Hey Fellas:
Along with Lee Groves and the great Jack Obermayer, a short bios list was compiled for the consideration of HOF voters this year. A lot of work went into this and it was great working with both men, each of whom deserve kudos. The names will all be familiar and first time nominees will be released on 10/1. Per conversations with the Hall, no names not elected have been removed from a year ago. With the first timers coming, here is the rest of this year's ballot:

http://bwaa.org/ibhof.htm

Isn't Chavez eligible for election this year? What's your ballot gonna look like Cliff?

Not sure who's going to be added. Brophy keeps that close to the vest and this is independent of what the Hall does. Not sure how mine will look yet.

Chavez's last fight was in 2005, which means that the Class of 2011 will be his first eligible year. I believe that this year will be the last best chance for some of the overlooked guys like Jung Koo Chang, Yoko Gushiken and Myung Woo Yuh to be enshrined for there will be guys like Chavez, Hearns, Tszyu and Tyson coming up soon. It should be interesting to see who the three new names are because I can't think off the top of my head who this year's guys are. In fact, I predict the Class of 2011 will be Chavez, Tszyu and Tyson...you heard it here first.

Lee

New names are out...let you know when we add the bios.

I thought Tommy was 2011? He is greater than the other three combined.

I like Marshall, Gushiken, Yuh & Zapata on the old list.

Agreed, I think Hearns gets in first not just because he is greater, but because everyone has WANTED to vote for him for so long.

The only notable 2004 retirees I saw while doing a quick search were Ayala and Vinny Paz. Will one or both make the list?

Cliff, Lee and Jack did an amazing job with the bios. Hopefully it will prompt my fellow BWAA members to put more thought into this year's votes than has been the case in recent years.


No and no. Santos Laciar, Danny "Little Red" Lopez and Sven Ottke are only three first-time nominees this year.

Lopez finally made it onto the list? Man, I hope he gets in.

Can someone explain to me why Barry McGuigan is in the Hall?
McGuigan beat Eusebio Pedroza, but that was at the end of Pedroza's career.
He managed only two title defenses before losing to Steve Cruz (who lost the title in his first defense).
After a few comeback wins, he got sliced up by Jim McDonnell.
How is that a Hall of Fame resume?

If McGuigan is in, then Donald Curry should be in.
He beat Marlon Starling twice, destroyed Colin Jones and Milton McCrory, made seven title defenses, was undisputed champion, and was considered by many to be the best pound-for-pound when he was in his prime.
Curry had a big fall from glory, but when he was in his prime, he was pretty damn good.

How about Sven Ottke? He retired undefeated and he made twenty-one title defenses, but who did he really beat? Also, many of his wins (Charles Brewer, Byron Mitchell, Mads Larson, Robin Reid) were controversial decisions.
I would vote no on him.

Bubba
please stop making sense
although the Hall has many qualified voters
they also have too many "biased fans" with "THE" power

Curry suffered from the lofty heights the press bestowed upon him
If you're considered "The P4P"
you can't get KO'ed by a Honeyghan
it's unforgiveable (sic)

but one thing I can say about the IBHOF
there are fewer mistakes in it
than those that are left out of it

There's no sense to McGuigan being in, but just because he is, you can't use the "If x is in, then a, b, c, and d all deserve to be there because they were better fighters." That would just open the floodgates and the Hall would lose its appeal. It's better to let a few of these picks slip through the cracks then all of them.

I agree with Dynamic Hispanic. McGuigan shouldn't have been elevated and I believe it was his election that led to the rule that shrunk the list of first-time nominees from four to three. The electors have made mistakes in the past, but why complicate it further by making more mistakes just because "X" happened to get in?

These biographies are intended to offer assistance and information to voters. I believe strongly that a more informed electorate will make better decisions and I am hopeful that it will show when the big announcement is made at the end of the year.


I do, too. I've advocated strongly on his behalf in past articles and earlier this year I wrote a letter to the screening committee detailing the reasons why I felt he should get his chance with the electors. I'm elated and gratified that my entreaties were listened to and I hope that Danny will finally be referred to by his rightful status -- Hall of Famer.

Good for you Lee, Lopez was every bit as exciting as Gatti & Corrales, but he was better than either of them.

And more accomplished. One of my articles next week will provide a rundown on the three new nominees and my thoughts about them, but needless to say Lopez will get an enthusiastic check mark from me.

Weird as it sounds, I grew up loving Laciar without ever seeing him fight. The lower weight fight results in the Ring were fantastic, never knew the result before you got the issue and his transformation into puncher was awesome.

It was the same way with me...I followed the junior flys, flys and junior bantams through Joe Koizumi and I was absolutely thrilled when I saw Francisco Quiroz stop Lupe Madera live on Univision. It was my first look at the guys I was following and I was especially happy to see Zapata fight Javier Lucas on the old weekend Univision show. It's too bad that there isn't an outlet where we can see taped title fights from around the globe.

This project (along with the top 25's research this year) increased my appreciation for Hamed and Jeffra. Love Little Red and Laciar is a strong addition.

For the record, I will never vote for Ottke.

Ten check marks get tougher all the time.

BTW...just mailed in the final bio updates and I'll link when they go up. Great work on your end Lee.

Thank you Cliff for the opportunity. It gave me another opportunity to dive into boxing history...a favorite pastime as you could probably tell.

Although the opportunities will be tougher after this year, I believe Gilberto Roman, Jiro Watanabe and Genaro Hernandez should be given their chance in front of the electors. I don't know if they'll be enshrined but I believe our bios will at least allow their cases to be presented.

I lived in Boston at 9 & 10, 78 & 79, they had a show on Saturday afternoons that ran taped fights. Almost always Gushiken & Canto + a lot of Cuevas. Zapata was another one I loved without seeing him, coming from Panama never hurt a fighter in my youth. Cinsidering the greatest fighter I've personally ever seen live hailed from there.

And I also believe that Simon Brown is among the forgotten because of his low-key personality. Orlando Canizales and Wilfredo Vazquez had to wait their turns to get on the ballot for that very reason and Genaro is probably in that trap as well. It's a sad fact, but loud, brash self-promotion also raises awareness in this regard. It shouldn't be about personalities but in many ways it is.

It's hard for me to complain about anything while marshall isn't in. Holman was probably the most ridiculous omission, but a lot of the skipped are getting in.

I think Burley being in BEFORE Marshall is absurd. Just MO...Marshall had dome worse losses but his best wins are superior.

And the full bios are up: http://bwaa.org/ibhof.htm

I think Holman was the best of the three.

Maybe...wish there were more film of all of them. I would love to see the Moore fights with Marshall...sound brutal.

Thanks, Cliff, Lee and Jack for taking so much time to put together those bios. Makes it much easier for a voter like me whose grasp of history pales in comparison to yours.

I do wish the IBHOF was like baseball's hall in that there didn't HAVE to be three inductees each year, but that there were percentage minimums. Perhaps that would've kept out some of the boxers many see as not deserving such enshrinement.

That said, I wonder how some of the all-time baseball greats had people NOT voting for them. The hell?

Any reason why Davey Moore still isn't on the ballot?

None that I know of. That needs to change.

And FW:
I think percentages would be unfair to a degree. The IBHOGF has been around less then twenty years which means a lot of catch up. I think the MOST fair thing would be to go back to old Ring Hall of Fame, induct everyone en masse who was there and is not in the IBHOF, and then clear the slate for modern voting. It would eliminate some issues.

Cliff, in terms of old-timers who have long-deserved to be in, sure. But in terms of the years when lesser-deserving names get in because they're more familiar to voters and because there's a three-inductee minimum?

You bring up a fair point about how little time the IBHOF has been around. And it's not like there's a veterans' committee like there is in other sports to bring the old-timers in (which has been shown to be a flawed, favorites-playing system anyway).

You could raise the limit beyond three. Baseball writers can put in between 0 to 10. That'd clear up the logjam and, potentially, keep there from being more inductees that draw criticism a la McGuigan, Norton and Johannson.

The issue, as you'll probably point out, is that there are voters like me -- they don't know of the old-timers like you do -- and, with a minimum percentage, the people who are deserving may not get in, while the possibility is higher with a minimum number of inductees.

--dpg

Sven Ottke? I will. I will throw some stuff if he makes it in.

There is an old timers committee/vote...check the cut off years. Over time, the modern line will change and then the guys who have gotten hosed (mostly sub Feathers, largely Asian) will get their due.




If it happens, then it's further proof of the holes in democratic approach.

It won't happen. I refuse to believe that. He earned a ballot slot. That's it.

1893 to 1942. Compare that to baseball's veterans' committee, which votes on players whose careers ended no less than 21 years ago.

Fair point...but Baseball also pulls guys off the ballot. There's no mechanism for that in boxing yet. Maybe there should be...Chang and Yuh shouldn't have to be dead before they get in.

There's nothing in the boxing criteria in either direction in terms of pulling guys. All it'd take is an amendment. Perhaps if guys had been on the list for 15 or more years? And/or if they get no votes at all for 5 straight years.

Talked to Lee about that a while back...problem I see is that no votes might not mean not a HOFer. There's a VERY pro-West flavor to the voting pool. Hopefully, getting more info out will help.

Are you and Lee old-timer voters as well? I see that the IBHOF picks a select pool of historians...

Don't know about Lee. I'm not. None of this stuff we did is tied to or endorsed by the Hall.

I agree that a percentage should be in place rather than mandating four. But a good point was brought up as to why the IBHOF needs to do it that way. I forget if it was Nigel Collins quoting Ed Brophy, or just raising the issue himself, but the fact of the matter is that baseball and its HOF can afford a year where none of its participants are elected in, because people will still go to Cooperstown to visit the HOF with our without an induction ceremony.

With boxing, it's a much different story. The only time the IBHOF - and really the town of Canastota in general - enjoys traffic of any kind is during induction weekend. If no fighters are elected in, people will be less inclined to attend. And with guys like McGuigan and even Terry Norris (who would've made it eventually but certainly wasn;t a 1st ballot-worthy entry) you know they snuck in as the 3rd/4th highest vote-getters of their class, though probably a low percentage.

That said, I think we're now at a point where there are three worthy candidates per year. I laugh when guys like Iole claimed in recent years to have sent in blank ballots in a statement that none were worthy, because there are guys on the list now that were also on back then. Just goes to show how misinformed most writers are of our past, though some of the recent enshrinements certainly underline that fact.

Blank ballots...LOL...lazy ass excuses not to research.

This is beginning to sound like it should be an article.

how many voters are there?
and is there a list?

Yes, but strangely enough it consists of one name and one name only: Max Kellerman.

Cliff’s Notes on The 2010 Hall of Fame Vote

By Cliff Rold

Last week, fellow BoxingScene scribe Lyle Fitzsimmons offered a full run down of this year’s International Boxing Hall of Fame (IBHOF) ballot, naming all of the fighters along with his own choices.

This year’s voting was different experience for this scribe due to involvement in a Boxing Writers Association of America committee, along with the excellent Lee Groves (MaxBoxing) and Jack Obermayer (Boxing Digest), which compiled biographical data and ‘stats’ if you will about each of this year’s nominees. This research, in part, caused reconsideration of some previously voted for fighters and new appreciation for others.

For readers interested in the work, it can be found at http://bwaa.org/ibhof.htm

Ballots are due this Saturday and, as always, mine goes through drafts. It is sometimes amusing to read that there are not ten men on the ballot worthy of induction to the Hall of Fame. It’s quite the opposite actually, somewhat due to time. The IBHOF has been around only a couple of decades and so, sometimes, fighters who at one time were considered of Hall caliber in the old Ring Magazine Hall of Fame are still on the outside. It’s something one can expect to be corrected over time.

For instance, Ceferino Garcia, Harry Jeffra, and Yoshio Shirai were all Ring-enshrined but have yet to be elected to the IBHOF. All are on the ballot this year.

There is also an arguable weighing of the scale, pun intended, against smaller, more modern greats whose fights were not largely featured on American stages. With a slate of all-stars eligible in the coming years like Mike Tyson, Julio Cesar Chavez, and Tommy Hearns, those smaller men were given even stronger consideration than usual.

With that, one man’s choices for the year at hand. My top ten are listed with my preferred three up top I’d prefer to see them go in, the rest laid out alphabetically. Where choices remain the same as a year ago, much of the text will also be the same.

1 - Lloyd Marshall
Marshall has been the first name I’ve checked on my ballot every year I’ve had the chance and was first again this year. The former Middleweight and Light Heavyweight contender of the 1930s and 40s is long overdue for induction and this should be his year. If it’s not, when will that year come? Fitzsimmons noted his win over Jake LaMotta, but it’s only the tip of the iceberg in terms of Hall of Famers he faced or defeated. Ken Overlin is on the ballot this year with Marshall as are Freddie Mills and Tommy Farr; Marshall beat them all. Of those already inducted, there was Teddy Yarosz (split two fights); Lou Brouillard (win), Charley Burley (win with a knockdown), Holman Williams (won one of three bouts), and Joey Maxim (win and a knockdown). None of those are his crowning achievement. That came in 1943 when he stopped Ezzard Charles in eight. He lost both return bouts in 1946 and 47, but came close to stopping Charles again in the first of those, dropping Charles in the opening frame only to see a man many now view as one of the ten greatest ever rise at nine and find revenge. He couldn’t get past Jimmy Bivins or Archie Moore in his career, but they’re both in the Hall and had to get off the floor to beat Marshall. If Lloyd Marshall had been white, or had not come in such close proximity to World War II, with his power and action style he’s a champion. Instead, the best Boxing can do is honor him years later and it’s time to do so.

2 - Jung-Koo Chang
Arguably the greatest South Korean fighter ever, Chang reigned as WBC titlist at 108 lbs. from 1983-89 and crept his way onto U.S. Pound-for-Pound lists almost solely on a resume few had seen built. Hilario Zapata is on the ballot with Chang this year, winning their first fight and being stopped in the third of a rematch to begin the Chang reign of 15 defenses. He defeated nine major titlists over the years, including future two-time lineal Flyweight champion Sot Chitalada, and retired as champion. A comeback loss to Chiquita Gonzalez passed the torch to a new generation in the still young Jr. Flyweight class. Chang wasn’t done, warring in a lost classic with Muangchai Kittikasem at Flyweight in his final 1991 bout. Aging, he dropped Kittikasem thrice only to be stopped himself in the final round. There have been dozens and dozens of Asian fighters and champions in the lowest weight classes and they are sorely under-represented in Canastota. Chang was amongst their very best.

3 – Harry Jeffra
This is a fighter who should have had check marks in the past. Jeffra won two world titles when it actually meant something, at Bantamweight and Featherweight, though he wasn’t much for long reigns, losing the Bantamweight title in his first defense, the Featherweight in his second. However, the men he beat for and around those titles speak volumes. The Bantamweight crown was lifted from Puerto Rican great Sixto Escobar and Jeffra won four of their five fights in total. He lifted the Featherweight crown from the excellent Joey Archibald and should have won three, instead of two, of their four. Add in wins against Bantamweight great Lou Salica and Featherweight titlists Jackie Wilson and Phil Terranova and one gets the picture of what sort of quality Jeffra provided in his 100-plus bouts.

Read the rest at: http://www.boxingscene.com/?m=show&id=23137

I only vote on the Moderns as well. That is where I feel most comfortable with my expertise.

War Jimmy Carruthers!!!!

And Dave Sands!

And the legendary Dave Sands!!!! I only got as far as Carruthers.

Didn't Sands die in his early 20's?

Is Fenech in the HOF? He should be.

Yes. Been there for a few years.