Foreman-Quarry 1971

For the record, Peralta had 89 fights going in with George the first time (not 60-70) and referee Tom Castellano scored the bout 5-4-1 in favor of George. It was really only that close because George had nothing left in the tank the last two rounds, and the judges had it way more in Foreman's favor, but many in the crowd saw it as the ref did, razor close.

 

I'd give Quarry a very good chance against Foreman in 1971. Quarry was still at, or at least near, his peak and George was still quite green. He could very well find a nice space for counter punches between those often crude swings, like he did against Shavers and Lyle, and he was tough enough not to crumble the first time Foreman lands on him.

 

Timmers, thanks for the post. I respect anyone who has a differing view of mine as long as he backs it up with facts or good old fashioned opinion in a logical argument that we can hash out over a bottle of suds. However, this dude is strictly confrontational. Did you read that post of his? It is the most rambling piece of gibberish I have ever read. He had to have wrote it in crayon before he got someone to type it for him. Man, it's rare that I get this annoyed, but your post settled me out. I will not let him get under my skin and will not reply to his pointless meanderings. He is, as I said, strictly a Foreman ass-kisser and anyone who contradicts his love-fest, he attacks with a, "blow me!" style of argument. Thanks for steadying the ship, dude.

Scartissue

 

I see no way Quarry could have won this fight.

 

Although Quarry was a master counter puncher with great skills, good conditioning and a strong work ethic, I'm not sure that I can see him pulling out a win against any decent version of George Foreman. Sure, the Foreman who was horribly unmotivated and possibly deconditioned against Jimmy Young, could have lost to just about any ranked fighter, but if we're going for two guys who are at or near their best, then I don't give Jerry much of a chance.

Foreman might have gotten tagged by a few of Jerry's counterpunches, while walking in, the same way he did against Lyle. But, Quarry had neither the power nor long term durability that Lyle had, and look at what happened to Lyle.. Additionally, Foreman and Quarry were both for the most part, mid range fighters, which in this case would be in George's favor by a heavy margin. Jerry would be there to get hit..I think Quarry would give it a game effort, and perhaps even have a few good moments, but ultimately I see George breaking him down for a likely stoppage somewhere around the 4th..

 

Okay, now that I understand the question a bit better, then I will change my initial response from an early Foreman victory, to a more balanced matchup. Foreman would still have my vote to win however. In 1971, his record was already stretching between 25-0 to 31-0, and he was a recent gold medalist. He also had decent wins already against Boone Kirkman, George Chuvalo, Gregorio Peralta and Chuck Wepner. Quarry got cut up badly around 1970 against a returning Muhammad Ali who had been off for 4 years.

 

interesting match
Quarry kayoed some big bangers and he might have surprised Foreman as he did Shavers and some others. I think Foreman would win but I give Quarry a good chance in '71.

 

At that stage of Foreman's career, whenever he was asked after a win if he was going to fight Jerry next, he replied to the interviewer with very evident reluctance. Big George only took the Gold Medal because he didn't have to defeat Quarry in the U.S. Olympic Trials to get there. Jerry had already knocked Foreman on his ass in sparring by the time George was rising in the ranks.

Nobody bombed out Jerry quickly, and nobody outmuscled him either. When Foster took him on, Mac had a reputation of being a deadly hooker, but he surprised Quarry with a potent jab and smacking right cross. Didn't matter. Jerry responded to Foster's hardest right hand with his fight winning attack in round six.

Watch how badly Quarry outmaneuvered Spencer. Jerry was trigger fisted, and would have enjoyed huge advantages over Foreman in experience, hand and foot speed, and endurance. Frazier and Ali could both bust up an opponent's face badly, as they both demonstrated with Chuvalo, Smoke with Stander, and Muhammad with Cooper. Foreman did not possess the manner of punching necessary to carve up Jerry, and would have been wide open to Quarry's machine gun counters.

Patterson, Spencer, Mathis, Foster, Lyle and Shavers were an impressive string of victims Jerry took care of. Larry Middleton was ruined by Quarry. Bodell was embarrassed by an extremely one sided 54 seconds before getting put to sleep.

Foreman could not have taken out Jerry quickly. Mac Foster hit him with everything before getting drowned in the middle rounds. The lumbering one simply did not have the quickness to trade with Quarry, or the endurance to hang with him for any significant length of time. Lyle had equal power and superior skills to Big George, and Jerry schooled him. Put any version of Foreman in the ring with the Quarry of the Spencer dissection, and Jerry makes him look like a zombie. He didn't even know Shavers had hit him until viewing the footage the next day. Foreman didn't have Earnie's punch.

Jerry should have gotten the title shot that went to Roman in Tokyo. If he had, he would have dethroned Foreman (especially with 15 rounds to work with).

 

Geese, both sides have good points here. Anyone who saw Jerry at his best knows how sharp his punches came off and with deceptive speed. Its hard not to see Quarry catching George on the jaw with right hands. I don't think Jerry hit as hard as Ron Lyle so George would likely not be ko'd, but if Jerry could outmanuver him into the seventh or so I could see George taking allot of shots in 1971. Jerry by decision or late round tko.

 

I've posted in this thread once, with little detail.

In 1971, George Foreman would have had over 20 professional fights and be 22 years old. Remember that George would become world champion in January of 1973, just after his 24th birthday. George Foreman is also not your typical professional, technique aside. Foreman was an Olympic Gold Medalist. Fighters with that kind of amateur pedigree are always more advanced upon turning pro.

Now if I were to just look at film of the two fighters, Foreman and Quarry, I would immediately think that Quarry had a considerable technical advantage. When you couple that technique with his toughness, it is tempting to think that he might take advantage of a young George Foreman.

The funny thing about 1971 George Foreman, is that he is not much different from 1973 George Foreman. Foreman is probably the strongest heavyweight champion ever, and has one of the best chins as well. Foreman was a winner in spite of his technique, not because of it. Foreman imposed his strength, and his will, on his opponents; and most succumbed. I can see how a year of experience further helps to develop some fighters, but as I said; George is a little different.

Forget about what George says about fearing Quarry. Foreman said he was afraid of Joe Frazier, and looked how that turned out. Foreman would be after Quarry in a way that Jerry had never experienced. Quarry would have an opponent he could hit at will, and won't be able to because that opponent will bull and club him around the ring like no one else would be capable of. Norton was more than impressive against Ali and Holmes. Foreman beat Norton like it should have been on an undercard. I believe Quarry takes a better shot than Norton, so that is why I said he would last twice as long.

 

I do think people should keep in mind, here, that it was not until 1973 that Foreman won the title, and that through 1971, his only major wins were over George Chuvalo and Gregorio Peralta (twice), and he had some trouble with Peralta. This may not be quite a peak Foreman. What's more, the stand-up clubbers were Quarry's favorite style of opponent to take on- his results against Ron Lyle, Earnie Shavers and Mac Foster are among the highlights of his resume, and all of them were beaten pretty badly. I would still expect a peak Foreman, because he was truly something special, to overwhelm Quarry, but I do think it's possible that, if Foreman as of '71 still wasn't quite the monster that destroyed Frazier and Norton, Quarry has a legitimate shot at outpointing him.

 

A few random thoughts:

Prime to prime, I don't think Jerry would have lasted long.

1971 - Foreman was beginning to come on and Jerry was more or less in his prime.

I would have liked to see Quarry move more and use his feet more than he usually did.

Gregorio Peralta is a much under-rated fighter and certainly does not deserve to be casually dismissed as is usually done. I sincerely feel that he was better suited for a young Foreman than Jerry.

Oscar Bonavena did not always come straight forward. It may surprise many, but he had a peek-a-boo sort of defence which he used quite imaginatively. Watch him fight Frazier the first time and see for yourself. A guy named Roberto Davila and another named Levi Forte lasted the distance against Big George. Davila, I think, was somewhat similar to Oscar Bonavena. Of course, Oscar was far better.

1971 - I still feel that Foreman would have won, but Jerry would have made it interesting. Perhaps, a stoppage in the middle rounds would have been the most likely outcome.

 

Jerry would've either stopped George late, or won a lopsided decision.Too much experience, and that sparring session may have still been in George's head.

 

Quarry by late rounds TKO. Too skilled and too seasoned for the '71 GF.

 

Althought I have faith on Big George pulling a victory, I still gotta admit Quarry has a good chance in this fight

Prime Quarry wouldn't be caught so easily and would be able to chastise George with that left hook of him. Furthermore, he is tough enough to last enough rounds as to bring George's stamina into question

I still think George wins this one, but Jerry would be a hard nut to crack