Did Arturo Gatti Deserve IBHOF Spot?

[Tom Cruise]

Comparing one fighter to another is not the criteria for HOF induction. Otherwise we have to start comparing Hector Camacho to Willie Pep, Henry Armstrong and Carlos Ortiz, hardly in the same league.

Some of the guys I listed weren't great fighters either. Some were, some weren't. Some of them never defeated anyone for a title yet they are in the HOF.

This is a question of what is the standard to get in? The IBHOF does not have a majority vote system such as other sports where an athlete must receive 75% votes to get in. They don't even reveal their criteria and how a fighter was selected or why. HOF doesn't always = ATG.

We don't need to compare across eras to say who the best fighters of the era are. Gatti wasnt one of the best of his. Not by a long shot.

Most of those guys didn't win titles because they were never allowed an opportunity to fight for the title due to racial politics of their era. Entirely different to Gatti who had many chances but simply wasnt good enough.

I wouldn't say there was a defining standard. You take it on a case by case basis. By my book Gatti is at least several levels below the standard you need to be to get into the hall.

Put this into context Ceferino Garcia has not been inducted despite being the recognised MW champion of the World. He knocked out MW great (and yes, HoFer) Fred Apostoli to gain the title. He also holds 2 wins over hall of famer Lloyd Marshall, and another win over HoFer Billy Soose. Plus a draw and a loss vs the ATG Henry Armstrong, admittedly thr draw was at a weight Armstrong shouldn't have been near. And several losses to the ATG Barney Ross. So that's 3-3-1 just vs inductees.

Already that is miles better than Gattis record. Then you factor in the slew of contenders he fought, many of which he beat, during his career. Men like Kid Azteca, Aaron Wade, Izzy Jannazo, Young Peter Jackson, Baby Joe Gans, Al Manfredo and probably more if you knew the era better than me.

Garcia cant get into the Hall, but Gatti can? Because he got smashed about a lot? Im not saying CG should get in (his sort of career should be about the borderline imo), but it certainly cheapens the whole project having the likes of Arturo Gatti in there.

Putting Gatti in basically opens the door to putting a whole load of relatively poor, but exciting and regionally popular fighters. Was a bad decision and one i doubt would have been made if the voters had had more time to consider his career.

[phallus]

Not the resume or big title victories but if you consider the drawing power he had and excitement he brought.

A good example similar to this would be Micky Ward. Ward fought on tv many times(the majority of his career). He scored many upsets over ranked contenders but does not have a great resume in regards to victories. Ward does however have many fights of the year and fight of the year candidates.
Being a fan favorite helps if it is prolonged and consistent. This description could easily apply to Gatti, who was a fan favorite as well.

It's the Hall of "Fame" not the hall of "ATG". I have no problem with Gatti being in despite not being an All-Time Great fighter. Every other sports Hall of Fame has non-great members. Up until now it was only the Hockey fans that I've ever heard b1tch about that fact.

gatti and ward were working man's heros, both were B level fighters. i don't think anyone is claiming that Gatti skills or acheivements were great, just that he did a lot to attract people to watch boxing. i don't have any problem with gatti in the HOF, no one who watches his fights will confuse him with Ali, Joe Louis or Willie Pep who all deserve placement because of exceptional talent.

[billeau2]

Yeah, I remember an episode of HBO's Real Sports doing a story on the case at the time it happened. Oh yeah and I know what you mean about not always having enough or reliable evidence. I not only watch a lot of mysteries and crime dramas, but true crime like Autopsy and Forensic Files. I remember on Autopsy they found an arm in an ocean spit out by a shark, but wasn't enough to prosecute, because it didn't mean the person was dead, at least that was the ruling. But I've seen on Forensic Files a handful of times when there's a conviction without even finding the body, only finding bones, or even finding a piece of a finger or a tooth. Amazing how far crime science has come. Arthur Doyle, who wrote the Sherlock Holmes stories, even talked about things such as crime labs and ballistics in his stories before they even existed.

In this case, it just seems police and the crime lab did a really sloppy job. It was probably the wife. I've read that 75% of murder victims are killed by people they know and about 19% by a spouse and 29% by a significant other.

Very well said Anthony. Those Stats, a painful reality, a reality which also applies to child abuse, sexual abuse, are the norm. yes very sloppy as well. Lo and behold it was Scotland Yard that developed the modern Forensics theater!

[OctoberRed]

Sometimes there is evidence in a case that is of a poor quality... for example, a very bad witness, who was in a place at the right time is claiming he/she saw something...but the witness has his/her own motivations.

Sometimes there is evidence that is great quality but insufficient in amount... they find a piece of something somewhere but it has no fingerprint, etc.

Finally, sometimes evidence exists that is great but does not reach the legal standard. Character witness', other secondary sources. This is especially true of when a case can be tried in a civil court but not in a criminal court.

I think with Gatti that there was enough evidence to have a civil trial. I don't remember the outcome of the trial but there was enough for a case to go forward. Maybe I am mistaken and there was no civil trial? if there was no civil case than there might not have been evidence after all. Again, the quality of evidence is such that if there was no civil case brought one can assume the evidence was sketchy regardless of how people felt.

Ok this case is a cluster f uck! Her purse strap could probably be cosidered evidence.

http://www.espn.com/boxing/story/_/i...r-arturo-gatti

I think there was a huge lawsuit over his estate and the money, but I don't remember the ex-wife losing out.

[Rip Chudd]

He did deserve it, but only because we are in a generation where everyone gets a medal

[Tony Trick-Pony]

Without question. He's the human highlight reel!

I don't think anyone can argue that he didn't help the sport by leaps and bounds. His wars were legendary and he packed the house so many times. People would just ask when his next fight was and sign up-no matter who he was fighting.

Everyone contributes to the sport in their own way. Gatti contributed with his super human recuperative powers along with his iron will. Never in a bad fight. Although more talented, El Terrible made a name for himself by giving us numerous wars. So have many others. On accomplishment alone, no, but on entertainment value, he did better than most fighters. There has to be room in there for guys like Gatti. I've called a lot of fighters bums, but I'd never call this guy a bum. A bum to me doesn't put forth effort. Gatti gave us everything in the ring. I can't knock that. I celebrate his legacy for sure.

And besides, he IS IN.

What are you gonna do about it?

[Tom Cruise]

gatti and ward were working man's heros, both were B level fighters. i don't think anyone is claiming that Gatti skills or acheivements were great, just that he did a lot to attract people to watch boxing. i don't have any problem with gatti in the HOF, no one who watches his fights will confuse him with Ali, Joe Louis or Willie Pep who all deserve placement because of exceptional talent.

So should the same standard be applied to every national star across the world?

Your Nigel Benn's? Your Frank Bruno's? Your Mikkel Kessler's? I wonder how many potential Chinese fighters Zou Shiming inspired?

Im not singling out Gatti here btw. I dont think Barry Mcguigan should be in the hall either, and he is in due to similar reasons. Though as i said earlier Barry at least got one great win vs Eusebio Pedroza and was lineal FW champ.

[Anthony342]

Every other sport has questionable inductions in their halls of fame. I guess now boxing is no different.

[billeau2]

I think there was a huge lawsuit over his estate and the money, but I don't remember the ex-wife losing out.

It would not be significant whether his wife prevailed, or not, with regards to whether there was evidence of her possibly murdering him Red. It might be if it turned out that Gatti and this women loved each other dearly and she was... oh lets say...set up by an evil business partner of Gatti incorporated.

In a case one has to consider the actual situation to determine whether there was evidence of a crime and most important: guilt. Legal process will only allow certain evidence to be brought to the trial procedure, and evidence might be tossed out because of sloppy procedure. I say this because whether the woman is guilty, or not, there is evidence that she murdered him. Maybe it is not as strong as contrary evidence, thats a possibility... But when we look this is what we see:

A purse strap belonging to her used, a conclusion reached that is highly unlikely, vis a vis, that he hung himself... sloppy evidence gathering from the police with a motive to protect the girl. You can see my point. I would not rush to call this woman guilty, but there is evidence that suggests she is guilty.

[billeau2]

So should the same standard be applied to every national star across the world?

Your Nigel Benn's? Your Frank Bruno's? Your Mikkel Kessler's? I wonder how many potential Chinese fighters Zou Shiming inspired?

Im not singling out Gatti here btw. I dont think Barry Mcguigan should be in the hall either, and he is in due to similar reasons. Though as i said earlier Barry at least got one great win vs Eusebio Pedroza and was lineal FW champ.

We cannot speak categorically of all the Halls of fame because they all have very different developments and standards. In Baseball, despite the fact that the game was pretty much played by a bunch of thugs in the early days, Pete Rose was made an example of...so let it be known, how baseball will deal with steriod cheats will be interesting with its piety!

In Boxing the hall is partially about fame and not all about skills. There are mistakes made and there might be many fighters who should be in, Thats a hard one to call. Suffice to say there is no hall of fame that can pretend that it never denied entry to someone who deserved it, or let someone slip in. A lot of Gatti's skill was in his appeal to the fans, his draw at the box office so to speak.

I like the idea that the HOF is for the fan favorites...it lets the real men have discussions about ATG status, the real gold ring at the Carousel.