Fighters with a worse resume than Gatti, that are in the Hall of Fame?

you guys r idiots... boxing is a form of entertainment, and name a fighter who does that better than gatti. gatti fights the best, is clean, has been in 4 FOTY's, and most importantly, does the sole-purpose of boxing being watched- ENTERTAINMENT I agree that Gatti is entertaining, but I dont think that should get him in the hall of fame.

you guys r idiots... boxing is a form of entertainment, and name a fighter who does that better than gatti. gatti fights the best, is clean, has been in 4 FOTY's, and most importantly, does the sole-purpose of boxing being watched- ENTERTAINMENT

No, he does not deserve to be in the hall of fame. FUCK NO.

Stop it already! Arturo Gatti is not Hall of Fame material! You are making yourself sound a hater and ridicules to try and bring down other fighter in the HOF to bring up Gatti, you should be ashamed of yourself for making this post! Man, what the fuck are you talking about? I'm not even a big Gatti fan. With all the "will gatti make it to the HOF" stuff going on, why not make a thread like this. Thanks for the bad k.

You're argument has no substance. But its probably genitics that leave you being blinded by a fighter like Gatti......Your observations about the lack of substance in my arguments shows dullness in perception. You have also added "genitics" to your ever-lengthening list that includes "redicules". That you think that I'm "blinded by a fighter like Gatti..." reveals that your elevator does not really go too high. Such statements are of the type that one can expect from a mind that produces such logical gems as the post below: Posted by ferocity on 07-22-2006, at 3:46 pm. Post number 26 in the thread Nashiro shocks Castillo in Japan: Happens a lot in the lighters weights, fighters are moved up quickly in the lighterweights. Remember Ali fougth Leon Spink with only 8 fights. And Jeff Fenech got a title shot with only 7-8 fights. __________________ No one can ever logically progress from talking about "lighterweights" by citing a heavyweight ("Leon Spinks") as prime example better than you. It is thus evident that further discussions with you will be exercises in futility for which I have neither time nor inclination. Such remorseless display of stupidity is unequalled. The way you cling to it makes me believe that you must think of it as a gift.

I cannot be blamed for your inability to understand. That can be genetic. As for your example, try crunching Sugar Ray's numbers that you put forward and find the ratio. Elorde's record cannot come close to that. It does not take a mathematical genius to see that with Robinson having fought in excess of twice of the times Elorde did, he had less losses than Elorde. You can't see that too? As for going by records, what will it take you to understand that my first post was in response to the thread starter. If you care to read that starter again, it required discussions of records. RESUME's. That's what I threw in because that is what should be thrown. It's what the thread starter demanded. Or, is that still too difficult for you? And, I noticed you don't learn fast. You still can't spell ridiculous. You're argument has no substance. But its probably genitics that leave you being blinded by a fighter like Gatti......

I'm actually reading Gatti and Elorde in the same sentence! :eek:Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! That's what sterile numbers do sometimes.;)

1) Nope (he held titles in divisions but he was never the guy people said, if you beat him you are the man of the division.) 2) He wasnt competitive 3) He was an exciting fighter, huge fan following without him pbf wouldnt have been on PPV. Of course he was exciting against poorer opposition because once the opposition stepped up he was generally outclassed. 4)C - B (B being a mentally tormented gabriel ruelas) (A being everyone who beat him) I like Gatti but i frankly dont know if he does or doesnt belong in the hall of fame. The answer to your questions though i thought were fairly simple. So it would come out to will he get into the HOF on plain excitement and fame.Thanks for providing the answers. Sadly, I am not in the position to put them to any use.;) :)

I'm actually reading Gatti and Elorde in the same sentence! :eek:

1. Was he ever THE FORCE or ONE OF THE FORCES in any division? 2. How competitive was he against the two HOF shoo-ins he fought (PBF and Oscar)? 3. Does he have specific contributions to the sport is? (e.g., did he make boxing popular, that is, did he attract additional fans to the sport? How many? etc. etc.) 4. What was the quality of the opponents he defeated? But, I'm just glad I am not one of those given the task.:) 1) Nope (he held titles in divisions but he was never the guy people said, if you beat him you are the man of the division.) 2) He wasnt competitive 3) He was an exciting fighter, huge fan following without him pbf wouldnt have been on PPV. Of course he was exciting against poorer opposition because once the opposition stepped up he was generally outclassed. 4)C - B (B being a mentally tormented gabriel ruelas) (A being everyone who beat him) I like Gatti but i frankly dont know if he does or doesnt belong in the hall of fame. The answer to your questions though i thought were fairly simple. So it would come out to will he get into the HOF on plain excitement and fame.

the way gatti was destroyed by mayweather is one reason why he shouldnt be put in even if floyd is a future HOF. put it DLH in there too. PBF and DLH were never threaten in anyway by gatti in those 2 'fights'.

okey gotcha bro grayfist ... its clear to me now ... another question with those facts on record how do you think Gatti's chances of being inducted to the Hall assuming that his carrer ended on his last fight? he won two title belts, beat several titlist, been to a number of great fights, but losses miserably to elite figthers he fought and was not really dominant in any division ... side note: Sugar Ray Robinsons numbers having more fights than Gatti and Elorde combine has a better winning percentage at 90% than both...Heya there again buddy! One gets inducted to the Hall not always by one set of factors but by several influences. Popularity does do its thing. Votes, after all, are THE determinants. That said, there are enshrinees in the Hall whose names are seldom mentioned even by avid boxing fans. Yet, they are there. Sometimes by sheer force of their excellent records (there's that word again.;) ) throughout the lengths of their careers. Sometimes, extremely popular fghters who go into the public psche by virtue of a handful of dazzling feats, get in as well. A fighter gets into the Hall because he is voted into it by accredited boxing writers, etc. It is therefore judgemental. Gatti has had good press. Many writers love him. Do they love him enough to vote him to the rarified heights? Do they love him but not enough to vote for him? I don't really know the answers to those. Personally, I have fond memories of Gatti fights. But shall I vote for him? Honestly, I can't say. But I would like answers to the following questions to guide my vote: 1. Was he ever THE FORCE or ONE OF THE FORCES in any division? 2. How competitive was he against the two HOF shoo-ins he fought (PBF and Oscar)? 3. Does he have specific contributions to the sport? (e.g., did he make boxing more popular, that is, did he attract additional fans to the sport? How many? etc. etc.) 4. What was the quality of the opponents he defeated? But, I'm just glad I am not one of those given the task.:)

okey gotcha bro grayfist ... its clear to me now ... another question with those facts on record how do you think Gatti's chances of being inducted to the Hall assuming that his carrer ended on his last fight? he won two title belts, beat several titlist, been to a number of great fights, but losses miserably to elite figthers he fought and was not really dominant in any division ... side note: Sugar Ray Robinsons numbers having more fights than Gatti and Elorde combine has a better winning percentage at 90% than both...

I think Gatti desrve to be on HOF because he is one of the few figters will get up even if he is down and accepet challenges from fighter far better than him

just like to question you bro about the worse record than Gatti statement, I do understand that Gatti's record of 83% winning percentage(48 Fights) with 8 losses is better on paper than Elorde's record of 75% winning percentage (116 Fights) with 27 losses, but would add to that there is a time span of seven years that The Flash dominated a division as champion and was considered by WBC as the "Best Super Feather that ever was" during that time, Gatti never achieved being dominant in any division, or I was missing something ... my question can it be categorically said that Elorde had a better boxing career than Gatti? IMHO he did, and that's one of the reasons why Elorde IS the FIRST modern day ASIAN boxer to be inducted in the Hall of Fame...Like you, by no means can I agree that Gatti comes close to Elorde. I am a fan of both but I will say that if my opinion is asked Elorde is far and away the better fighter. Elorde virtually invented the Jr. Lightweight division as we know it. That weight class was moribund for decades, revived with a handful of forgetable champs, then came Da Flash. But the thread starter was crafted in such a manner that I cannot respond in any other. It spoke of resume's. Career records. It seeks not opinions on who is a fighter in the Hall worse than Gatti. Had that been the question asked, I would not have posted, as I have none that I can defend well. Sadly, career records do not speak the whole truth. They do not cover circumstances and other factors. They are sterile numbers. And, going merely by those numbers one gets those percentages you mentioned. Gatti's numbers are indeed better than Elorde's.

I read what you say and it seems like you're talking 1,000 words a minute without saying anything of importance. If all you are going off is records then how about we throw in Sugar Ray Robinson 173-19 loses, do you see how ridicules that sounds? You can't just throw in records as you did with Elorde, just stop it, Gatti lost to the elite fighters, worse is that he was not competitive with any of them.I cannot be blamed for your inability to understand. That can be genetic. As for your example, try crunching Sugar Ray's numbers that you put forward and find the ratio. Elorde's record cannot come close to that. It does not take a mathematical genius to see that with Robinson having fought in excess of twice of the times Elorde did, he had less losses than Elorde. You can't see that too? As for going by records, what will it take you to understand that my first post was in response to the thread starter. If you care to read that starter again, it required discussions of records. RESUME's. That's what I threw in because that is what should be thrown. It's what the thread starter demanded. Or, is that still too difficult for you? And, I noticed you don't learn fast. You still can't spell ridiculous.

More ridiculous is the way ridiculous is spelled. More absurd is when one presumes to know other people's intentions when one has no clue whatsoever as to what those intentions are. More ludicrous is the arrogance to try to argue against facts using opinions. Simply put, one becomes funny when...:rolleyes: I read what you say and it seems like you're talking 1,000 words a minute without saying anything of importance. If all you are going off is records then how about we throw in Sugar Ray Robinson 173-19 loses, do you see how ridicules that sounds? You can't just throw in records as you did with Elorde, just stop it, Gatti lost to the elite fighters, worse is that he was not competitive with any of them.

I was responding to the thread starter, pal. It asks for people in the Hall with worse record/s than Gatti. Elorde's record is. I am not saying that Elorde has no business being in the Hall. I am merely stating facts. I also added that Elorde beat Saddler, who more than most, deserve his niche in the Hall. And though he lost to Saddler in their title meeting in San Francisco, the stoppage was very controversial. The other Hall of Famers I cited did not win over other Hall of Famers. I did not question their being enshrined. I did not mention these Hall inductees to dinigrate their feats. I simply responded to Godzhands' question with the little knowledge that I have. I am not presumptuous enough to assume the mantle of judge and jury on who should be in or out of the Hall. I leave that to better qualified people. just like to question you bro about the worse record than Gatti statement, I do understand that Gatti's record of 83% winning percentage(48 Fights) with 8 losses is better on paper than Elorde's record of 75% winning percentage (116 Fights) with 27 losses, but would add to that there is a time span of seven years that The Flash dominated a division as champion and was considered by WBC as the "Best Super Feather that ever was" during that time, Gatti never achieved being dominant in any division, or I was missing something ... my question can it be categorically said that Elorde had a better boxing career than Gatti? IMHO he did, and that's one of the reasons why Elorde IS the FIRST modern day ASIAN boxer to be inducted in the Hall of Fame...

Vargas should not be in the hall of fame are you kidding me?

He's trying to bring down other fighters to make Gatti look better, which is just ridicules.More ridiculous is the way ridiculous is spelled. More absurd is when one presumes to know other people's intentions when one has no clue whatsoever as to what those intentions are. More ludicrous is the arrogance to try to argue against facts using opinions. Simply put, one becomes funny when...:rolleyes: