Quote Originally Posted by DavilaJones View Post
I don’t want there to be a misunderstanding I have total utter respect for Cotto and the fact that he ducked no one and had a solid career but my standards for HOF is higher than sadly even the HOF folks. Kostya Tszyu as first bout HOFer? I just can't wrap my head around that one.

I'll give you my criteria and do feel free to critique it.
Number of Title defenses
Number of weight classes in which he was 'the man' of the division, i.e. lineal champion
Number of legitimate (not paper champs) champions dethroned.

If on average his number is greater than someone else in a comparable division then I’d consider him a first ballot HoFer for that time period.

Again, HOF-worthiness is a matter of opinion, and you're certainly entitled to yours. And honestly, there's nothing wrong with having a higher standard for the HOF than the HOF folks themselves, as you say. As long as it's even-handed across the board. If Cotto isn't worthy in your eyes, then in my mind that also excludes a lot of other fighters from our generation, with the exceptions of Floyd and Pac. My own standards aren't as high as yours, so I happen to think that Cotto definitely belongs there.

Now about your criteria... I got no issue with the first one. Number of title defenses certainly has to be among the criteria for HOF induction. But number of weight classes? Why? Does that mean you have to travel through several weight divisions to be considered? Where does that leave old timers like Carlos Monzon, who fought his entire career at middleweight? How about Ricardo "Finito" Lopez, who finished undefeated and never left his weight division? How about the heavyweights, who only fight at heavyweight? This makes no sense, unless I misunderstood your meaning. Same goes for number of champions dethroned, because this goes hand in hand with the # of weight divisions.

Rather than those, I'd include stuff like quality of opponents. This cannot be ignored. Either by won-loss records or other criteria, the quality of the opponents you face HAS to have tremendous bearing on HOF-worthiness. Quality of wins is another. It's not the same thing to eke out controversial split decisions, or win by DQ, than to win by convincing decision or KO. Also, longevity and/or number of wins. You can't compare a champion who has defended his title for 10 years to one who's only had a couple of title defenses.