Jerry Quarry vs Max Schmeling

Schmeling by decision or late round stoppage. Max was more accurate, more explosive, had better stamina, and came in well prepared and stuck to a fight plan. Quarry may have had the better chin but it wouldn't save his skin from opening up. Quarry had decent power but he didn't punch as hard as Louis, Baer, or some of the other fighters Max fought.

 

You need to take a close look at Jerry's win over Thad Spencer, his best extended performance on known footage. [Supposition is that his virtual shutout of a 234 pound Buster Mathis in March 1969 was his best career win of any length, but videotape of that telecast has not surfaced, and may be lost. It was on the strength of that performance though that JQ challenged Frazier, and Joe's rapid mastery of Jerry in 1969 has been suggested as his true peak performance.] Youtube commentators repeatedly express surprise over JQ's defensive elusiveness in that one. As pediatrically originated brain damage and wear and tear from too young an age began to catch up with him entering the 1970s, he went from slipping and countering to getting hit and countering. He wasn't the same for Mac Foster as he was for Thad Spencer.

Jerry was never going to slip and counter Frazier like that, because of Joe's hook to the body and relentless pressure. And I don't think he'd have the patience to wait for Schmeling, allowing Max to apply his preference.

 

Once again, here I go. A 1936 Quarry vs. a 1969 Max? IMO too much for Jerry. The different era matchups simply, IMO, can't truely judge a mythical matchup.

 

The 1936 Schmeling would have thoroughly studied Quarry as he did in preparation for Joe Louis. He would have known that Quarry did very well when he was in command of the fight and it was going his way. He would have known that when the fight was not going Quarry's way, he tended to get discouraged. Max would have expected Quarry to start fast - attempting to take control of the fight early, and maybe even trying to take Max out early, capitalizing on Max being a methodical, slow starter. In fact, that is how Quarry came out against Frazier in their 1969 meeting. Schmeling had experience with that type of fighter in his two bouts with Jack Sharkey. His strategy, knowing that Sharkey was a fast starter (usually the third round being his best round) was to box Sharkey, land his potent right hand when he could, keep from getting caught cold, and count on coming on strong as the fight progressed. I believe this is the strategy he would use against Quarry. This is pretty much the same strategy he used in the 1936 Louis fight as well. In that fight, he took a solid lacing for the first three rounds, but stuck to his plan, turning the tide in the fourth round and going on to victory. I see this being a good fight - a lot of action in the early rounds with Quarry probably taking the first two or three. But after that, I see Max finding the range and landing those right hands with increasing frequency and accuracy. I think his firepower would grind Quarry down and stop him in about seven rounds.

 

Yeah, Quarry was also quite successful against bigger fighters like Middleton, Lyle, and Foster. This size argument holds no water.

At any rate, I think Quarry has his moments but gets outboxed here. UD Schemling.

 

I like Schmeling to win by decision or late knockout. Certainly Schmeling was erratic enough that he could come up dry, but at his best I judge him better than the equally erratic Quarry.

 

Quarry's career pattern showed that he typically didn't do very well against better technicians, which I would have to classify Schmeling as being. Max is the favorite here.

 

one of the best match ups ive seen on here.if quarry has a good night he wins.

 

I was a big fan of Quarry's and I was at many of his fights, he was great against the Big Slow Bombers but had trouble with a guy like Schmeling, who had decent legs, and smart. These 2 guy could be hot & cold so it depended on how prepared they are but I pick Max by a UD 10-15

 

An interesting fight as both were talented but inconsistent ... just not sure ...