Is Antonio Margarito a Hall of Famer?

[IronDanHamza]

God no.

No way.

[BKM-2010]

He didn't get enough top fights(Margarito & Floyd were mentioned, those could have been great) and his career was cut short by the scandal and eye injury. The answer is no.

[billeau2]

Lets play devil's advocate and say for a moment that margarito had a few more victories...What would we say about his skills? What I mean is: "Cotto as a fighter was known for great body punching, later on he became a decent boxer as well" or 'Sugar Shane Mosley was phenominally fast and had decent power as well"...

Know lets do Margarito: "Margarito was known as a human punching bag who was durable and kept coming fowards." Frankly I remember days on another board and the cult of Margarito. Margarito....the man who they all ran from! Margarito, the old school tough and tumble nemesis of all the boxers and technicians, the man who given a chance would climb the championship ladder one bloody punch at a time.

As posters have said Margarito never had a particularly good record...we cannot simply say he fell a victory or two short....Margarito never possesed great skills...we cannot say he had a lot of abilities because Margarito's skill was in exposing the deficiencies of other fighters who had skills! The first Cotto fight was a perfect example: Cotto forgets to clinch and walla Margarito is persistant enough (forget the plaster for a moment here) to just be able to absorb the punishment and come fowards.

Was Margarito's persistance really so special? Well....It was not Marquez getting off the canvas 3 times against Pacman! It was at best questionable considering the plaster fiasco.

Margarito did have a cult following. But he lost a lot of fights and never showed anything beytond sheet force of will.

[greeh]

Lets play devil's advocate and say for a moment that margarito had a few more victories...What would we say about his skills? What I mean is: "Cotto as a fighter was known for great body punching, later on he became a decent boxer as well" or 'Sugar Shane Mosley was phenominally fast and had decent power as well"...

Know lets do Margarito: "Margarito was known as a human punching bag who was durable and kept coming fowards." Frankly I remember days on another board and the cult of Margarito. Margarito....the man who they all ran from! Margarito, the old school tough and tumble nemesis of all the boxers and technicians, the man who given a chance would climb the championship ladder one bloody punch at a time.

As posters have said Margarito never had a particularly good record...we cannot simply say he fell a victory or two short....Margarito never possesed great skills...we cannot say he had a lot of abilities because Margarito's skill was in exposing the deficiencies of other fighters who had skills! The first Cotto fight was a perfect example: Cotto forgets to clinch and walla Margarito is persistant enough (forget the plaster for a moment here) to just be able to absorb the punishment and come fowards.

Was Margarito's persistance really so special? Well....It was not Marquez getting off the canvas 3 times against Pacman! It was at best questionable considering the plaster fiasco.

Margarito did have a cult following. But he lost a lot of fights and never showed anything beytond sheet force of will.

I agree with this, and would add that the victory over Cotto - loaded wraps or not - was more of a testament to Cotto’s own limitations rather than Margarito being some sort of excellent talent.

[joseph5620]

Cheaters don't deserve to get that kind of recognition in my opinion. But putting aside "the scandal" was his career good enough to get him in?

Not at all. And I'm not even factoring the hand wraps.

[just the facts]

Take away the scandal factor and Margarito still doesn't have the wins (quality or quantity) to be a HOFer

[messenger]

Even if he wasn't a cheater, I doubt he'd make it.

[ShoulderRoll]

The weird thing is that I think he was better than Arturo Gatti who IS in the Hall.

[billeau2]

The weird thing is that I think he was better than Arturo Gatti who IS in the Hall.

No doubt and I would be willing to bet that virtually all posters would concede that point. Gatti got in because of his image, he was the fanfare for the common man regarding the square circle. Green and I had a decent converation regarding the implications of Gatti getting into the Hall....It all boils down to a certin degree of biase, a certain criteria where by one either agrees or disagrees that a boxer can get in based on their other skill sets, etc. To play devil's advocate here:

a) Gatti was an incredible draw....a legitimte talent to be sure! People forget that when he fought Mayweather he was the bigger draw at the time

b) Gatti was pure excitement. His Ward trilogy was one of the best ever....Two evenly matched guys from the same socio-economic class, both with wills of iron going at it non stop.

c) Gatti became a symbol to which fighters aspired too....The Rocky that got by on piss vinegr and balls to the wall.

in essence Gatti had incredible PR skills and the ability to get people to buy tickets....does this make him better than winky wright? interesting argument.

Having said all that, as when Green and I looked at this philosophically, there is usually some bias regarding how fighters are selected. Gatti may be the best example of this because it is so transparent. WE ALL know Gatti did not get in because of his measuring up in talent. What would be nice is if we had a small committee of people like Hassup (our own poster) who could make the final determinations...but we do not alas!

[bklynboy]

No doubt and I would be willing to bet that virtually all posters would concede that point. Gatti got in because of his image, he was the fanfare for the common man regarding the square circle. Green and I had a decent converation regarding the implications of Gatti getting into the Hall....It all boils down to a certin degree of biase, a certain criteria where by one either agrees or disagrees that a boxer can get in based on their other skill sets, etc. To play devil's advocate here:

a) Gatti was an incredible draw....a legitimte talent to be sure! People forget that when he fought Mayweather he was the bigger draw at the time

b) Gatti was pure excitement. His Ward trilogy was one of the best ever....Two evenly matched guys from the same socio-economic class, both with wills of iron going at it non stop.

c) Gatti became a symbol to which fighters aspired too....The Rocky that got by on piss vinegr and balls to the wall.

in essence Gatti had incredible PR skills and the ability to get people to buy tickets....does this make him better than winky wright? interesting argument.

Having said all that, as when Green and I looked at this philosophically, there is usually some bias regarding how fighters are selected. Gatti may be the best example of this because it is so transparent. WE ALL know Gatti did not get in because of his measuring up in talent. What would be nice is if we had a small committee of people like Hassup (our own poster) who could make the final determinations...but we do not alas!

I think that there should be a Fan Favorite section of the HoF where we can remember fighters such as Gatti but who didn't make it due to skill or record.

Of course this could be corrupted as well. "If Gatti is in then so to should McClellan" or Duk Koo Kim (sp)

Both of whom, now that I think of it, could be remembered there as well. They got stopped in the prime of their life.

Anyway, just an idea.