This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected
See...where exactly is posts like this coming from? Nobody in this thread even argued Quarry as being "Great"
You're right, perhaps the comment was misplaced. It just that you hear alot of "Quarry was so great" "He would have dominated any other era" and stuff like that. I don't see it, Jerry was a good fighter and deserves credit for his courage, but he lacked durability and got stopped when he faced top opposition. As you said though, no one claimed he was great here. Sorry for that. Still, i think Byrd should take this.
I really don't see too much of that, and anybody who thinks Quarry would beat a Wlad, a Lewis, a Holyfield, or Tyson, just aren't worth replying to, and represents an extreme minority using Quarry as a base point to discredit other eras they don't personally like. But what I have seen personally on this board is people getting unhinged when they see a majority pick Quarry to outbox their favorite limited sluggers with well reasoned arguments. Yes, Quarry shouldn't be picked to dominate an era, but I don't see anything wrong with picking him to box the ears off Ray Mercer or David Tua.
Byrd is a class above those guys though. Tua was a big puncher, but nothing more, and Jerry could handle punchers. I have no problem with him beating Tua or Mercer. But against fast and skilled stick and move fighters he came up short. I rank him below both Bonavena and Ellis.
And the majority is picking Byrd to outpoint him. If the overrating Jerry was a problematic trend, you would see more posts favoring him and more outlandish claims. The poll shows Byrd leading 8-5 at this time. That's reasonable. Well, Ellis beat Quarry in a competitive fight so that's a fair opinion. Though their resumes are pretty close overall.