Ingemar Johansson vs Jerry Quarry

Quarry easy.

 

Agreed. If you take away one shot KO equity from Ingo, Ingo will have problems here in an extended fight. He needs a clean outside fight and to hurt Quarry early and keep him in his place so he can outbox him. It's heavyweight at the end of the day so one punch KO is still a possiblity with the timing Ingo has on the shot and Jerry wasn't exactly Salvador Sanchez in terms of head movement but I'll stick with him. I know how tough he is.

 

Proper 50/50 this. I could see Johansson having success with the straight punches with Quarry being quite square on, he could hurt or cut Quarry this way.

Quarry could also counter him with speed, get inside where he has the advantage, and I don’t see him struggling too much to get inside, as Johansson wasn’t the fleet of foot, but it’s the power he’d have to watch out for as he closes the distance.

Might actually edge toward Johansson here to measure and time him enough times on the way in with that right to cut him up, but I’m not sold either way.

 

Think at their very best Ingo would take it but styles make me think Quarry is extremely live

 

Ingo's ring IQ was miles above the likes of Shavers and Lyle, and he was a very good boxer & mover.

As for not having "the savvy to repeatedly land", Quarry wasn't exactly Willie Pep when it came to defense. I doubt he's gonna one punch him, but there's every chance he can outbox him for a decision, or inflict a cut on that paper-thin skin.

 

I've noticed a massive discrepancy between how Quarry fairs in H2H hypotheticals and how he did against the contenders he actually faced. In discussions like this, he's often picked to beat fighters who, on paper, were of a higher caliber than the men he was actually able to defeat in the ring. Take this matchup, for example. Ingo is being given virtually no chance, despite the fact that Quarry lost to lesser fighters in his prime, such as George Chuvalo. Chuvalo was already past his best by then, while Quarry was in his prime. Hell, Alex ****ing Miteff gave a prime or near-prime Chuvalo a better fight than Quarry did.

Ingo iced a peak Machen in a single round whereas Quarry lost to a shot one. Yes I know Quarry was extremely green but there is absolutely nothing in his career that suggests he ever had the tools to defeat Machen. Ingo also knocked down a prime Patterson 7 times, and knocked him out. Quarry drew and got a controversial decision against a past prime Patterson. In my opinion, he was fortunate to get the results he did because, honest to God, I thought he lost both fights.

None of this, by itself, proves that Ingo would beat Quarry. But taken together, it does suggest to me that Ingo was operating on a higher level than Quarry ever did.

 

At gym. Will respond when come back.

 

I tend to think Ingo at his best was just a slightly better caliber fighter like you stated. I don’t think he really took his craft seriously after winning it all like many fighters.

 

"Not land once but land repeatedly. " I don't think that will be very hard to do. There's a reason Quarry was done before 30 and gone by 56. He had virtually no defense.

And I disagree that he wouldn’t beat Quarry in a boxing match. Whenever Quarry wasn't facing a limited slugger, he started to look a lot more ordinary. Ingo was a very skilled boxer—especially the way he disguised that right hand behind his jab. He was a sharp counterpuncher as well, and in my opinion had a much higher ring IQ.

 

I think you're pretty much spot on.

It's a bit laughable, really, that so many people pick Quarry here. A tough, durable brawler whose biggest asset was his willingness to eat punches is about the last type of opponent I'd fancy against Ingo.

If Ingo didn't put him to sleep early, it could easily turn into one of the most one-sided beatings imaginable. Quarry's toughness and refusal to quit would actually work against him, because he'd just keep walking into Ingo's right hand.

Quarry was a very good fighter, but he lacked the finesse, speed, ring IQ and overall class to consistently beat elite opposition. That's reflected in his record against the very best.

Johansson, on the other hand, proved himself against top-level competition. He flattened a prime Machen in one round, knocked Patterson down seven times to win the title, and, as a professional, only ever lost to one man - Patterson, an all-time great. Even then, their trilogy was far more competitive than people tend to remember.

To me, they're simply operating in different leagues. I don't see what Quarry brings to the table that makes him the favourite.

 

Typical example of American boxer being overrated and European boxer underrated.

 

Sitting on the fences right now.

This fight could go any way depending on what Quarry does.

As pointed in the post about the "good" and "bad" quarry it is really up to him how this fight goes.

It is literally a coin toss.