Jerry Quarry vs Joe Bugner 1972

[Robinson]

"Little" Marvis Frazier contray to his blow out losses to a prime Tyson and
Holmes was a decent fighter...but also...was bigger than Quarry was.

Sure he beat a returning Bugner. The hypothetical was about the two men
as they were in 1972. Not a 1983 Bugner versus a peak Quarry.

I dont spar with head gear, that does not mean I am awesome. It just means
I like to see things and not get tagged by blows that would ordinarily just
mis.

[dempseyfire]

"Little" Marvis Frazier contray to his blow out losses to a prime Tyson and
Holmes was a decent fighter...but also...was bigger than Quarry was.

Sure he beat a returning Bugner. The hypothetical was about the two men
as they were in 1972. Not a 1983 Bugner versus a peak Quarry.

I dont spar with head gear, that does not mean I am awesome. It just means
I like to see things and not get tagged by blows that would ordinarily just
mis.

Bigger than Quarry? How did you come with that one? Frazier and Quarry were roughly the same size and Joe was bigger than his son. In any case I don't think one can make any case one was truly bigger than the other in any notable fashion.

You say Bugner later on was punching better and using his size more . . that Bugner got sweeped by Marvis.

Then you say we're talking about the early 70s version, and that guy got embarassed by Jack Bodell

Just look at their respective rounds vs a common opponent. Look how big Joe just stands there and gives ground to Bodell:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q5s5ksF3mpo

Then Quarry show the difference in class from the get-go: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dfypx1zT ... re=related

[Robinson]

Bugner was inconsistent no doubt. And as an older fighter he
did do OK...considering but he was damned in consistent.
I have not watched the Bugner-Marvis fight so I can not
comment on that.

I was refering to the comment that Marvis was "little" yet he
was quite the normal size had he been fighting a decade or
so earlier.

Yes Quarry decimated Bodell...no disputing that. If you want
to look at common opponents you can look to the Frazier fights
in my opinion Bugner did a lot better than Quarry...and in the
Ali fights....

In any case I feel the Bugner-Quarry fight would be a good match
... I do however feel that Quarry would win. But I do not see
it as a shut out as many here do.

So in a round about way DF...you and I....agree. Does this mean
their will be earth quakes and fire from the sky ?

[BoxBuzz]

Here is what the mighty Univac has to say about this. (I'd go along with the French Judge in this case.....but apparently Finland and Venezuela were in cahoots.)

http://forum.boxrec.com/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=106165

[raylawpc]

Bugner was inconsistent no doubt. And as an older fighter he
did do OK...considering but he was damned in consistent.
I have not watched the Bugner-Marvis fight so I can not
comment on that.

I was refering to the comment that Marvis was "little" yet he
was quite the normal size had he been fighting a decade or
so earlier.

Yes Quarry decimated Bodell...no disputing that. If you want
to look at common opponents you can look to the Frazier fights
in my opinion Bugner did a lot better than Quarry...and in the
Ali fights....

In any case I feel the Bugner-Quarry fight would be a good match
... I do however feel that Quarry would win. But I do not see
it as a shut out as many here do.

So in a round about way DF...you and I....agree. Does this mean
their will be earth quakes and fire from the sky ?

But the issue is not whether Quarry or Bugner is the better overall heavyweight, but what would happen in a head-to-head match-up in sometime in 1972. So whether one outperformed the other versus this or that opponent is not particularly relevant.

In my opinion, Quarry would win the match-up because:

(a) Quarry had more experience against top-flight competition.

(b) Quarry was very successful against bigger men - two examples being Lyle and Mac Foster. (And, if we believe him, Foreman claimed his management ducked Quarry because of Quarry ability to counter-puncher slower big men).

I think Quarry could have handled Bugner, but Bugner's defense-first attitude would have prevented a KO, I think.

[bennie]

Bugner knew how to survive (that's all), and Ray is spot on with his analysis, in my opinion. Styles make fights but if you take away the Ali and Frazier equation, Bugner was licked by Larry Middleton, Jack Bodell, Ron Lyle and Earnie Shavers (cuts) round his prime. Both Shavers and Middleton had Bugner down. Middleton cracked his jaw.

Quarry beat the same four men.

[bennie]

Bugner knew how to survive (that's all), and Ray is spot on with his analysis, in my opinion. Styles make fights but if you take away the Ali and Frazier equation, Bugner was licked by Larry Middleton, Jack Bodell, Ron Lyle and Earnie Shavers (cuts) round his prime. Both Shavers and Middleton had Bugner down. Middleton cracked his jaw.

Quarry beat the same four men.

Quarry lost to Jimmy Ellis. Bugner beat Ellis.

A finished Ellis, a finished Mac Foster... I know you admire the man and, giving Bugner his due, he certainly knew how to 'sell' a fight. The game, however, was just a money-making exercise to him, hence all his pre-fight chat, and he rarely committed himself for real. Indeed, he was a serial disappointment. He went to war with Frazier, then had no intention of even trying against Ali for the world heavyweight title; he flattened Dunn, then lost a snoozefest to a finished Lyle; he put together a winning run, then sent everyone to sleep again against little Marvis...

[hhaehre]

Can you imagine Quarry losing to little Marvis Frazier on a landslide decision. It also happened to be the most boring fight I have ever seen. This must have been the only punch Bugner threw and he looks pretty scared throwing it. You have to remember Bugner boxed much of his career in England. He was booed out of the ring so many times for his tame approach, he makes Audley Harrison look dangerous.

The 38-year-old Jerry Quarry who struggled against a light-heavyweight named James Williams in a 1983 comeback? Yes, I can imagine him losing a landslide decision to young Marvin Frazier in 1983.

That's apples and oranges, Bugner was 33 with no lengthy lay offs when he fought Frazier while Quarry was 38, totally washed up and fighting for only the second time in 6 years when he fought Williams. A better comparison would be the Quarry who struggled against Zanon, would he have beaten Marvis ? Probably not.
Bugner followed his crappy performance againt Frazier with a close win over novice Anders Eklund and then loosing against the very ordinary Steffen Tangstad. Bugner, as usual, cried robbery after the Tangstad fight.

Bottom line when it comes to Bugner is that he had many a lackluster performance throughout his career. Bugner was the kind of fighter that I hate to watch because you always knew he could do so much better.

[raylawpc]

Can you imagine Quarry losing to little Marvis Frazier on a landslide decision. It also happened to be the most boring fight I have ever seen. This must have been the only punch Bugner threw and he looks pretty scared throwing it. You have to remember Bugner boxed much of his career in England. He was booed out of the ring so many times for his tame approach, he makes Audley Harrison look dangerous.

The 38-year-old Jerry Quarry who struggled against a light-heavyweight named James Williams in a 1983 comeback? Yes, I can imagine him losing a landslide decision to young Marvin Frazier in 1983.

That's apples and oranges, Bugner was 33 with no lengthy lay offs when he fought Frazier while Quarry was 38, totally washed up and fighting for only the second time in 6 years when he fought Williams. A better comparison would be the Quarry who struggled against Zanon, would he have beaten Marvis ? Probably not.
Bugner followed his crappy performance againt Frazier with a close win over novice Anders Eklund and then loosing against the very ordinary Steffen Tangstad. Bugner, as usual, cried robbery after the Tangstad fight.

Bottom line when it comes to Bugner is that he had many a lackluster performance throughout his career. Bugner was the kind of fighter that I hate to watch because you always knew he could do so much better.

Excuse me, but bennie asked, "Can you imagine Quarry losing to little Marvis Frazier on a landslide decision?" and my answer was yes, the 1983 version that tried to make a comeback. My answer was not intended as a comparison with Joe Bugner.

[raylawpc]

Guys, let's remember the original question was concerning a match-up in 1972 between the 1972 version of Jerry Quarry and the 1972 version of Joe Bugner (a match which could have happened), not one of those prime v. prime fantasies.

In 1972, the only areas in which Bugner had it over Quarry were size, possibly physical strength (although Quarry was deceptively strong), and really cool looking sideburns.

[hhaehre]

Excuse me, but bennie asked, "Can you imagine Quarry losing to little Marvis Frazier on a landslide decision?" and my answer was yes, the 1983 version that tried to make a comeback. My answer was not intended as a comparison with Joe Bugner.

Ok, but I also think the Quarry of the Zanon fight would have dropped a wide decision to Marvis Frazier. Quarry was well on his way to a shut out loss at the hands of the mighty Lorenzo and Marvis was not that bad.
In '72 Quarry gets a comfortable win over Bugner. Quarry would be able to dictate the pace against Bugner and Jerry was difficult to beat when he was was allowed to fight his fight.

[ronnyrains]

Come on gang! Joe Bugner would never get off the ropes, like when they sparred, Jerry got inside, and stayed there, Bugner did not have the punch to keep Quarry off him, I've never seen Joe Bugner, even knock anybody down, much less beat anyone in the top ten besides, Cooper & Blin! -And the Cooper victory (his best) was hotly debated! They always say, Well Bugner did better than Jerry vs Ali, and Frazier OK! How about Bodell, Middleton, Lyle, and Shavers? His lucky victory over Bonecrusher, Bugner acted like he scored a knockout, that should have been a technical draw, Bonecrusher, crushed his bones, crushing Bugner, Who barely survived the round!

[Tony1244]

Quarry decision win but somewhat close.

Bugner would outbox Jerry early and then Jerry would start beating him up a bit, not unlike Lyle-Bugner which happened in the late 1970s.

[prewarboxing]

I know these posts go back to 2009 but people keep saying Bugner was 33 when he fought Frazier. He wasn't 33, he was 23. BIG difference.

[Caractacus]

Not sure if it was already mentioned in this thread.But I rememered reading a interview with Joe Bugner
where he said he sparred with both Thad Spencer and Jerry Quarry when they came over to England to fight.
so he must have sparred with Quarry,when Quarry came over to fight Jack Bodel in 1971,
because Bugner fought on the same card against Marc Harns.
BTW Bugner is still around,maybe someone could ask him about it ?

[Kalan]

I know these posts go back to 2009 but people keep saying Bugner was 33 when he fought Frazier. He wasn't 33, he was 23. BIG difference

Bug was 23 when he fought Joe Frazier... He was 33 when he fought Marvis Frazier... Larry Holmes was slightly older than Bugner and I believe 34 when he fought Marvis Frazier, and that was Marvis's next fight....a very unfortunate one... Larry put a death stare on Marvis before the fight that even intimidated his father..

Quarry would have beaten Bugner using the same tactics he used to beat Ron Lyle and Buster Mathis... Jerry could move his head quickly enough to slip Bugner's jabs and pokey right hands... and than rip him to the ribs and head inside.

[Tony1244]

I can only imagine the reason people are skirting around the real issue on these Joe Bugner threads is either,

1. They are not old enough to remember Bugner from the early 70's.

or,

2. They are just spouting revisionist nonsense to suit their own agenda's.

Bugner was NEVER a natural fighter, with almost no amatuer experience. What he was considered to be was the " great white hope " in the eyes of the British press, and a lot of the public. Here was a blue eyed blonde haired 6' 4" 15 stone guy who was almost immediately referred to as an " Adonis " who they tried to build up as a legitimate threat to the black fighter domination of the Heavyweight championship.

It was never going to happen, end of story. He did very well at his own Euro, and Commonwealth level, but that is all.

Bugner could take a pretty good shot. His feet and hands had some speed, but he was no Ali. I agree with most of what you wrote, his look and the fact he could go rounds had people hoping for a whole lot more.

[Tony1244]

I can only imagine the reason people are skirting around the real issue on these Joe Bugner threads is either,

1. They are not old enough to remember Bugner from the early 70's.

or,

2. They are just spouting revisionist nonsense to suit their own agenda's.

Bugner was NEVER a natural fighter, with almost no amatuer experience. What he was considered to be was the " great white hope " in the eyes of the British press, and a lot of the public. Here was a blue eyed blonde haired 6' 4" 15 stone guy who was almost immediately referred to as an " Adonis " who they tried to build up as a legitimate threat to the black fighter domination of the Heavyweight championship.

It was never going to happen, end of story. He did very well at his own Euro, and Commonwealth level, but that is all.

Bugner could take a pretty good shot. His feet and hands had some speed, but he was no Ali. I agree with most of what you wrote, his look and the fact he could go rounds had people hoping for a whole lot more.

I agree he had a decent chin Tony, but as for the rest of it I think it came across as being taught rather than natural ability. Much like Frank Bruno it lacked fluidity. I understand in these days of P.C. we try to deny racism / nationalism ever existed, but I'm sure if someone could be bothered to search the archives of the shitt press ( Sun, Mirror, Mail ) in Britain from the time you would find plenty of references to the fact Joe was a " white " fighter looking to end the domination of American ( black ) Heavyweights.

I was watching Bobick vs the Russian in the 1972 Olympics recently and the British announcer kept referring to Duane as "The White American."

I've mentioned here that I've found it interesting that even progressive whites who check all the proper boxes on civil rights saw Quarry, Bugner, and Bobick as white hopes. That search did not end with Jesse Willard.

[Kalan]

I think people mentioned white guys in Heavyweight Boxing at one time because they were so unusual.... Boxing was mostly centered around North American and basically the United States, but good white Heavyweights didn't exist.

Like black male tennis players, volleyball players, gymnasts, hockey players, or swimmers... There was a time in the 60's, 70's, and 80's when white Heavyweights looked pretty hopeless.... How many white guys fought each other for a World Heavyweight Title in the 60's, 70's, and 80's??? It seemed like white guys didn't go out for boxing.

At some point with Wladimir fighting Ibragimov, Chagaev, Pulev, Povetkin and Fury it didn't seem unusual that both combatants were white.... but they were all from overseas... Doesn't the United States have any big whites guys who want to box who are any good at athletics??? .... It's a lot like Olympic Basketball... You have a black team from the United States playing a bunch of white or mixed race teams from other countries... All the top white players go back to their respective countries to play for their Olympic teams.

[JohnReed]

If we're talking about the 1972-73 version of Joe Bugner against the Jerry Quarry of that same time period, then I'd say Bugner stood a very good chance of winning. That's especially true if we're talking about the way Bugner fought against Ali and Frazier in 1973.

Remember: Quarry is said to have fought many a bad fight against inferior opponents. He had sluggish performances, just like Bugner did. Quarry always had issues with defense, so we can rest assured that Bugner would have speared him with lots of jabs.

On top of that, Bugner -- assuming he's at his best -- could dance quickly and efficiently on his toes, dodging punches and scoring with that lightning fast, flicking jab.

I won't' say Bugner would win for sure. Of course not. We all know that as of the first half of 1972, Bugner was still a developing fighter. It's well known, in fact, that Bugner's manager brought Quarry to England in late 1971 to teach Joe a few pointers. But over the course of 1972, Bugner improved rapidly. And during that same year, Quarry put on a very poor performance against Ali.

So, this fight is a close one to call. Its a question of which guy is having the better night. Given what we know about both guys, I'd rate Quarry a 60% chance of emerging the winner. But Bugner's 40% of winning is pretty good too.

[JohnReed]

If we're talking about the 1972-73 version of Joe Bugner against the Jerry Quarry of that same time period, then I'd say Bugner stood a very good chance of winning. That's especially true if we're talking about the way Bugner fought against Ali and Frazier in 1973.

Remember: Quarry is said to have fought many a bad fight against inferior opponents. He had sluggish performances, just like Bugner did. Quarry always had issues with defense, so we can rest assured that Bugner would have speared him with lots of jabs.

On top of that, Bugner -- assuming he's at his best -- could dance quickly and efficiently on his toes, dodging punches and scoring with that lightning fast, flicking jab.

I won't' say Bugner would win for sure. Of course not. We all know that as of the first half of 1972, Bugner was still a developing fighter. It's well known, in fact, that Bugner's manager brought Quarry to England in late 1971 to teach Joe a few pointers. But over the course of 1972, Bugner improved rapidly. And during that same year, Quarry put on a very poor performance against Ali.

So, this fight is a close one to call. Its a question of which guy is having the better night. Given what we know about both guys, I'd rate Quarry a 60% chance of emerging the winner. But Bugner's 40% of winning is pretty good too.

I think that's a good post

Thanks. I must admit however that I was a big Bugner fan as a kid. So, maybe I'm more inclined than others to see his upside.

Still, I stand by my words. Bugner at his best -- as shown in the 1973 Ali and Frazier fights -- was a serious contender by any measure. Big, mobile, fast, hard to tag cleanly and even harder to hurt. Joe was all about the left jab, thrown as hurtful spears or slaps, but scoring all the time. He wasn't fun to watch but Bugner could get the job done.

[JohnReed]

My theory is that turning pro too young harmed his career.

It might have been different had Bugner turned professional at, say, 23 or 24. That would have meant he could have won the ABAs two or three times and maybe gone to the Commonwealth Games (1970) and turned pro after the '72 Olympics.

You raise an interesting question: why did Bugner turn pro so early? Sure enough, that question was answered by the very early Bugner feature articles written in the late 1960s and very early 1970s by the boxing magazines. Generally, Andy Smith addressed this issue in those stories. Here's what he said.

Basically, by the time Bugner was 16 or 17 years old, it was clear that he had the potential to turn into something very big in British boxing. Joe only had about ten or so amateur fights at that time, and he wasn't a national champion. He had even been beaten a few times (final amateur record was 13-3). However, British boxing people saw Bugner's unusual size and athleticism, and recognized that he had already demonstrated near-world class potential in other sports. So, big things were predictable for Bugner even at that early age, including the probability that he would represent the UK in the 1972 Olympics.

However, there was a problem. Given that the UK was at that time a small pond in the world of heavyweight boxing, it was obvious that young Bugner would become a national champion by the time he was 18 or 19 if he remained amateur. That was unavoidable. And, when that happened, Bugner would have been obliged to spend a couple of years representing the UK in world-class amateur meetings against the best amateurs in the world. That means the fledgling Bugner would have had no choice except to square off against seasoned, powerful Soviets, Cubans, East Europeans, and Americans. And, of course, at age 18 or 19, Bugner would not be expected to win those fights. At best, they'd be learning experiences for the young boxer.

According to what I read in the boxing magazines, either Bugner's early coaches, or Andy Smith, or the top British boxing officials didn't want to take the risk of keeping Joe in the amateurs. That's because they feared that an unusually tough defeat might ruin him psychologically given that he would only be about 18, 19, or at most 20 when he faced the Iron Curtain monsters in world-level meetings. The articles explained that, often in boxing history, very young and brilliant prospects are destroyed if they are overmatched and KO'd at too early an age. In such unfortunate instances, the young prospect permanently loses confidence and burns out as a boxer. End of career, basically, before it even begins.

In other words, the "powers that be" in British boxing back then, or maybe Andy Smith himself, realized that Bugner might never reach his full potential if he remained in the amateurs. Waiting to put Bugner in the 1972 Olympics meant taking dangerous risks. Therefore, according to the articles, Bugner was turned pro at the tender age of 17, because his management could match him selectively in the professional ranks, and build him up slowly. As you're aware, that's not possible in amateur tournaments, where fighters are matched according to the draw.

Keep in mind, that as of the late 1960s and early 1970s, British boxing was in jeopardy on a marketing and business level. That's because England's top heavyweight, Henry Cooper, was old in the tooth and could no longer be matched against top US fighters for big bouts televised in Europe and America. The BBBC had already nixed a match between Henry and Jimmy Ellis for this reason. In this UK boxing atmosphere, obviously, Bugner's handlers -- or maybe their big-time boxing and television contacts in London -- knew they had a gold mine on their hands. Young Joe was probably being groomed to "save" British boxing before he even turned pro. Therefore, nobody wanted to take chances with him by getting hurt and retired as a teenager because of an unfortunate loss at the hands of a big Cuban or Soviet.

It's an interesting story. But if you look up Bugner articles in early boxing magazines and English newspapers, you'll get the short version of what I explained here.

[keithmoonhangover]

Quarry is perfect for Bugner, who is one of the most underrated boxer on these boards.

[JohnReed]

Thanks for that John, there is a certain logic to the story as you describe it.

It's easy now to forget that the Cubans and the Soviets, etc. never turned pro and that Bugner would have been up against big, mature fighters had he been thrust onto international scene as a teenage amateur. I've also heard that Bugner himself was keen to turn professional early in order to get out of the factory where he was working.

Bugner was certainly worked hard as a young pro though. I think he'd had about 35 bouts before he was 21 and he was fighting a couple of times a month at one stage. Maybe Andy Smith saw keeping Bugner busy as an 'apprenticeship' in lieu of an amateur career, I dunno.

Either way, Bugner said in his autobiography that he feels that he was exploited as a young pro, and that he regrets having so many fights early in his career. He went in with some good fighters when he was still a teenager as well.

Different times though anyway, the 1960s. Nowadays top amateurs are effectively paid a salary but that didn't exist back in the day so it would have meant years of factory life hanging around for the Olympics, and that wasn't Bugner's style.

Joe Bugner was, as you have said, a talented athlete and there were very few sports where a young man could earn a living. Rugby and athletics were all amateur back then so professional boxing was probably a logical option for him.

I didn't realize that Bugner did factory work. I remember reading that, in his late teenaged years and early 20s, he worked at Andy Smith's construction company. I also read that Bugner was did agricultural work. But either way, it makes sense that he was motivated to start earning money as a boxer at an early age.

I wonder what Bugner meant when he said he felt exploited as a pro during his early years? Can you elaborate on that ?

As for the unusually large number of fights Bugner fought during his first three years as a pro -- something like eight or nine bouts per year -- I always thought that made sense. After all, the pro ranks were supposed to provide Bugner with the amateur career he never had. The whole point behind turning the 17-year old Bugner pro was to give him fundamental experience as a fighter, teach him the basics, and enable him to develop confidence. And , as I already pointed out, the goal was to enable Joe to develop by pitting him against hand-picked foes. So, to me at least, it was inevitable that Bugner learned boxing basics by have a hell of a lot of bouts against nobodies for a couple years, at least.

You are correct in pointing out that Bugner was thrown in with some tough guys in the early days. He didn't just fight stiffs. In 1969, the English promoters brought tough Jack O'Hallaran to London to fight Joe. That was a real challenge for Bugner, given his youth and relative inexperience.

And of course, in 1970, while Joe was still 19 years old, they stepped up his level of competition by giving him a series of foes who were ranked in the top-25 worldwide. Johnny Prescott, Chuck Wepner, old Brian London, Manuel Ramos, and Eduardo Corletti all fit this bill. All these guys were beatable -- or even on losing streaks -- but they were solid opposition for a kid just 19 or 20 years old who barely had amateur experience.

And again, I'll emphasize that big London promoters and powerful English TV people were always looking over Bugner's shoulder during those early years. The "powers that be" in British boxing knew that young Bugner was their only hope for a UK "Golden Boy," and they were anxious that his career didn't go sour.

[JohnReed]

Mercman:

As an example of a brilliant young heavyweight who fizzled because he rose to the top too soon and couldn't handle the big-time opposition, have you ever heard of the Soviet amateur champion from 1976, Viktor Ivanov? He surprised everyone by taking the heavyweight USSR national championship in 1976 by scoring KO's over all his opposition. The 19 year old Ivanov was green, but he was talented and could hit like hell. The Soviet coaches regarded Ivanov as a brilliant young prospect who would represent the USSR in big international competition for years to come.

But the Soviet coaches also knew something else: that given Ivanov's youth and inexperience -- and the fact that he had outpaced himself in achievement -- that they would be taking a big chance by throwing Ivanov in with the big tigers of international boxing before he was ready. For example, everyone shuddered at the thought of Ivanov fighting Teofilo Stevenson. Would the young Soviet kid be able to hold his own, or would it make more sense to hold him back a year or two, then send him to the big leagues when he was more mentally and athletically mature?

Well, the Soviet coaches made the wrong decision. They put Ivanov in there against the world's best in 1976, expecting that young Viktor might lose, but that he'd get some polish. All wrong. Ivanov looked like crap against the world's best amateurs. And, by the end of 1976, he was even brutally KO'd by an experienced pug in Moscow. That destroyed Ivanov's career forever. Too much too soon at too young an age.

I think the Ivanov saga illustrates what British boxing power brokers wanted to avoid happening to young Joe Bugner.