Don't laugh, Hunter had skills. He was taller, had a longer reach, was heavier, was quicker, could take a punch, and he was crafty. Hunter was stopped just once in 36 fights... in his last pro fight he was stopped by Brian Nielsen, LTKOby5. Hunter was outweighed by 35 Lbs. and was past prime at almost 37 years old. He beat Oliver McCall, Dwight Qawi, Pinklon Thomas, Jimmy Thunder KO4, Ossie Ocasio, Tyrell Biggs, Alexander Zolkin, Cecil Coffee, Buster Mathis Jr. (later changed to a NC because Hunter was a stoner). He dropped Frans Botha and lost a questionable MD to him.
He did indeed beat Qawi, Ocasio and Thomas, but in the 90's so although the names look good the victories arn't very meaningful. I don't rate Quarry as high as some, he was a contender who won some and lost some, but he was a class above Hunter.
I see a lot of merit in both of these two posts.. Mike "the Bounty" Hunter - briefly managed by actor James Woods, was a crafty and difficult fighter to look good against and quite often was a spoiler to some decent boxers.. He was hard to hit and snuck little punches in here and there. Its definitely not outside the realm of possibility that he could have upset an elite rated fighter, even one of Quarry's status. Then again its also valid to point out that his best wins were against men who were either on the way down or ones who had not yet fully developed. I saw him fight Pinklon Thomas around 1990 on USA's Tuesday night fights. I can remember wanting to see that match to settle my curiosity about weather or not Pinklon had anything left. As it turned out, he was slow as an ice glacier and non aggressive to the point of letting Hunter walk right in and hit him. Neverthless Mike Hunter is underrated and forgotten, so its good to see his name brought up in such an interesting scenario... I still have to favor Quarry, but Hunter raises some interesting questions.
You have to favor Quarry, no doubt about that. Those names I mentioned on Hunter's resume? No doubt most of them were pretty well past prime. Hunter was still a good boxer that had the ability to upset a guy like Quarry. If they fought 3 times I think he could get 1 close decision win.
Quarry by decision I really liked Hunter. I first saw him on ESPN top rank boxing around '86 when he beat prospect Avery Rawls. He came into the ring dressed like a Bounty Hunter. He completely outboxed a pretty well schooled guy in Rawls. That said, Hunter was a fringe guy, at best. He did beat a faded Tyrell Biggs. Thomas was shot. The Qawi win was at Cruiserweight, and Dwight was fairly faded. He beat McCall when they were both just starting out in the pro game. He had good, funky movement, speed and reflexes, but little power - except for a freak ko of Jimmy Thunder that left Jimmy on his face. Quarry, on the other hand, was a top 10 contender during a stacked era Quarry would have to work the body and probably have to lead, but he could do it. He is also the stronger guy in this matchup I think he'd gradually slow Mike down and win a rather wide UD.
Hunter did more than just beat an aged Biggs or a green thunder. He fought about a dozen notable people, beating most of them while giving some a hard time in defeat. of his first 8 professional opponents, 4 of them were undefeated prospects. Not a man who was protected by any means. And while I agree with you that Quarry would or at least "should" win, I'm not too keen on automatically picking the man with the better legacy to prevail.. There are other things like styles to consider.. Quarry did well against slower moving hitters with average defenses who walked into his counter punches. Hunter was a totally different type of animal... Quick, elusive, hard to hit, and hard to land flush on while subtly steeling points on the cards... Kind of a Jimmy Young type guy if that comparison works. I remember reading a small article about him in either Ring or KO magazine about 25 years ago. The author said that most fighter would rather " go to the proctologist " than to face Hunter. There was a good reason for that. That said, I'd pick Quarry by a decision. But Hunter isn't a guy that I'd ever bet too much money against. He made a career spoiling the plans of named boxers.
I agree Hunter had a difficult style The problem for me is the only "prime" heavyweight who I would consider was close to a top 10 contender at the time he beat him was Zolkin. And, Zolkin had a ****py defense and just came straight in. Quarry was no defensive genius but be was more rounded than a guy like Zolkin. It's just hard to gage how he would do against a prime top 10 guy like Quarry.
Oh definitely. A prime Quarry would be a big notch above anyone Hunter ever defeated and for that reason I favor Jerry as well. But the stylistic issues make it difficult to make any convictions for me however.
I agree and would favor a prime on his game Quarry. However, reality of Quarry is that you never really were sure what you're going to get. The guy that was brilliant against Mac Foster might show up, or you could get the guy that lost the count vs. Chuvalo.
