Would Quarry really have been champion in any other era

Yeah, even in the late 50s and early 60s , Patterson and Liston wouldn't be the only 2 to pose threats. You'd have Machen, Folley, Williams, Dejohn, Harold Johnson and while it would not be unheard of for Jerry Quarry to have beaten them, it's not a foregone conclusion that if only Liston and Patterson were out of the way, we might as well just crown Quarry as champion if he were airdropped into that era.

 

Yeah he could have pulled a rabbit out of the hat vs Foreman or Liston. I can see that .

 

Yeah, that sounds about right. I believe that he'd have always been a top rated contender. Although in the 80s and going forward, it might have served him better to bulk up to at least 210 lbs and that's pushing it. He may have wanted to be about 215, 216 lbs. Basically as big as he can get without being fat and without losing skill and adding punching power.

 

I would say that today, he may have had to bulk up, at least to compete with the top fighters. Especially since he wasn't a mega puncher like a 200 lbs Joe Louis. Although, he had solid punching power for a top rated contender his size. I think he'd be at a major disadvantage if he had to fight Wilder or Joshua.

 

Max Baer may have beaten him if he came with his game face on. Although Quarry was a better boxer and could counter punch, the same also applied to Max Schmeling. Max Baer would be able to withstand the shots Quarry would have given him. I think Baer would have eventually battered him down. Although I wouldn't exactly call a Quarry win an upset .

Jack Sharkey was an underrated boxer who's been all but forgotten with time. I'd pick Quarry to beat him, but it would have been a competitive fight, IMO.

Primo Carnera also had underrated skills. I doubt if all of his fights were fixed. Sure, some might have been, but then again, in that time frame, many fighters had a fight or two fixed. It was almost SOP. Carnera was as large as a modern day super heavyweight, was tough and had moderately good boxing skills. He reminds me of the Klitchsko brothers as far as style, but not as good at capitalizing on the advantages of said style. He could be outboxed by smaller fighters in a way that I don't think the Klitchsko brothers could have been outboxed. From what we know, I would favor Quarry to beat him. Carnera could hit, but his power was underwhelming for a man his size.

I really would lean towards Ezzard Charles. Charles was about 10 lbs to 15 lbs lighter than Quarry, but that would make little difference in the outcome. Everything Quarry could do, Charles could do better. Im on the fence about Charles chin. He was the only man to take Marciano the distance, but was stopped by less powerful opponents. Probably because Marciano couldn't land clean and Charles was blocking, rolling and turning with the shots which would take away alot of the power. Quarry probably hit harder than Charles, but Quarry had problems with skilled and smooth boxers. I'd pick Charles by UD.

Patterson past his best battled a prime/ near his prime Jerry Quarry to a virtual standstill. The only difference was that a prime Patterson was quite a bit lighter than he was in 1967. And probably not as strong. But he was faster and could still crack. His speed gave Quarry issues. And his skills. I'd pick Floyd Patterson. But, Quarry was powerful enough to pull a Johansson. Patterson weighed 182 lbs the first time they fought and in the rematches, he was 190ish lbs, which I think served him better.

I would say that Johansson was too crude to beat Quarry and see Quarry stopping him. One thing I can say is that if Quarry was around in 1959- 60 heavyweight scene and he was able to get a title shot vs Johansson, his chances of being called "heavyweight champion of the world" would have dramatically increased.