On Jerry Quarry …

That's fine and perfectly understandable.

I'd like to add that if a black contender had Jerry Quarry's record, he'd be widely remembered today, as in fact Shavers, Lyle and Patterson are, and the manner of his domination over Buster Mathis at the time it happened should also be remembered. (We don't have the JQ-Mathis footage, but we do have Buster's performance the previous month over Chuvalo for some context.) And Jerry's the reason Thad Spencer, Mac Foster, Jack Bodell and others are not remembered.

He ruined Spencer (who was originally the favorite to win the WBA tournament for replacing Ali as their champion), Bodell (who was then the triple EBU/Commonwealth/BBBofC HW champion when Jerry one punched him in 54 seconds) was also ruined, losing the EBU title to Urtain in two rounds, then getting utterly wrecked in two rounds by the sloppy and wildly swinging McAlinden for the remaining two titles. (Comparing Jerry Quarry to Danny McAlinden provides a clear definition between world class and regional flash in the pan.) Eduardo Corletti may very well have been Ali's third challenger of 1967, but when JQ wiped him out in one during April 1972, Corletti's descent into complete obscurity was clinched.

Jerry was a true gatekeeper until Norton in 1975.

 

Absolutely, a fight in 73 Isn't getting out of the first round, it's that brutal imo.

 

Jerry was,as has been said,a very good counter-puncher and tough as iron. A very good fighter who would have won a world title belt had he been at his best in later eras. I rate him number seventh in my Top 10 1970s heavyweights.

 

Hi Stevie.
In full agreement, add to that, bit like Ali ( dare I say ) Quarry had two careers sort of, in the mid to late 60s he was quite a bit lighter, with a more chiseled physique, he had more mobility, and was altogether quicker than the late 60s to mid 70s fighter, he sort of sacrificed the former, to stand down on his haunches, fight as a more flat footed boxer, relying more on power, or at least heavier punching, not sure which incarnation had the more success, arguments for both I suppose, but yea he was fine fighter, and at another time in history could well have found a belt of some sort around his waist.
stay safe buddy, chat soon.

 

You hear the phrase in basketball that a player is a "tweener"--(not quite big enough to play forward-not quite quick enough to play guard.) IMHO Quarry was THE classic HW "tweener." He was not quite fast and slick enough for guys like Ali (or Jimmy Ellis)--not quite powerful enough for guys like Foreman (or Frazier.)

Quarry had the misfortune of his career overlapping THE golden age of HW's. He was a game, tough fighter but simply not fast enough nor powerful enough to seriously contend for a title during his era. Too many fighters ahead of him in the pecking order. As simple as that!!

 

Fantastic post Mike.

 

Quarry could fight he was just in one of the most competitive eras and he blocked punches with his face which is a recipe for disaster.

 

Hi Buddy.
Thanks for your kind words, they are much appreciated, I never take any nice comments on my posts for granted, they humble and surprise me all and every time, also I might add,you are no mean poster yourself, no ranting, no profanitys, just good interesting and informative reads, members like you are the backbone and lifeline for our community, and I speak for many, believe me.
stay safe Cecil, chat soon buddy.

 

I have no idea what race has to do with how Jerry Quarry is remembered.

He lost most of his biggest fights. He lost to some great fighters and some less-than-great fighters.

Ron Lyle isn’t remembered today by anyone but hardcore boxing fans … the same people who remember Quarry.

Shavers is remembered for his punching power, not for his greatness. Great punchers always carry a legend in any weight class.

Floyd is remembered as a two-time world champion who had a very impressive second act — that act being better than Quarry’s career.

I’m not sure if you’re serious about a lot of this. Buster Mathis? A big dancing bear of a man with one decent win on his resume (over a 14-loss Chuvalo at that). Spencer? He was 7-5 over Quarry and was most certainly not regarded as some ATG-to-be who would have reached great heights were it not for Jerry. Mac Foster and Jack Bodell? LOL.

Jerry was a tough customer, always game, but as mentioned elsewhere he was a face fighter and that was his undoing. Good counter-puncher but neither a big enough puncher nor a skilled enough boxer to compete with the top tier — good enough to earn meaningful fights but not good enough to win them.

He lost to Norton, Ali x2, Frazier x2 and, yes, Chuvalo … all by stoppage. He came up a hair short vs. Ellis and Floyd.

His best wins? Lyle and Shavers. After that, a fairly steep drop to Spencer and … Buster?

Sorry, I don’t see how any contender of the time (of any race, creed, color or religion) would be better remembered based on that resume. He is remembered, but you called it yourself — he was a gatekeeper. In the toughest period in heavyweight history, but his ceiling was below the top; he could only set the floor for those on the top tier.

 

Don't think he'd beat Bruno

 

In the 1970’s, yes. But he was championship material in multiple other eras, for mine. Not trying to oversell Quarry (Spencer was pretty highly regarded BTW), but if you’re suggesting he could only ever be a bridesmaid, in any age, I’d strongly disagree. Tell me if I misinterpreted. & a prime Quarry would have bested Norton.

 

Not necessarily specific to Quarry or how you view him now but it’s great that you’ve remained sufficiently open minded to potentially change your opinion on any fighter as and when you feel that it’s justified.

Quarry was basically before my time - and for those who didn’t see him as and when, I suspect that they would probably underrate him by default.

With greater access to boxing resources, not least being by way of You Tube, my own estimation of Jerry’s abilities and overall quality has certainly increased.