Originally posted by warp1432
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
if YOU had a vote..would gatti,tarver get into the hall of fame??
Collapse
-
-
-
Originally posted by danc1984 View PostOk, cool.
There is no way he isn't going in though, just saying.
4 Fights of the year and many runner ups. He was one of the most exciting fighters to ever wear gloves. He is the epitome of blood and sweat.
He is a lock. The hall of fame is not about pure talent. It is about what truly represents the sport in the most positive light.
Comment
-
Originally posted by deanrw View PostExactly!! The hall of fame is for those who made an impact in the sport. Gatti was not elite, but in the late 90's and into the new millennium, he was the lifeblood of the sport and brought in more casual fans than anyone.
4 Fights of the year and many runner ups. He was one of the most exciting fighters to ever wear gloves. He is the epitome of blood and sweat.
He is a lock. The hall of fame is not about pure talent. It is about what truly represents the sport in the most positive light.
Comment
-
Originally posted by deanrw View PostExactly!! The hall of fame is for those who made an impact in the sport. Gatti was not elite, but in the late 90's and into the new millennium, he was the lifeblood of the sport and brought in more casual fans than anyone.
4 Fights of the year and many runner ups. He was one of the most exciting fighters to ever wear gloves. He is the epitome of blood and sweat.
He is a lock. The hall of fame is not about pure talent. It is about what truly represents the sport in the most positive light.
Tarver has better wins in bigger fights. That's a positive thing.
Hall of fame should be based on merit and a couple of slugfests with a pretty good not great fighter that Gatti had is great for entertainment, but Tarver fought and beat better people.
It's not even an argument.
Comment
-
Originally posted by jreckoning View PostTarver has better wins in bigger fights. That's a positive thing.
Hall of fame should be based on merit and a couple of slugfests with a pretty good not great fighter that Gatti had is great for entertainment, but Tarver fought and beat better people.
It's not even an argument.
It depends what you interpret the Hall to mean. If it is contribution to the sport then how is Gatti not more deserving than ***n Tarver?
Comment
-
Originally posted by danc1984 View PostIt is.
It depends what you interpret the Hall to mean. If it is contribution to the sport then how is Gatti not more deserving than ***n Tarver?
You're making this a popularity contest. Put in guys that are trainers and donated money to the sport, but don't act like Gatti did anything to merit being great.
He entertained people. so frickin what. Emmanuel Augustus does too.
But Tarver's accomplishhments in the ring dwarf Gatti's and you know it.
Comment
-
Originally posted by jreckoning View PostTarver has better wins in bigger fights. That's a positive thing.
Hall of fame should be based on merit and a couple of slugfests with a pretty good not great fighter that Gatti had is great for entertainment, but Tarver fought and beat better people.
It's not even an argument.
The Hall of fame does base inductee's on accomplishments also. It is just not tied exclusively to that one area though. Gatti is the warrior poster boy, with a heart 10 miles high. That is the type of fighter who gets remembered more fondly than anyone. Tarver accomplished a lot, but he never grabbed the limelight like Gatti did.
Comment
Comment