You're certainly entitled to your opinion but I really don't see how Ezzard Charles would stop the '69/'70 version of Jerry Quarry considering his punch resistance. I do, however, admit that Quarry would have problems with Charles. He would be a handful for any other HW of the era(except Joe Louis).
Walcott vs. Quarry would be a close fight. Walcott was so unpredictable and sometimes fought down to the level of his opponent. If Walcott was at his best I think he would win by a close but convincing decision... if he isn't, Quarry wins a close decision. Walcott was more elusive than Quarry, he had good power and quickness as well. They were similar in height and weight.
I don't see Charles ever stopping Quarry. Patterson couldn't even stop a green Quarry, and Charles power and handspeed was not on the same level as Patterson's. Anyway, from what I observed with Hearns, if Quarry just goes all out against him without focusing on skill he will stop Hearns similar to the way Hagler did.
Patterson was past prime when he fought Quarry. Quarry may not have peaked yet but he had already fought Tony Doyle D10, Tony Alongi D10 x2, Machen L10, and Brian London among others. A prime Charles was faster than a past prime Patterson for sure. Power? They both had good power but I will give Patterson the edge in that department. Better overall boxer? Charles for sure!
I peg Quarry as a very good, but not great, and smallish heavyweight. The caliber of fighter that could be a champion when the division is weak. If you believe Hearns could be beat this kind of fighter, you have to believe that he'd still be a big time puncher at HW, that bulking up wouldn't slow him down or kill his endurance and that his chin could have survived by a big HW punch. If Hearns could do this, why didn't he do it? In 85-88 there's a very good, but not great and smallish HW champ: Michael Spinks. Why didn't Hearns bulk up and get the big prize against Spinks? Answer: because he couldn't. Heavyweights hit harder than Iran Barkley or Marvin Hagler. Hearns record against good HW's would look a lot like Bob Fosters. PS: Tommy Hearns is one of my favorite fighters of all time. I've seen about 30 of his fights. A great fiighter? Yes. A great or even very good HW? No
M. Spinks would have beat the crap out of Quarry. All, I am saying is that Hearns "could" win a hard fought decision vs. Quarry.
The fact that Hearns was stopped by Hagler and Barkley means nothing. Hearns was their size when he fought them... he had to make weight, etc. Also, I explained above how a slower, less skilled bigger man is more unlikely to hurt a fighter than a smaller man who is fast and highly skilled... but whatever, I'm done with this thread for now. Quit overrating Quarry people, the man wasn't that good.
Look at the results of... Haye W12 Valuev... huge size difference but Carl Thompson stopped Haye at CW Chagaev W12 Valuev... huge size difference, but Chagaev was stopped in 9 by a fighter who weighed 80Lbs. less than Valuev Williamson KO5 Sanders... huge size difference, but Williamson has been outboxed and stopped by guys his own size Weaver KO15 Tate... the smaller Weaver was stopped by several people not as good as Tate prior to his fight with Tate Holyfield KO3 Douglas, W12 Foreman, W12 Holmes, and W12 Bowe (their 2nd fight). All bigger men with good overall skills. Adamek KO5 Golota and W12 Estrada... Adamek was a LHW who was beat by a LHW who could make SMW (Dawson). He will probbaly beat Arreola (a 260Lber) in April. Barkley vs. Coetzee... both way past prime but it just shows that you can judge what happened in different weight classes on what will happen when both fighters meet in the same division... James Toney is a very good example of this... he struggled vs. Sanderline Williams, Merqui Sosa, Michael Nunn, Reggie Johnson, Mike McCallum, Dave Tiberi, Montell Griffin, Drake Thadzi, Terry McGroom, and Vassiliy Jirov... some wins, some losses... but he has little problems with guys like Evander Holyfield, John Ruiz, Sam Peter (first fight), Hasim Rahman x2? Don't judge a HW on what he did at MW, SMW, LHW, or even CW. It doesn't always tell the tale.
Bob Foster is your guide to this fight. Tall, rangy, explosive power at Light Heavy (better than Hearns' at that weight, I'd say). 2 inches taller, carried light heavy well, but when he stepped up, he got blasted even by second division heavies like Zora Folley. I don't see any justification for thinking that Hearns could do what Foster didn't; he had a very similar style, and was a considerably less distinguished light heavy. I don't see Hearns carrying his power up to heavy, and his chin didn't hold up against the heaviest punchers even at middleweight. Comparisons with Holyfield, whose career low weight was 176 pounds are meaningless when you're consider a man who started at welter. Comparisons against Valuev (or similarly huge opponents) are particularly redundant, since Valuev can't fight a lick, and since we're not talking about a huge, immobile lump here. Plain and simply, we're talking about a man who couldn't take Hagler's shots for 4 rounds, or get him out of there, dealing with a guy who took out Earnie Shavers in one round. Hearns vs Ruiz doesn't look totally unreasonable, because Ruiz barely throws a punch. Hearns Valuev even looks more reasonable than putting him in against an active, hard punching guy like Quarry.
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. Brilliant. The inaugeral winner of the ESB (in conjunction with Groucho Marx Estate)Post of the week no question. Im just sorry you beat me to it. ha ha ha ha:good
With respect PK, can you give me an example of a boxer bulking up on powerlifting that was actually faster as a result of it? Hearns is an ATG no question but Quarry would walk right through him IMO
Quarry wins inside of 5. Quarry could take hearns punches but hearns couldn't take jerrys punches, it's as simple as that. If quarry wasn't a big puncher then perhaps I would give hearns a chance.
a quarry left hook would seperate hearns from his senses early.why match quarry with light heavies?? he has no history of fighting smaller men.