title in which many of them were against Sub-Par opposition.

Skills aside, If Calderon is a HOF'er than anyone who can string a list of Title Defences should be. Including Sven Ottke[I][B] and Johnny Nelson.

In terms of Hatton and Cotto, of course they are greater fighters than Gatti.




ok now i cant tell if you are being serious lol

the men faced and the means by which they faced them do not compare


he didn't fight sub par - opposition

he fought other guys his size that were contenders. its not like the WW division wehere you can duck good fighters in hopes of fighting lesser fighters for more money in a sound business move.


guys of that size aren't treated like guys in higher weights with greater potentials for earnings are treated. calderon wasn't coddled in a manner even remotely resembling ottke.


there really aren't any sven ottke's at the minimumweights
there's no money in it.

IronDanHamza
09-30-2011, 11:06 AM
If Vitali deserves to get in so does Ricky Hatton. He doesn't deserve tog et in and its not even arguable, his best win was against a flabby journeyman.

Meh, he may not be but I do believe it's argubale. JMO.

Atleast he fought Top ranked fighters during his reign(s). Wladimir is the same, really. Just resume is much better than Vitali's but he doesn't have the best resume either but he is certainly a HOF'er.

The likes of Joe Calzaghe genuinely fought Top 5 2 ranked fighters during his reign and he will get in.

Then again I actually don't really think he deserves to get in all that much either :lol1:

RubenSonny
09-30-2011, 11:17 AM
Meh, he may not be but I do believe it's argubale. JMO.

Atleast he fought Top ranked fighters during his reign(s). Wladimir is the same, really. Just resume is much better than Vitali's but he doesn't have the best resume either but he is certainly a HOF'er.

The likes of Joe Calzaghe genuinely fought Top 5 2 ranked fighters during his reign and he will get in.

Then again I actually don't really think he deserves to get in all that much either :lol1:

Calzaghes resume is far superior to Vitali Klitschko. and Vitali has only beat fat burger boys and lost to the 2 best fighters he faced, never been champion, he is not a great and nothing he has done has been great.

ok now i cant tell if you are being serious lol

the men faced and the means by which they faced them do not compare


he didn't fight sub par - opposition

he fought other guys his size that were contenders. its not like the WW division wehere you can duck good fighters in hopes of fighting lesser fighters for more money in a sound business move.


guys of that size aren't treated like guys in higher weights with greater potentials for earnings are treated. calderon wasn't coddled in a manner even remotely resembling ottke.


there really aren't any sven ottke's at the minimumweights
there's no money in it.

Calderon was pretty much an Ottke at 105, he has a thin resume but its especially thin there, if you dispute this tell me how many contenders he beat there and all the contenders he beat in his whole career. There are also plenty of Ottke like fighters at the lower weights.

IronDanHamza
09-30-2011, 11:19 AM
ok now i cant tell if you are being serious lol

the men faced and the means by which they faced them do not compare


he didn't fight sub par - opposition

he fought other guys his size that were contenders. its not like the WW division wehere you can duck good fighters in hopes of fighting lesser fighters for more money in a sound business move.


guys of that size aren't treated like guys in higher weights with greater potentials for earnings are treated. calderon wasn't coddled in a manner even remotely resembling ottke.


there really aren't any sven ottke's at the minimumweights
there's no money in it.

Tell me, how many Top fighters did Calderon beat his entire 12 defense reign at Minimumweight? How many in total?

Infact, how many Top 10 ranked fighters did he fight in his reign at Minimumweight?

Other than Cazares, by far the best wins of his career. How many ranked fighters did he fight during his reign at Jr Flyweight?

His career literally consists of sub par, mostly unranked opposition during a long, worthless title reign.

He fought like a handful of ranked fighters his entire career.

I can't see how the blatent resemblence to the likes of Sven Ottke and Johnny Nelson cannot be seen. All 3 of them have long title reigns consisting of almost no quality wins at all.

New England
09-30-2011, 12:38 PM
Tell me, how many Top fighters did Calderon beat his entire 12 defense reign at Minimumweight? How many in total?

Infact, how many Top 10 ranked fighters did he fight in his reign at Minimumweight?

Other than Cazares, by far the best wins of his career. How many ranked fighters did he fight during his reign at Jr Flyweight?

His career literally consists of sub par, mostly unranked opposition during a long, worthless title reign.

He fought like a handful of ranked fighters his entire career.

I can't see how the blatent resemblence to the likes of Sven Ottke and Johnny Nelson cannot be seen. All 3 of them have long title reigns consisting of almost no quality wins at all.



sven ottke sucked dude. he literally sucked. he was not a good fighter. surely you aren't trying to tell me that you evaluate a fighters greatness without taking that into consideration.
so no, i'm not seeing the resemblance. they aren't even on the same planet. calderon was a very pure boxer.


to be fair to calderon and respect your points fighters generally do not choose who they fight. certainly not ones of calderon's weight and esteem.
many of the fighters he fought during his run at minimumweight were highly "ranked" fighters at one point or another, either before and sometimes after the time that they fought caldron. i never thought "damn, this guy is fighting cans," when watching his fights. in my ring monthly rankings when i was reading them during his run i generally recognized the names, and this was back when the ring was only "partial" toward certain areas of boxing and not outright owned by a promotor.

i'm not going go through each month and tell you what the guy was "ranked" according to the ring, the sanctioning bodies (generally more important in lower weight classes where guys genuinely need them to sell,) the press, or anybody else. if you'd like to you can have at it.

on a quick glance i saw that at minimumweight reyes, bustsos, cardenas (though he was coming off of a stoppage,) as names all ranked highly either before or after the time of their fights with calderon at the end of the year by the ring magazine (which is not always a terrific means of evaluation)


during his run at the top nobody was accusing him of being the next ottke.


he was the best minimumweight of his generation and he had two long runs at two weights
his size didn't allow for him to move up. the guy was tiny. virtually everybody he faced was bigger than he was. in terms of guys his size he's one of the best. healthy men are very rarely that small, nevermind those who are athletic enough to box.
he was in the fight of the year according again to ring magazine (i thought it was the second best fight of the year. marquez and katsidis ^^)
and he was on the p4p list in '08 and into '09

again
the guy was 5'0 and had a 63 inch reach. if it's possible, that's very small for a minimumweight, and toy sized for a light flyweight (think about how big giovanni segura is,)

call me old fashioned but i trust my eyes in the historical evaluation of a fighter more than anything else, especially for those that i've been able to see in their primes as active fighters.
he was a terrific boxer.
he beat cotto in the amateurs. (admittedly, age would have been a factor. i want to see it.)

i don't vote guys into the hall of fame
but i'll venture a guess that the guy's who do will vote him in there.


i understand your sentiments to a degree and everybody can have an opinion
but the guy is no sven ottke

Pastrano
09-30-2011, 12:45 PM
sven ottke sucked dude. he literally sucked. he was not a good fighter. surely you aren't trying to tell me that you evaluate a fighters greatness without taking that into consideration.
so no, i'm not seeing the resemblance. they aren't even on the same planet. calderon was a very pure boxer.


to be fair to calderon and respect your points fighters generally do not choose who they fight. certainly not ones of calderon's weight and esteem.
many of the fighters he fought during his run at minimumweight were highly "ranked" fighters at one point or another, either before and sometimes after the time that they fought caldron. i never thought "damn, this guy is fighting cans," when watching his fights. in my ring monthly rankings when i was reading them during his run i generally recognized the names, and this was back when the ring was only "partial" toward certain areas of boxing and not outright owned by a promotor.

i'm not going go through each month and tell you what the guy was "ranked" according to the ring, the sanctioning bodies (generally more important in lower weight classes where guys genuinely need them to sell,) the press, or anybody else. if you'd like to you can have at it.

on a quick glance i saw that at minimumweight reyes, bustsos, cardenas (though he was coming off of a stoppage,) as names all ranked highly either before or after the time of their fights with calderon at the end of the year by the ring magazine (which is not always a terrific means of evaluation)


during his run at the top nobody was accusing him of being the next ottke.


he was the best minimumweight of his generation and he had two long runs at two weights
his size didn't allow for him to move up. the guy was tiny. virtually everybody he faced was bigger than he was. in terms of guys his size he's one of the best. healthy men are very rarely that small, nevermind those who are athletic enough to box.
he was in the fight of the year according again to ring magazine (i thought it was the second best fight of the year. marquez and katsidis ^^)
and he was on the p4p list in '08 and into '09

again
the guy was 5'0 and had a 63 inch reach. if it's possible, that's very small for a minimumweight, and toy sized for a light flyweight (think about how big giovanni segura is,)

call me old fashioned but i trust my eyes in the historical evaluation of a fighter more than anything else, especially for those that i've been able to see in their primes as active fighters.
he was a terrific boxer.
he beat cotto in the amateurs. (admittedly, age would have been a factor. i want to see it.)

i don't vote guys into the hall of fame
but i'll venture a guess that the guy's who do will vote him in there.


i understand your sentiments to a degree and everybody can have an opinion
but the guy is no sven ottke
I wouldnt say Ottke sucked exactly, he was just overated. The man had a good defence and a very tough chin, but thats about it. Zero power, zero speed.

IronDanHamza
09-30-2011, 12:51 PM
sven ottke sucked dude. he literally sucked. he was not a good fighter. surely you aren't trying to tell me that you evaluate a fighters greatness without taking that into consideration.
so no, i'm not seeing the resemblance. they aren't even on the same planet. calderon was a very pure boxer.


to be fair to calderon and respect your points fighters generally do not choose who they fight. certainly not ones of calderon's weight and esteem.
many of the fighters he fought during his run at minimumweight were highly "ranked" fighters at one point or another, either before and sometimes after the time that they fought caldron. i never thought "damn, this guy is fighting cans," when watching his fights. in my ring monthly rankings when i was reading them during his run i generally recognized the names, and this was back when the ring was only "partial" toward certain areas of boxing and not outright owned by a promotor.

i'm not going go through each month and tell you what the guy was "ranked" according to the ring, the sanctioning bodies (generally more important in lower weight classes where guys genuinely need them to sell,) the press, or anybody else. if you'd like to you can have at it.

on a quick glance i saw that at minimumweight reyes, bustsos, cardenas (though he was coming off of a stoppage,) as names all ranked highly either before or after the time of their fights with calderon at the end of the year by the ring magazine (which is not always a terrific means of evaluation)


during his run at the top nobody was accusing him of being the next ottke.


he was the best minimumweight of his generation and he had two long runs at two weights
his size didn't allow for him to move up. the guy was tiny. virtually everybody he faced was bigger than he was. in terms of guys his size he's one of the best. healthy men are very rarely that small, nevermind those who are athletic enough to box.
he was in the fight of the year according again to ring magazine
and he was on the p4p list in '08 and into '09

again
the guy was 5'0 and had a 63 inch reach. if it's possible, that's very small for a minimumweight, and toy sized for a light flyweight (think about how big giovanni segura is,)

call me old fashioned but i trust my eyes in the historical evaluation of a fighter more than anything else, especially for those that i've been able to see in their primes as active fighters.
he was a terrific boxer.
he beat cotto in the amateurs. (admittedly, age would have been a factor. i want to see it.)

i don't vote guys into the hall of fame
but i'll venture a guess that the guy's who do will vote him in there.

I :lol1: 'd at the Ottke thing. Genuinely laughed.

I agree Ottke was poor, very poor. And Calderon was a good fighter. But, in terms of competition, there genuinely is a blatent resemblence.

They weren't ranked. Never were, either.

Calderon fought like 3 or 4 ranked fighters his entire career. 5 at most. That includes both weight classes.

The vast majority of his defences were against unranked opposition. Let alone Top ranked opposition.

Other than Daniel Reyes and Issac Bustos and ? I can't even remember anyone else, is there anymore than those 2 at Minimumweight? That's all he beat.

Why didn't you think 'Damn, this guy is fighting cans'? when that's literally what he was doing most of the time.

I personally care more about what he did and who he beat as opposed to his size and his clear skills. And the fact is; his resume is very very very weak. And far from HOF worthy.

I used to think Calderon was a HOF'er, because I do like the guy, I like his style. But the more I think about, like I have been over the past year, atleast. I can't see how.

Atleast that's if we are going off resume an achievments. Which again, for Calderon, is very weak.

RubenSonny
09-30-2011, 01:05 PM
Ottke fought more ranked comp :lol1:

Tiozzo
09-30-2011, 01:09 PM
Pound for pound.....not even close. At lightheavyweight.....he might make the top 25.

hell no

the division is too packed with greats

New England
09-30-2011, 01:14 PM
I :lol1: 'd at the Ottke thing. Genuinely laughed.

I agree Ottke was poor, very poor. And Calderon was a good fighter. But, in terms of competition, there genuinely is a blatent resemblence.

They weren't ranked. Never were, either.

Calderon fought like 3 or 4 ranked fighters his entire career. 5 at most. That includes both weight classes.

The vast majority of his defences were against unranked opposition. Let alone Top ranked opposition.

Other than Daniel Reyes and Issac Bustos and ? I can't even remember anyone else, is there anymore than those 2 at Minimumweight? That's all he beat.

Why didn't you think 'Damn, this guy is fighting cans'? when that's literally what he was doing most of the time.

I personally care more about what he did and who he beat as opposed to his size and his clear skills. And the fact is; his resume is very very very weak. And far from HOF worthy.

I used to think Calderon was a HOF'er, because I do like the guy, I like his style. But the more I think about, like I have been over the past year, atleast. I can't see how.

Atleast that's if we are going off resume an achievments. Which again, for Calderon, is very weak.

when discussing sven friggin ottke i'm always lauging and dying a little on the inside.
when one of the writers for bscene did a feature on why he was voting sven into the hall i contemplated blocking the news feed. seriously.

if anybody ever needs a good laugh dig that one up from the archives.

and on the bold
maybe it was the lack of punching power.

lol sorry ivan, that's only a joke.


they looked to be solid fighters. i'm not calling them ricardo lopez, but they weren't horrid to my eyes or so overmatched that they appeared to be simply padding his record.
lower weight guys generally come up less spoonfed than higher weights because they don't generate a ton of money and don't have long careers, so they have a rough time building a record.

in other words a young top 50 ranked minumumweight is going to likely be more tested and less padded than a top 50 WW, where you find spoonfed prospects
its too expensive to spoonfeed a minimumweight. they don't have a big payoff down the line. so they really cant be complete cans with records worthy of challenging for a world title.

New England
09-30-2011, 01:21 PM
Ottke fought more ranked comp :lol1:


with all respect if that's all you care about you are missing the point of the distinction i'm trying to make


and caldron also fought three of his biggest names twice (think "ranked," if it helps. mayol was rebuilding when he faced caldron, but got ranked when he earned the TD. he also went on to win a world title against edgar sosa, a solid fighter, in what i believe was his next fight)

jabsRstiff
09-30-2011, 01:25 PM
Wow, someone sure pulled a thread topic/question out of their ass!

You have got to be kidding us with this....

New England
09-30-2011, 01:26 PM
I wouldnt say Ottke sucked exactly, he was just overated. The man had a good defence and a very tough chin, but thats about it. Zero power, zero speed.



yes you're certainly right, no highly paid pro sucks.


sucks is a huge overstatement.


the way his career played out grinds my gears a bit and i have a tendency to bash the guy to a level far exceeding what he deserves


i do believe that if you put him in there with any solid MW or SMW he would get completely exposed.


for instance, i'd pick jermain taylor to stop him
and i don't pick taylor to stop ANYBODY lol.

Ziggy Stardust
09-30-2011, 02:58 PM
Antonio Tarver is not a HOF'er.

Castillo, Hatton, Cotto, Corrales, Gatti and Hernandez getting in would be ridiculous.

But Tarver? That would just make the HOF close to worthless.

If Antonio Tarver were to get in the HOF it would be one of the most undeserving inductions in History.

Right up there with Barry McGuigan and Willie Pastrano.

That's just it Bro: The IBHOF IS worthless if you're going to use it as a measuring stick for greatness. I'm not saying that to put it down it just is what it is. Truth is, if a fighter is a crowd pleasure he's got a good shot at getting in regardless of whether he's C-level talent or not. I've said for a long time that Gatti's a lock. Again, not putting it down I just don't use the IBHOF for something it was never intended to be used for.

Poet

lightsout_finit
09-30-2011, 03:18 PM
No. Tarver is not even close to being a great fighter.

bojangles1987
09-30-2011, 03:28 PM
One of the most overrated boxers in my lifetime. He's not even a HOFer, let alone an ATG.

bojangles1987
09-30-2011, 03:33 PM
BTW, every Hall of Fame for every sport is a joke. At some point guys who were good but not great get in just because they were good guys or the media liked them. They end up having little to do with actual worth.

McGoorty
09-30-2011, 03:39 PM
I agree with you about Tarver, but do you seriously think Hatton, Cotto and Gatti shouldn't be in the Hall? There are far less deserving people in there already.
I don't think they are,.......... We have to have a HOF for very exceptional Champions only, ---------- A world title is what I'd call as ALREADY a Great Honour and great recognition. If you have a HOF of anybody who's held a partial title,.... that HOF simply becomes a statistical list of champions and partial champions....... and with the amount of divisions and titles there are now,... it won't be long before a trip to the HOF will take 4 years to read all the names there,..... you could end up with a hall of fame with 20000 names. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- And then you might as well abolish titles.

Pastrano
09-30-2011, 04:35 PM
If Forrest belongs into the HOF then so does Tarver. And Gatti, if he also belongs there than Antonio DEFINITELY does!

New England
09-30-2011, 04:39 PM
If Forrest belongs into the HOF then so does Tarver. And Gatti, if he also belongs there than Antonio DEFINITELY does!


i dont think forrest will make it in either

RubenSonny
09-30-2011, 05:03 PM
with all respect if that's all you care about you are missing the point of the distinction i'm trying to make


and caldron also fought three of his biggest names twice (think "ranked," if it helps. mayol was rebuilding when he faced caldron, but got ranked when he earned the TD. he also went on to win a world title against edgar sosa, a solid fighter, in what i believe was his next fight)

I never said that top 10 rankings is all I care about. I rank Calderon far ahead of Ottke, he was simply a much better fighter. The notion that Calderons resume isn't relatively thin is flat out wrong.

Scott9945
09-30-2011, 07:28 PM
i dont think forrest will make it in either

If he does make it then it will be because of sentiment over his tragic death. Take away the Mosley fights and you have a very thin resume for someone with that good of a record. I'd pick Tarver over Forrest if I had to choose between them.

joseph5620
09-30-2011, 07:32 PM
If he does make it then it will be because of sentiment over his tragic death. Take away the Mosley fights and you have a very thin resume for someone with that good of a record. I'd pick Tarver over Forrest if I had to choose between them.

I would too and I don't think either has done enough to get in.

Forza
09-30-2011, 07:42 PM
If he had beat bhop then I'd say HOF worthy but still not ATG

New England
09-30-2011, 10:19 PM
If he does make it then it will be because of sentiment over his tragic death. Take away the Mosley fights and you have a very thin resume for someone with that good of a record. I'd pick Tarver over Forrest if I had to choose between them.



aye and a fighter that good as well. he was a very good WW but outside of mosley he did not make use of his prime.

the guy also was stopped once by mayorga

and then lost via decision in the rematch


both guys will have their names on the ballot i'd think
i'd be pretty shocked if either gets in.


and if by ATG it's meant that a fighter is among the 100 best of all time then cotto, calderon, hatton, tarver, gatti, johnson, castillo, and forrest need not apply

BoxingGenius27
09-30-2011, 10:30 PM
And far more deserving are still waiting to be put in.

The like of; Pone Kingpetch, Tiger Jones, Eddie Booker, Cocoa Kid, Ken Overlin and many others are still waiting.

Whilst the HOF continue to induct the likes of McGugian, Pastrano and Brian Mitchell.

To then add the likes of Hatton, Cotto and Gatti. Now people are arguing Tarver. Others arguing Glen Johnson and Diego Corales.

Who's next? Ivan Calderon? Antonio Margarito? Zab Judah? Sven Ottke?

I mean, when does it stop? When will second rate good but not great fighter's stop being inducted into the HOF when actual great fighters are still waiting?

Should Hatton get in on popularity? Sure.

Gatti for excitment? Sure.

Not sure what Cotto should get in for..

But, all three of them should not get in for what they achieved. Which ultimately is what the HOF is all about. Or supposed to be.

But for the record, those 3 fighters should get in if Tarver gets in. If Tarver gets in then I don't see how almost anyone can't get in.


You make good arguments. We definitely need to set the bar higher than what's been set already.

Considering Hatton only lost to Mayweather and Pac, I can see some making an argument for him in the next 15 years.

Tarver has pretty good wins, but his losses are pretty bad also. He's really in the grey area. For every good thing you say, one could say something bad in the same sentence. As of right now, I really don't think he should get in.

Scott9945
10-01-2011, 01:19 AM
aye and a fighter that good as well. he was a very good WW but outside of mosley he did not make use of his prime.

the guy also was stopped once by mayorga

and then lost via decision in the rematch


both guys will have their names on the ballot i'd think
i'd be pretty shocked if either gets in.


and if by ATG it's meant that a fighter is among the 100 best of all time then cotto, calderon, hatton, tarver, gatti, johnson, castillo, and forrest need not apply

Another knock against Forrest is that he outright refused to fight lefties.