Is Arturo Gatti worthy of the Hall of Fame?

Everyone loves Arturo Gatti. I cant think of a more exciting and inspirational fighter in the last 20 years. Always gave his all and had the most amazing courage in the ring but does someone like him deserve a place in the HOF?

Some will say the halls a place for those who had an influence and an impact on the sport. Theres no doubt that Gatti did this. 2 weight world champ who was involved in 4 Ring fights of the year including that trilogy. Had an enormous fan base and always gave his all never letting the side down win or lose. Wasn't the most talented but that makes his impact even more impressive and based on some who have made it he deserves a spot.

Others will argue he lost to every elite opponent he faced. That his exiting performances came against the average and mediocre boxers he faced. The HOF should be for the absolute cream, great fighters who did special things and beat other great fighters. Being entertaining or popular is simply not enough.

Despite not being the most talented I think he managed to carve himself a memorable legacy as a must see fighter and achieved much more than he should have. Was never in a dull fight and kept many people interested in boxing. Perhaps the HOF should be completely elitist but it hasnt been up to now and based on some in there already Arturo would get my vote.

What do you think? Is providing great entertainment and being involved in great fights enough or does Gatti miss out on the Hall?

Would recommend watching the documentary on him in the boxing documentary thread for those who havent.

Cheers.

I have little doubt that he'll be inducted in to Canastota in the future, but if it were up to me he'd never make it in a million years, fantastic entertainer though he was and may he rest in peace.

But at the end of the day, he wasn't a great fighter, more a very good one. If / when he makes the Hall of Fame, it will simply be because the bar is set far, far too low, as most of us have said many times over.

Absolutely not; as you may know, pp, we're in the lengthy process of sorting out a proper 606 v2 Hall of Fame at the moment, restricting it to the true elite as far as we possibly can. Fighters as good as Wilfred Benitez and Jeff Fenech have fallen so far short of qualifying for membership that they've been permanently removed from the candidates' slate. Both are miles superior fighters to Gatti, who was a great trier, but whose record is almost risibly short of truly elite status.

No, no and a thousand times no, in summary - not in a million years is Gatti of the right quality for such an honour.

This is where you have the problem of criteria: entertainment value, popularity, talent, record, overall contribution etc. For me, no. His FOTY wins are accolade enough, but he wasn't a great.

I get a small incling that Captain doesn't want him in there....

For me - I must also go with a 'No'

Seems fairly conclusive so far.

Been reading your HOF thread with interest Captain and can see that with the high standards that have been set Gatti would nver figure in a million years. However, the IBHOF havent set the same standards and based on their own requirements and inductees do you think hes even half worthy?

paperbag_puncher wrote:Others will argue he lost to every elite opponent he faced. That his exiting performances came against the average and mediocre boxers he faced. The HOF should be for the absolute cream, great fighters who did special things and beat other great fighters. Being entertaining or popular is simply not enough.

This is true, however on the basis that the above also describes exactly the career of Mike Tyson, who was inducted this year, there should also be a place for Gatti.

Have to agree with the consensus that he should not be inducted. To be honest he was the ultimate warrior but I don't believe he was even a a very good fighter. He best wins were against faded, overrated under sized opposition (Ruelas, Dorin & Gamache) and the legendary trilogy against a well rounded fighter who at the end of the day who was nothing more than a contender.

Too many life and death wars against opponents who if you want to be in the HOF should not be struggling against.

But as the HOF as inducted other fighters of equally undeserving achievements, then I will expect he will get the nod.

The IBHOF have made an enormous rod for their own backs by accepting people of the standard of Zaragoza, Johansson and McGuigan, pp. With that as the benchmark, you're almost forced to let in any fighter who has ever held a belt for a year or longer. Having held two, Gatti is certainly not less qualified than the names I've mentioned for Canastota, and it would probably be unfair if he didn't make it. However, and as Chris has already stressed, this says more about the limitations of Canastota than it does about the suitability of Gatti as a candidate.

Well, they have a weekend every year, so you have to have a certain number of candidates for them to function. 8 boxers I think this year, if that continues until say 2030, you're looking at another 160 nominees and only another 20 years of eligible candidates. Probably 100+ will be guys who have been eligible but not good enough to be voted in yet.

alma wrote:Personally if I was sitting down for an evening's entertainment I'd pick an Arturo Gatti fight over a Floyd Mayweather fight, but we all know what happened when they met, so there's your answer I think

Interesting point. I certainly admire someone like Gatti a lot more than PBF. Will always favour those that make the most of what they have and overachieve than those with buckets of talent but dont make the absolute most of it. No doubt Mayweathers one of the best fighters of the last 20 years and probably ever but his self imposed periods of inactivity and not having too many defining fights mean he hasnt made the most of his ability.

I'm more likely to rewatch Mayweather-Mosley, DLH or Corrales than Gatti-Ward but expect I'm in the minority.

Got to echo the general sentiments, was rarely in a bad fight and a true value for money guy, but not an elite talent in a million years. Won belts but that says more about the number of belts and divisions than Gatti's abilities. Alas he is not a lot less deserving than many who are in so when coupled with his untimely death I have no doubt he will get the call. Should not in any way shape or form be the case though.

If Sly Stallone gets in, then so too does Gatti.

Stallone got in as an observer.

No, never and no way should Gatti be in the HoF, may he rest in peace.

Curry isn't in - who at his sublime best was a damn site better than Gatti. Gatti's fights were extremely exciting - yes - but that was because he and his opponents eschewed defence and preferred to leave their chins hanging in the air to be mauled by their opponents fists.

That is not HoF worthy.

I would say no but I wouldn't be surprised if he got in. It's became a bit of a popularity contest in recent years. Personally I never felt Tyson or Tszyu were worthy of their place this year.

100% yes, HoF credentials isn't always down to sheer talent (although Gatti could box when he wanted to).

Gatti entertained the entire boxing community for many years and should be honoured appropriately IMO.

If Stallone got in, it'll be a disgrace if Gatti didn't, I mean Gatti's fights were more entertaining than Rockys!

Valero's Conscience wrote:100% yes, HoF credentials isn't always down to sheer talent (although Gatti could box when he wanted to).

Gatti entertained the entire boxing community for many years and should be honoured appropriately IMO.

If Stallone got in, it'll be a disgrace if Gatti didn't, I mean Gatti's fights were more entertaining than Rockys!

Could not agree more.

What's it called again? The 'Hall of Talent'?

Stallone induction was under a different criteria where as Gatti as fighter should not be inducted in my opinion.

As for the induction of Tszyu and Tyson I would support those as they both cleaned out their divisions and unified the multiple titles available. Also it is generally argued that Tyson was not beaten until he was past his best (although I would always think a boxer of 6ft 3 and above who could establish a jab and decent power would always give him problems) and won more than one version of the heavyweight title on 2 occasions.

Tszyu was know where near the fighter he was when he lost to Hatton but to help his own legacy he should have rematched Phillips.

prettyboykev wrote:I would say no but I wouldn't be surprised if he got in. It's became a bit of a popularity contest in recent years. Personally I never felt Tyson or Tszyu were worthy of their place this year.

I completely understand and I know the HoF should be the top, top elite fighters only which Gatti wasn't but because they've let a few subject people in, the flood gates are open for more.

Personally I think Gatti should get a pass for his input to boxing, god knows how many people he made fans.

When you are asked to show a fight to a newcomer to the sport to show action and sheer heart, Gatti's name would pop up in 99% of people's top 5 list and for that reason I think he should get in.

I'm not sure I'd let Gatti in as things stand, for the sake of maintaining a certain standard of talent and achievement.

However, is it the case that perhaps guys like Gatti should be admitted on another set of criteria? He's made a great contribution as a fan favourite, as a guy who gave his all and made fans of people.

Definite no for me, he was exciting sure but compare his level of opposition to that of say Bobby Chacon and it doesn't even come close, it's one thing to be exciting fights with low level opposition but something completely different against high level opposition. I tend to agree with Scott, personally don't think much of the Gatti/Ward fights because neither were world class but give me Castillo/Corrales or Barrera/Morales and i'd watch them over and over.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:I tend to agree with Scott

Print screen.

No chance, a punch bag, and i say that with respect of him not being here, but he lost near enough every big fight he had and was nowhere near good enough to ever beat the best.

As others have said though Curry and Naz are not in, whatever you may think of those two fighters, there were points both could claim without too much argument to be the premier fighter in their division and genuine top ten P4P guys, am not sure Gatti could ever make such a claim. Appreciate he was good to watch but so was Carl Thompson, there has to be a bar set somewhere in terms of a minimum talent and for me Gatti is a good way below it.

rowley wrote:As others have said though Curry and Naz are not in, whatever you may think of those two fighters, there were points both could claim without too much argument to be the premier fighter in their division and genuine top ten P4P guys, am not sure Gatti could ever make such a claim. Appreciate he was good to watch but so was Carl Thompson, there has to be a bar set somewhere in terms of a minimum talent and for me Gatti is a good way below it.

There's a good shout to say that he's below Carl Thompson as well.

I think Gatti will stroll into the Hall of Fame but in all honesty he isn't in the same league as some of the calibre of fighter in there. Was exciting to watch though that's for sure.

No 1 p4p in his day...Cleaned up the welterweight div...won a jr midd title.....

yep leave don out and stick Gatti in..

totally depends if we are entering people into HOF for impact as fighers or impact on sport, if it is for talent and achievement in rig then no but for excitement and the eyes he brought on sport, then yes

www.maineventboxing.wordpress.com

Sorry but having Gatti in there cheapens HOF status.....

Hamed was exciting wasn't he?????

Vinny Pazienza was exciting wasn't he and a 3 weight champion!!!!!

no, no way, no way jose, never, never ....................

Why you so against Gatti being inducted TRUSS? Ray Mancini dont deserve to be there either.

At some point the HoF needs to set standards and they dropped this year with the inclusion of Tyson. So on that basis yes but it's not the achievement it should be. They should rename it to the hall pretty good fighters.

Two wrongs don't make a right...

Maybe not but their standards have dropped considerably. I wouldn't have had Tszyu in it either.

At some point the HoF needs to set standards and they dropped this year with the inclusion of Tyson. So on that basis yes but it's not the achievement it should be. They should rename it to the hall pretty good fighters.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rubbish Kev absolute rubbish. Leaving Tyson out of the boxing HOF is as major as the Bible omitting Dinosaurs from the old testerment. You just cant leave a figure like Tyson, with the impact he made on the sport, out because he never reigned for long or he did not beat any big names. Rubbish.

Tyson was deserving I have to agree...Cleaned up at heavy and unified the throne ...champ for 4 years and then came back and semi-unified...

huge name too.

Look if Sly Stallone can get in for his "impact" on boxing then Tyson's a shoe in.
I see the HOF as a huge time capsule and I feel that someone like Gatti should be remembered along side the very best. His career and how he was a fan fav merits inclusion.

Let's just chuck in one man and his dog as well.....

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:At some point the HoF needs to set standards and they dropped this year with the inclusion of Tyson. So on that basis yes but it's not the achievement it should be. They should rename it to the hall pretty good fighters.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rubbish Kev absolute rubbish. Leaving Tyson out of the boxing HOF is as major as the Bible omitting Dinosaurs from the old testerment. You just cant leave a figure like Tyson, with the impact he made on the sport, out because he never reigned for long or he did not beat any big names. Rubbish.

Onetwo, please remember to use the quote function, mate. It is significantly easier than doing what you're doing.

How do you use it?

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:How do you use it?

You can't be serious...

John mcenroe..welcome to 606 mate.

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:At some point the HoF needs to set standards and they dropped this year with the inclusion of Tyson. So on that basis yes but it's not the achievement it should be. They should rename it to the hall pretty good fighters.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rubbish Kev absolute rubbish. Leaving Tyson out of the boxing HOF is as major as the Bible omitting Dinosaurs from the old testerment. You just cant leave a figure like Tyson, with the impact he made on the sport, out because he never reigned for long or he did not beat any big names. Rubbish.

Not just the points you made but along with biting people's ears and failing drug tests. He may have been a big name but he isn't the elite.

Orlando canizales, michael carbajal, Daniel Zaragoza are though I guess.

Got to say for all the profile Tyson bought to the sport it would be remiss to suggest he did not bring comfortably as much shame, the ear biting, convictions etc. Personally I think none of this is relevant though because were we to exclude boxers with less than monastic lifestyles outside the ring the hall would be a fairly small place. Boxers should be included on achievements inside the ring alone and Tyson for me would be borderline, winning the title at his age is impressive but losing it to Douglas is less so and his record, an ageing Holmes aside is somewhat lacking in strength in depth or quality, genuinely tough call for me.

It's a tough call and yet the above fighters i've mentioned are in there...

So why is it tough or do those guys come before mike??

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:It's a tough call and yet the above fighters i've mentioned are in there...

So why is it tough or do those guys come before mike??

Literally a few posts ago you said two wrong don't make a right.

It's not because literally two posts ago I said TYson deserves a place..

Merely suggesting it can't be hard for Rowley to decide with the guys who are already in..

Dumbass.