If He Wasn't A Proven Cheater Would Shane Mosley Deserve A Place In The Hall Of Fame?

[jabsRstiff]

I suspect Iron Dan was being a little sarcastic about the 135lb days of Shane Mosley.

[IronDanHamza]

I'm assuming that you mean his competition was awful and not his performance, which was excellent.

But I'd agree that Mosley's reign at 135 is only slightly better than Moorer's overrated reputation at 175.

Yeah, I mean his opposition.

He only fought 1 or 2 ranked fighters his entire run there.

His performances where obviously awesome but I put that down to the opposition.

And I consider it to be in the same league as Moorer's LHW's run.

[IronDanHamza]

I suspect Iron Dan was being a little sarcastic about the 135lb days of Shane Mosley.

I wasn't being sarcastic. I was being deadly serious.

His run at Lightweight was terrible.

[New England]

I wasn't being sarcastic. I was being deadly serious.

His run at Lightweight was terrible.

terrible? i know we are talking about a historic context (which recognizes the notion that men have done better), but shane's run at LW was far from terrible.

if i remember correctly it took almost 30 fights (and an undefeated world champion,) for somebody to last the distance with him


at lw he was a monster. lots of power. great chin. better offensive skills than those with which he's credited (and has displayed,) recently. and he was huge and had speed. tough nut to crack. you'd have to be a hell of a boxer, or be able to take his gas and outgun him. he was never a terrific boxer, but he was good enough. he was so fast and powerful (and able to take such a good punch with his great chin and natural size at LW,) that you'd have a tough time scoring points against him and winning rounds, even if you could clearly outbox him.

his championship run was short. it's obviously not going to put him on par with (benny) leonard, duran, whitaker, ortiz

i dont think he beats them, either. but he was not a "terrible" lightweight. not in my opinion anyway. he was the best fighter on the planet for a period of time. the man was damn good.

[IronDanHamza]

terrible? i know we are talking about a historic context (which recognizes the notion that men have done better), but shane's run at LW was far from terrible.

if i remember correctly it took almost 30 fights (and an undefeated world champion,) for somebody to last the distance with him


at lw he was a monster. lots of power. great chin. better offensive skills than those with which he's credited (and has displayed,) recently. and he was huge and had speed. tough nut to crack. you'd have to be a hell of a boxer, or be able to take his gas and outgun him. he was never a terrific boxer, but he was good enough. he was so fast and powerful (and able to take such a good punch with his great chin and natural size at LW,) that you'd have a tough time scoring points against him and winning rounds, even if you could clearly outbox him.

his championship run was short. it's obviously not going to put him on par with (benny) leonard, duran, whitaker, ortiz

i dont think he beats them, either. but he was not a "terrible" lightweight. not in my opinion anyway. he was the best fighter on the planet for a period of time. the man was damn good.

He literally fought 1 or maybe 2 ranked fighters during his Lightweight reign.

The only good fighter who wasn't well passed his best during that reign was Philip Holiday and he looked distinctly worse and beatable in comparison to the other unranked bums he fought there.

His run at Lightweight is similar to Edwin Valero's Title reign. He even has the KO Ratio to make it look better than it was (Terrible).

And of course he's not on par with Leonard, Duran, Whitaker or Oritz. He's not even in their stratosphere.

He's Lightweight reign pales in comparison to the likes of Ken Buchanan, Estaban DeJesus or even Jose Luis Castillo.

Let alone actual some of the greatest Lightweight's ever.

[joseph5620]

I don't consider drugs when factoring HOF credentials. You'd have to be pretty naive not to suspect most of Mosley's contemporaries of the same thing.

That's the truth. If it was not for that deposition nobody would even know Mosley used anything. If he passed the standard testing I'm pretty sure many others have/are too.

[New England]

He literally fought 1 or maybe 2 ranked fighters during his Lightweight reign.

The only good fighter who wasn't well passed his best during that reign was Philip Holiday and he looked distinctly worse and beatable in comparison to the other unranked bums he fought there.

His run at Lightweight is similar to Edwin Valero's Title reign. He even has the KO Ratio to make it look better than it was (Terrible).

And of course he's not on par with Leonard, Duran, Whitaker or Oritz. He's not even in their stratosphere.

He's Lightweight reign pales in comparison to the likes of Ken Buchanan, Estaban DeJesus or even Jose Luis Castillo.

Let alone actual some of the greatest Lightweight's ever.

his run at lightweight is very much unlike valero's. surely you cant be serious. edwin valero had a ton of talent but his career was largely a sham. he did not have that kind of power.

and valero did most of his work at 130.

the fact remains that shane mosley's run leading up to and throughout his tenure as a LW was far from terrible. you're talking about him as if he's a bum and he's not. he's a hall of famer based on his work at lightweight and welterweight. looking through the thread i dont see anybody calling it some historic lightweight run.

he moved up in weight to chase big fights. it's not like he was some bum who would have eventually been destroyed by the lightweight shark tank [ ] in 1998..
if the money had been there and he could make the weight he could have stuck around and smashed the "ranked comp" at 135

instead he took on oscar de la hoya at WW after two tune ups and became the top p4p fighter on the planet


not everybody is going to be in the top 5-10 of all time at his weight
that does not make him terrible.

you're talking about shane mosley like he's edwin valero

[jabsRstiff]

I agree that Shane's 135 competition was nothing special. But, he at least showed there was a massive gap between him and those guys while there.
I think he showed by coming up to 147 and meeting much better competition that his 135lb run wasn't a "sham"....he was pretty much just that good.

[IronDanHamza]

his run at lightweight is very much unlike valero's. surely you cant be serious. edwin valero had a ton of talent but his career was largely a sham. he did not have that kind of power.

I am serious.

What's so much different about Valero's career and Mosley's Lightweight run? Do tell.

Both have high KO ratio's against almost entirely unranked bums.

Infact, the one good fighter Valero fought in DeMarco he looked better than Shane did against the one good fighter he fought in Holiday.

the fact remains that shane mosley's run leading up to and throughout his tenure as a LW was far from terrible. you're talking about him as if he's a bum and he's not. he's a hall of famer based on his work at lightweight and welterweight. looking through the thread i dont see anybody calling it some historic lightweight run.

It's it not terrible, then what is it?

Is Micheal Moorer's run at LHW not terrible either?

And no I'm not talking about him as if he's a bum at all. Where have I insinuated that? I am talking about him as if his Lightweight run was a joke, which, it was.

he moved up in weight to chase big fights. it's not like he was some bum who would have eventually been destroyed by the lightweight shark tank [ ] in 1998..

Where have I said he'd have been destroyed if he fought more than 1 or 2 ranked fighters? I haven't said that.

Infact, I've said the opposite. He'd have beaten most of the ranked fighters, infact he'd have dominated most. But atleast then it would have legitimized his LW reign as opposed to fighting almost entirely unranked bums making it non existant.

Although, he'd have lost to Stevie Johnston IMO.

if the money had been there and he could make the weight he could have stuck around and smashed the "ranked comp" at 135

He could have smashed the ranked competition instead of smashing the unranked competition.

instead he took on oscar de la hoya at WW after two tune ups and became the top p4p fighter on the planet

Not sure what the point here is.

not everybody is going to be in the top 5-10 of all time at his weight
that does not make him terrible.

Haven't implied that.

Jose Luis Castillo's Lightweight reign was awesome.

Shane Mosley's was terrible.

If you beat up and destroy a long list of unranked fighters I don't consider your reign any more than terrible.

Micheal Moorer, Edwin Valero, and Shane Mosley's runs at those times in their career's were atrocious.

you're talking about shane mosley like he's edwin valero

No, I'm not.

I'm talking about Shane Mosley's Lightweight reign as if it's as lack luster as Edwin Valero's short career.

[IronDanHamza]

I agree that Shane's 135 competition was nothing special. But, he at least showed there was a massive gap between him and those guys while there.
I think he showed by coming up to 147 and meeting much better competition that his 135lb run wasn't a "sham"....he was pretty much just that good.

I think nothing special is anunderstatement.

And did he really show the massive gap between him and the guys that were there?

Like I said, the only good fighter who was ranked highly or possibly even ranked at all was Philip Holiday and he looked distinctly worse and beatable in that fight compared to the other unranked bums he fought there.

I wouldn't be surprised at all if Steve Johnston has beaten him if they'd have fought.