Jerry Quarry v Tom Sharkey

Jerry pretty easily -- even if he brawls.

 

Sharkey walks into Quarry without much in the way of defense, which might not be the greatest of ideas.

 

The kind of match that has the potential to go either way.

I think that much would depend upon Quarry's tactics, and we might see a split series here.

 

just waiting for someone to say quarry loses on cuts...

 

This has all the makings for a real crowd-pleaser. Quarry was a very good boxer-puncher, and counterpuncher. On a good night, he was capable of an exceptional performance as he did against Buster Mathis, Mac Foster, and Ron Lyle. Sharkey was a powerful, rugged scrapper possesed of phenomenal durability and endurance. He always came to fight, and fought in a brawling style similar to Marciano. He gave Jeffries all he could handle in two fights, scored stoppages against Ruhlin, Choyinski, and Kid McCoy, and was well on the way to stopping Corbett when the latter's handlers stepped into the ring, forcing a disqualification of the boxing master. Although he was not a clever boxer by any stretch, he was successful against most heavyweights of his era - scientific boxers and rugged sluggers alike. I think endurance is the key factor in this matchup. Quarry would do very well in the opening rounds, as he did in Frazier I. But if he didn't take Sharkey out by the middle rounds, I can see him winding down as he did in both Frazier fights and Ali II. I pick Sharkey by TKO in 10.

 

I for one have never seen Tom Sharkey fight, and don't even know what kind of footage ( if any ) is even available. We do know that Quarry was a bit bigger, a very talented counter puncher, could bang when he had to, and managed to stay ranked for the better part of a decade in one of the toughest eras for heavyweight boxing... Sharkey was no slouch though. Even without seeing him on film, his resume speaks volumes and his pictured physique reveals a rather strong looking fellow.. Even with a big size deficit, Sharkey was able to battle Jim Jeffries and trouble him more than enough.

I think the vast difference in the rules of the game might make this one tough to pick, but my vote is probably going to have to be with Quarry. He was too well proven against an entire generation of big men with many talents including Shavers, Lyle, Foster, Mathis, Spencer and Patterson ( though Floyd was not exactly big. ) Ad to that his advantage in size and it could create problems. As some have already pointed out, Sharkey was a rush-in sort of fighter who tried to smother his foes - a possible mistake against one of the best heavyweight counter punchers of the 20th century.

 

Funnily enough, I know a lot more about Sharkey than I do about Quarry. My gut tells me that Sharkey would harry him constantly inside and win on points.

 

This video clip has some of the Jeffries-Sharkey title bout of November, 1899:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pj2jOpoecfc[/ame]

The quality isn't the greatest, but you can get a sense of Sharkey's style and ruggedness.

 

This

 

Sharkey was strong and had great stamina and would come at Jerry who may have a bit of trouble with the shorter bull-like Sharkey but Quarry was never troubled by strong rugged puncher (except the Chuvalo mishap) Jerry had trouble with speed something Sharkey was not particularly known for so after a rugged start Jerry gets into his box hit and move a bit and takes over for the Nod in a rugged event

 

I agree with Bummy on this, and speaking of the Chuvalo epesode, that was a one-in-a-million fluke that would have never occured again in any number of rematches..in fact, I think Jerry would have avenged that loss nicely had they been rematched. I don't know why that never happened.

 

Jerry Quarry by knockout. Quarry had the far better skills, was far more proven against better fighters, he never drew the color line like sharkey, and he was never twice floored by a super-welterweight like sharkey was.

Quarry KO 8 Sharkey