If Andre Ward retired today, should he get inducted into the HOF?

I remember Kessler was a huge tomato can killer after Calzaghe beat him to discredit Calzaghe. Now all of a sudden he's a huge deal since Ward beat him around two years later. Fucking boxing fans :lol1:.

That's a lot of no's. He had the talent, but he's screwing himself over

NOPE. I just had this argument with some friends of mine..... All he did was win a tournament. When was the last time someone got inducted into the HOF by fighting and dominating in only one weight class (not named Marvin Hagler)?

yes rocky balboa is in id say ward deserves it

I have repeatedly said Andre Ward is not a great fighter and never will be. His two best wins are Froch and Kessler, and I don't particularly rate them. Ok. At least that is consistent.

I really don't know

In other words you are saying Froch is sjiit. Since Froch is Ward's best win, Ward must be far away from the HOF in your opinion. :ugh: I have repeatedly said Andre Ward is not a great fighter and never will be. His two best wins are Froch and Kessler, and I don't particularly rate them.

... WARD beat the man who was condsidered pound for pound one of the best fighters at the time, (Dawson)... This one here made my day... (I don't use to say anything about Ward anymore, but when I hear again about Sad Chad I can't help myself...)

Worse fighters have been inducted in so I guess by that measure he would.

any other fighters with less than 30 fights get in? im curious Nope. Spinks and Tszyu have the least.

Dirrell was a novice who hadn't beaten anyone and he has only beaten Abraham who isn't very good, Froch was a favourite and he didn't win convincingly, I don't see how that counts for anything. Groves is a crappy fighter, and people only rate that win because Froch struggled so badly, that's a paradox. Abraham is another crappy fighter and Taylor was done. None of these wins have much value if you are talking 'history' or 'legacy', just simply overhyping names. Neither have done that much in that respect, but Ward holds a definitive win over Froch, it's not hard to work out. In other words you are saying Froch is sjiit. Since Froch is Ward's best win, Ward must be far away from the HOF in your opinion. :ugh:

Well considering some of the fighters that have made, it, I'd say yes. It's hard to say though. One or two big wins against say Golovkin, one of the LHWs and/or even a Froch rematch puts him in for sure. I imagine when his career is over he'll be more or less a lock.

WARD beat the man who was condsidered pound for pound one of the best fighters at the time, (Dawson) no one considered dawson to be p4p when ward fought him

Ward has the best win (Froch) and a fresher Kessler. But outside if that he doesn't have much, Abraham and Bika are good solid wins. Froch has Kessler (abit older), Bute, Abraham, Taylor, Dirrell, Groves x2, Pascal. I think it's definitely very clear Froch has more depth to his resume. But again it is still arguable. I don't see how it's arguable. It's as clear as daylight Froch is superior in the resume department. A fighter can have the talent to be the best ever but if he's not putting in work, he shouldn't get the credit of other boxers.

Ward is a top candidate for the Hall of Shame. He showed promise early on but got full of himself, and single-handedly tanked his own career by suing his promoter. The fact that he continues to lose in court should tell him something about his logic.

If he died maybe.

You can break down any resume in history in a hindsight view to make it seem worse than it is. Pre-fight, Froch was an underdog against Taylor, Abraham, Bute, Ward and Kessler 1. Only 1 of those fights was on home soil. Against Taylor, he went to the US where casuals had never heard of him, and stopped him. Abraham and Kessler were Super-six favourites pre-tournament. Everybody talked about how Abraham was going to knock the one-dimensional, lethargic Froch out! Froch schools him. Bute was supposedly the man to put Froch into retirement, the man everybody wanted Ward to face to determine the number 1 at 168. Froch stops him in brutal fashion. Just because these men haven't amounted to much post-Froch does not diminish the result in any way. Bute, Kessler, Pascal, Abraham, Dirrell, Groves, Johnson....almost a who's who of the best the division has on offer at the time. The value of a win is based on the quality of fighter beaten, nothing else, a fighter being incorrectly hyped doesn't make a win better. Simply listing names doesn't mean much either.

neither froch or ward deserve to be in the hof tbh

Dirrell was a novice who hadn't beaten anyone and he has only beaten Abraham who isn't very good, Froch was a favourite and he didn't win convincingly, I don't see how that counts for anything. Groves is a crappy fighter, and people only rate that win because Froch struggled so badly, that's a paradox. Abraham is another crappy fighter and Taylor was done. None of these wins have much value if you are talking 'history' or 'legacy', just simply overhyping names. Neither have done that much in that respect, but Ward holds a definitive win over Froch, it's not hard to work out. You can break down any resume in history in a hindsight view to make it seem worse than it is. Pre-fight, Froch was an underdog against Taylor, Abraham, Bute, Ward and Kessler 1. Only 1 of those fights was on home soil. Against Taylor, he went to the US where casuals had never heard of him, and stopped him. Abraham and Kessler were Super-six favourites pre-tournament. Everybody talked about how Abraham was going to knock the one-dimensional, lethargic Froch out! Froch schools him. Bute was supposedly the man to put Froch into retirement, the man everybody wanted Ward to face to determine the number 1 at 168. Froch stops him in brutal fashion. Just because these men haven't amounted to much post-Froch does not diminish the result in any way. Bute, Kessler, Pascal, Abraham, Dirrell, Groves, Johnson....almost a who's who of the best the division has on offer at the time.

Ward has the best win (Froch) and a fresher Kessler. But outside if that he doesn't have much, Abraham and Bika are good solid wins. Froch has Kessler (abit older), Bute, Abraham, Taylor, Dirrell, Groves x2, Pascal. I think it's definitely very clear Froch has more depth to his resume. But again it is still arguable. Dirrell was a novice who hadn't beaten anyone and he has only beaten Abraham who isn't very good, Froch was a favourite and he didn't win convincingly, I don't see how that counts for anything. Groves is a crappy fighter, and people only rate that win because Froch struggled so badly, that's a paradox. Abraham is another crappy fighter and Taylor was done. None of these wins have much value if you are talking 'history' or 'legacy', just simply overhyping names. Neither have done that much in that respect, but Ward holds a definitive win over Froch, it's not hard to work out.