How Would Jerry Quarry Have Done Against Schmeling, Baer etc?

his style is just 2 simple and 2 easily overcome imo

 

It didn't matter vs the other top contenders because he didn't spend his training camp for those on a golf course or in bed with celebrities.

 

I am not sure about it. At least Louis has written in his book, that he was really a bit overconfident, but he trained before the fight with Schmeling as always (if he tells the truth).
Also Bert Sugar said once, that his left was hanging, cause of to much golf. I mean, it sounds plausible initially, but I doubt that it has really effect on boxing defense.
Louis said, that he was young and a bit overconfident and Schmelings style was difficult for him. Schmeling was in great shape and had a great strategy and it wasn`t Louis fight.
Afterwards, Louis analysed the fight together with Blackburn and improved his style. Anyway, it`s heavyweight boxing, there is always a possibility for an upset, when two great boxers face each other.

 

Well, first of, it isn't the verison of Louis that Schmeling fought. This is:

This content is protected

Notable difference, there.

And secondly, it's a quite a big ask for Quarry to beat someone as good as Louis. Asking somebody to beat essentially the best offensive fighter ever, one of the top ten to fifteen fighters in the sport, a top two heavyweight of all-time and the best technician ever above light-heavyweight, that is. Who ever actually beat somebody that good? Duran? Ali? Greb? Charles? It's a very short list, and that's across ALL weights, let alone HW. Schmeling, when facing the version of Louis who'd trained, was absolutely obliterated. Sure, he was getting on in age himself, but it's not like he'd have ever beaten that version of Louis. Furthermore, it's a big ask of them to beat the undertrained version which Schmeling beat, let alone a peak, prime and prepared Louis.

Look, I'm not saying that Quarry has a good chance against Louis, because I honestly think he's got much chance of going in one round than he does going the distance, but the logic is stupid. Asking for proof of how someone beating somebody as good Joe Louis is just ridiculous. Tyson, Holmes, Liston, Foreman and even arguably Ali never beat anyone as good as Louis, yet most of those are seen as the favourites vs Louis.

 

Sharkey's style was simple? Could you elaborate?

 

That's why I said that Max had better career without taking Louis fight into account

 

U mind if I get back 2 u on this? It's been a while since I've seen Sharkey, and I actually planned on watching some of his fights again soon.

 

Sure, I like your retrospective threads

 

Thnx.

 

He'd win some and lose some, just like he did during his real career. He had a knack for choosing the wrong tactics on occasion like when he fought guys like Machen, Ellis, Frazier, and Chuvalo. He couldn't dominate Patterson. I don't think things would be any different if he had fought in the '30s. He definitely would be a live contender though and probably would have had as good a chance to win a title as any of the five guys that held the title between Tunney and Louis. But he wouldn't have been any more dominant as champion than any of them. I'd pay good money to see him fight Schmeling.