Did Jerry Quarry ever floor or KO Ken Norton in sparring during the early 1970s?

[Ambling Alp II]

Norton has one of the thinnest win resumes in HOF history. His entire reputation is built on him giving Ali fits due entirely to his style. He remains the only HW champ to have never won a championship, literally being gifted his title retroactively based on a gift decision over Young. No, he was not a class above Quarry. If that were the case he would have fought Quarry much earlier for a big payday instead of ducking the matches he was repeatedly offered by Aileen Eaton in order to fight lesser opponents for less money. The memory of getting knocked out cold was still fresh in his mind. If you want to believe Norton was simply “better” than Quarry and thats why he beat him, fair enough. But dismissing the facts that Quarry was in a steep decline, ill trained, took the fight on short notice, etc is nothing more than burying your fanboy head in the sand. All of those points are easily confirmed if you chose to look them up. And again, a fat, out of shape, and rapidly obsolete Quarry still badly hurt Norton and him running for cover before he gassed out. So lets, not pretend that glass jawed Ken Norton was a bridge too far for a prime Quarry.

I didn't deny that Quarry was in athletic decline when he fought Norton. I even acknowledged that he probably wasn't in the best of shape that night either. Did you read my other post about Quarry's 1975 Scrapiron Johnson fight? I indicated that Quarry may have revealed signs of severe burn-out and physical decay even in that bout.

Why was nobody saying that Quarry was past it before the fight? I never heard anything about him being past it for the Norton fight until many years after the fight.
Quarry was still ranked when they fought. He was just 29. It was only a couple of years after the Lyle fight.

I was "out of shape" is the boxing excuse for my dog ate my homework.

[JohnReed]

I didn't deny that Quarry was in athletic decline when he fought Norton. I even acknowledged that he probably wasn't in the best of shape that night either. Did you read my other post about Quarry's 1975 Scrapiron Johnson fight? I indicated that Quarry may have revealed signs of severe burn-out and physical decay even in that bout.

Why was nobody saying that Quarry was past it before the fight? I never heard anything about him being past it for the Norton fight until many years after the fight.
Quarry was still ranked when they fought. He was just 29. It was only a couple of years after the Lyle fight.

I was "out of shape" is the boxing excuse for my dog ate my homework.

There are a few points to consider.

First, take a look at Quarry's 1974 effort against Frazier. Quarry looks like a shot fighter, taking a one-sided beating. Compare that fight to Frazier-Quarry I, which took place in 1969. You'll see that the 1974 version of Quarry doesn't have the punch resistance, vitality, power, and tenacity of the younger version. That's the first piece of evidence suggesting that, by 1974-75, Quarry was on the biological and athletic downside.

Second, consider Quarry's 1974 tune-up bout against Joe Alexander. Quarry was nearly KO'd in the first round. Would a younger Quarry have been that vulnerable against a fighter like Alexander? I tend to doubt it.

Third, consider Quarry's 1975 tune-up bout against Scrapiron Johnson. I didn't see the fight, but I remember reading the Ring Magazine description of the action. I also saw a couple of brief newspaper accounts of the fight. There was talk to the effect that Quarry may not have deserved the decision that night. Quarry must have been very burned-out or physically aged if he struggled with a fighter like Johnson, a guy that Jerry had whipped twice previously. This bout was a red flag that Quarry was nearing the end of his shelf-life as a fighter.

Fourth and finally, even though Quarry put up a great fight against Ken Norton in March 1975, it's clear that Jerry was not the same lean, mean fighter that he had been in earlier times. You can tell by looking at his physique. Quarry punched himself out in that fight by the end of the third round, which suggests he wasn't capable of getting himself into tip-top shape anymore after ten hard years of fighting.

As for Quarry still being in the top-10 ratings in March 1975, well, the reality is that he had sunk to the bottom of the rankings. Most organizations and magazines rated Quarry something like 7th or 8th worldwide at that point. Previously in his career, Quarry was rarely ranked below 4th or 5th in the world. By 1975, Quarry was still worthy of a ranking based on his experience and earlier big wins, and not so much on his ability. He was perennial contender on the way down and out of boxing at that point.

[hhaehre]

I didn't deny that Quarry was in athletic decline when he fought Norton. I even acknowledged that he probably wasn't in the best of shape that night either. Did you read my other post about Quarry's 1975 Scrapiron Johnson fight? I indicated that Quarry may have revealed signs of severe burn-out and physical decay even in that bout.

Why was nobody saying that Quarry was past it before the fight? I never heard anything about him being past it for the Norton fight until many years after the fight.
Quarry was still ranked when they fought. He was just 29. It was only a couple of years after the Lyle fight.

I was "out of shape" is the boxing excuse for my dog ate my homework.

So he was in great shape then? When someone says "the dog ate my homework" it doesn't mean that they actually did their homework now does it?

[Ambling Alp II]

He looked like he had in previous years. He weighed 27; it's not like he was obese. He was 202 when he fought Shavers. He was 209 when he fought Randy Nuemann a couple of years earlier.

As for the not in shape excuse- the point is that it;'s lame. You can always come up with crap like this. My pet gerbil died. I was partying too much etc. Always love how people will latch on to anything to excuse a specific fight. How about all the fights that Quarry won? I'm sure you can come up with some crap for his opponents as well.

If you are going to buy this kind of excuse, no fighter ever really lost legitimately.

[Ambling Alp II]

Why was nobody saying that Quarry was past it before the fight? I never heard anything about him being past it for the Norton fight until many years after the fight.
Quarry was still ranked when they fought. He was just 29. It was only a couple of years after the Lyle fight.

I was "out of shape" is the boxing excuse for my dog ate my homework.

There are a few points to consider.

First, take a look at Quarry's 1974 effort against Frazier. Quarry looks like a shot fighter, taking a one-sided beating. Compare that fight to Frazier-Quarry I, which took place in 1969. You'll see that the 1974 version of Quarry doesn't have the punch resistance, vitality, power, and tenacity of the younger version. That's the first piece of evidence suggesting that, by 1974-75, Quarry was on the biological and athletic downside.

Second, consider Quarry's 1974 tune-up bout against Joe Alexander. Quarry was nearly KO'd in the first round. Would a younger Quarry have been that vulnerable against a fighter like Alexander? I tend to doubt it.

Third, consider Quarry's 1975 tune-up bout against Scrapiron Johnson. I didn't see the fight, but I remember reading the Ring Magazine description of the action. I also saw a couple of brief newspaper accounts of the fight. There was talk to the effect that Quarry may not have deserved the decision that night. Quarry must have been very burned-out or physically aged if he struggled with a fighter like Johnson, a guy that Jerry had whipped twice previously. This bout was a red flag that Quarry was nearing the end of his shelf-life as a fighter.

Fourth and finally, even though Quarry put up a great fight against Ken Norton in March 1975, it's clear that Jerry was not the same lean, mean fighter that he had been in earlier times. You can tell by looking at his physique. Quarry punched himself out in that fight by the end of the third round, which suggests he wasn't capable of getting himself into tip-top shape anymore after ten hard years of fighting.

As for Quarry still being in the top-10 ratings in March 1975, well, the reality is that he had sunk to the bottom of the rankings. Most organizations and magazines rated Quarry something like 7th or 8th worldwide at that point. Previously in his career, Quarry was rarely ranked below 4th or 5th in the world. By 1975, Quarry was still worthy of a ranking based on his experience and earlier big wins, and not so much on his ability. He was perennial contender on the way down and out of boxing at that point.

1. The 2nd Frazier fight went about as expected. Eve time Quarry fought one of the elite, he got dominated. Where was the resistance, vitality, power, tenacity against Ali in 1972?
In the 2 fights against Frazier, the two against Ali, and the Norton fight, he never got past the 7th round. He won a total of about three rounds in those fights.

2. Yep he got knocked down against Joe Alexander. And he stopped him in the 2nd round.

3. He won almost every round Scrap Iron Johnson. Fight went about as expected.

4. He didn't fight a great against Norton. He showed a few flashes, but for the most part got dominated, just like he did against Frazier and Ali.

He was ranked 7th at the end of 1974. He went up and down in the rankings. He wasn't even ranked in the top 10 at the end of 1972.

Why was nobody saying he was on his way down going into the Norton fight?

[hhaehre]

He looked like he had in previous years. He weighed 27; it's not like he was obese. He was 202 when he fought Shavers. He was 209 when he fought Randy Nuemann a couple of years earlier.

As for the not in shape excuse- the point is that it;'s lame. You can always come up with crap like this. My pet gerbil died. I was partying too much etc. Always love how people will latch on to anything to excuse a specific fight. How about all the fights that Quarry won? I'm sure you can come up with some crap for his opponents as well.

If you are going to buy this kind of excuse, no fighter ever really lost legitimately.

Who says he didn't lose legitimately? He wasn't in shape because he didn't train properly for the fight and didn't live like an athlete. That is why he gassed after 3 rounds. That's an explanation for his poor showing, not an excuse.
When Ali lost the FOTC you sure had plenty of excuses for him, but Quarry just lost to a better man in Norton right?

[Ambling Alp II]

I think sometimes there are legitimates excuses or reasons. Most of the time they are just crybaby excuses.

Ali-Frazier and Quarry-Norton are apples and oranges.
Ali wasn't anywhere near his best against Frazier. You can't just be off for 3 and a half years and be right where you left off. Quarry didn't have to overcome anything like that at all. He really didn't have to overcome anything at all.

You have to look at each case individually. For example, I don't give Ali credit for beat Archie Moore. Moore was way past it. Sometimes one guy is way past his prime. However, most of the time, the better fighter simply won.

It is grasping at straws making up these excuses for Quarry. Are you really willing to accept these excuses all the time?
How about Quarry's big wins? Do you know the circumstances of every single opponent that he beat when he beat him?

Quarry lost to Norton because Norton was better. There really isn't much more to it.

[JohnReed]

1. The 2nd Frazier fight went about as expected.

I disagree. That's because Quarry entered the match as a 5-4 favorite over Frazier. The perception among boxing experts was that Quarry abilities had peaked in 1973-74, and that Frazier was burned-out and in decline.

At the very least, experts expected Quarry to put up far better resistance against Frazier than turned out to be the case. The outcome of the match definitely raised the question of whether Quarry had reached the end of the line as a top-flight athlete.

[drunkenpiper36]

There was a lot of talk back then about Quarry’s lifestyle outside the ring. Mention of cocaine use, alcohol and bad spending habits which eventually rendered him bankrupt. I think Quarrys last year as an elite contender was 1973. From there he took a steep fall downward and by 1975 May have been diminished. Sure he was still only 29 or 30 when he met norton but he was also coming in around 15 lbs above his traditional best weight and also lugging close to 60 fights of mileage behind him. That coupled with the lifestyle mentioned above and I can see why he’d be a shot fighter. With all that said, I’m making no claims as to who would win prime for prime between Norton and Quarry. I imagine it would be a great fight either way.

[Wee Tommy]

He looked like he had in previous years. He weighed 27; it's not like he was obese. He was 202 when he fought Shavers. He was 209 when he fought Randy Nuemann a couple of years earlier.

As for the not in shape excuse- the point is that it;'s lame. You can always come up with crap like this. My pet gerbil died. I was partying too much etc. Always love how people will latch on to anything to excuse a specific fight. How about all the fights that Quarry won? I'm sure you can come up with some crap for his opponents as well.

If you are going to buy this kind of excuse, no fighter ever really lost legitimately.

Alp, not being funny here but you can tell you’ve never fought by this post alone. Very knowledgable guy but there is a hole in your game here. Circumstances matter going into fights, partying, injuries, drug abuse, etc all play huge factors.

[Ambling Alp II]

Actually I am a former two-time WBS Super-cruiserweight interm champion.

As for out of the ring problems, That's kind of one of my points. Everyone has things going on outside of the ring that they have to deal with. So are we looking into what was going on in Ron Lyle and Earnie Shavers' lives when Quarry fought them? Of course not. Only Quarry. We just assume that everyone else was at peak efficiency when they fought Quarry.

What about Larry Middleton, whom a prime Quarry barely beat?
How about shot Chuvalo, who Quarry managed to lose to?

Everyone was always at their best against Quarry? No one else had to deal with anything?

[Wee Tommy]

Actually I am a former two-time WBS Super-cruiserweight interm champion.

As for out of the ring problems, That's kind of one of my points. Everyone has things going on outside of the ring that they have to deal with. So are we looking into what was going on in Ron Lyle and Earnie Shavers' lives when Quarry fought them? Of course not. Only Quarry. We just assume that everyone else was at peak efficiency when they fought Quarry.

What about Larry Middleton, whom a prime Quarry barely beat?
How about shot Chuvalo, who Quarry managed to lose to?

Everyone was always at their best against Quarry? No one else had to deal with anything?

I’d be interested to hear of how the camps of his opponents went of course. I’m not defending Quarry here just pointing out something I’ve noticed. I could be wrong of course. I’ve got a good few pro fighters as pals and I know what they go thru in and out of camps etc. I’ve also seen guys lose to fighters they are 100% better than due to circumstances, sometimes beyond their control.

[JohnReed]

There was a lot of talk back then about Quarry’s lifestyle outside the ring. Mention of cocaine use, alcohol and bad spending habits which eventually rendered him bankrupt. I think Quarrys last year as an elite contender was 1973. From there he took a steep fall downward and by 1975 May have been diminished. Sure he was still only 29 or 30 when he met norton but he was also coming in around 15 lbs above his traditional best weight and also lugging close to 60 fights of mileage behind him. That coupled with the lifestyle mentioned above and I can see why he’d be a shot fighter. With all that said, I’m making no claims as to who would win prime for prime between Norton and Quarry. I imagine it would be a great fight either way.

If I'm not mistaken, Quarry actually lived in New York City during the 1973-74 period. I've heard that he did a lot of partying during those months. Allegedly Quarry was hanging out with Mickey Mantle and other famous athletes, partying it up and hitting the nightclub scene.

I don't know if this is true. It's all rumor. But I find it easy to believe.

[drunkenpiper36]

There was a lot of talk back then about Quarry’s lifestyle outside the ring. Mention of cocaine use, alcohol and bad spending habits which eventually rendered him bankrupt. I think Quarrys last year as an elite contender was 1973. From there he took a steep fall downward and by 1975 May have been diminished. Sure he was still only 29 or 30 when he met norton but he was also coming in around 15 lbs above his traditional best weight and also lugging close to 60 fights of mileage behind him. That coupled with the lifestyle mentioned above and I can see why he’d be a shot fighter. With all that said, I’m making no claims as to who would win prime for prime between Norton and Quarry. I imagine it would be a great fight either way.

If I'm not mistaken, Quarry actually lived in New York City during the 1973-74 period. I've heard that he did a lot of partying during those months. Allegedly Quarry was hanging out with Mickey Mantle and other famous athletes, partying it up and hitting the nightclub scene.

I don't know if this is true. It's all rumor. But I find it easy to believe.

I think it’s plausible for sure. I’m not sure about the specifics but he definitely saw a steep decline within a relative short period

[Controversial]

Actually I am a former two-time WBS Super-cruiserweight interm champion.

As for out of the ring problems, That's kind of one of my points. Everyone has things going on outside of the ring that they have to deal with. So are we looking into what was going on in Ron Lyle and Earnie Shavers' lives when Quarry fought them? Of course not. Only Quarry. We just assume that everyone else was at peak efficiency when they fought Quarry.

What about Larry Middleton, whom a prime Quarry barely beat?
How about shot Chuvalo, who Quarry managed to lose to?

Everyone was always at their best against Quarry? No one else had to deal with anything?

I’d be interested to hear of how the camps of his opponents went of course. I’m not defending Quarry here just pointing out something I’ve noticed. I could be wrong of course. I’ve got a good few pro fighters as pals and I know what they go thru in and out of camps etc. I’ve also seen guys lose to fighters they are 100% better than due to circumstances, sometimes beyond their control.

Yes boxing is so much more than one fighter being more skilled than another. So many decent journeymen around who just don't have the finances to train full time, so they work and go where the fights are. Driving up and down motorways after work, fighting in someones else back yard, often at short notice and then they sometimes win but the local favourite will get the nod. So many fighters have chaotic lives out the ring and just don't train right or enter the ring in the right mind frame. Especially when they don't have to make weight.

[Ambling Alp II]

That certainly is true. some guys just don't have quality trainers and/or connections. They automatically start their careers 15-0 against opponents they can't possibly lose to.

[Ambling Alp II]

As for Quarry, there are just some points that just don't add up:

-I think he was simply overrated by many people. He was much closer to the Jimmy Ellis, Ron Lyle, Earnie Shavers, George Chuvalo, Oscar Bonavena etc. level than the Ali-Frazier-Foreman level.

- The excuses are lame. Too much partying? Come on. People are quick to latch on on to anything in regard to him.If you are going to use excuses for him against Norton, then you can come up with something for literally every fight.

-He didn't just magically decline right before the Norton fight. Look at this career. Yes he had some nice wins. But look at the time line, you see it all through his career:

1968- Lost to Ellis
1969-Dominated by Frazier and stopped in 7 rounds.
1970-Stopped after three rounds in Ali's first fight in 3 and a half years.
1972-Barely scrapes by Larry Middleton
1972-Stopped again by Ali in 7 rounds. Didn't win a round.
1974-Dominated again by Frazier.

It's not just that he went -5 against Ali, Frazier and Norton. He never got past the 7th round. Won about 3 rounds total in those 5 fights. He couldn't compete with them. He simply was not on their level.

There is little reason to expect a much different result against Norton. He starts off strong, runs out gas, goes into punching bag mode. The usual pattern.

[JohnReed]

As for Quarry, there are just some points that just don't add up:

-I think he was simply overrated by many people. He was much closer to the Jimmy Ellis, Ron Lyle, Earnie Shavers, George Chuvalo, Oscar Bonavena etc. level than the Ali-Frazier-Foreman level.

- The excuses are lame. Too much partying? Come on. People are quick to latch on on to anything in regard to him.If you are going to use excuses for him against Norton, then you can come up with something for literally every fight.

-He didn't just magically decline right before the Norton fight. Look at this career. Yes he had some nice wins. But look at the time line, you see it all through his career:

1968- Lost to Ellis
1969-Dominated by Frazier and stopped in 7 rounds.
1970-Stopped after three rounds in Ali's first fight in 3 and a half years.
1972-Barely scrapes by Larry Middleton
1972-Stopped again by Ali in 7 rounds. Didn't win a round.
1974-Dominated again by Frazier.

It's not just that he went -5 against Ali, Frazier and Norton. He never got past the 7th round. Won about 3 rounds total in those 5 fights. He couldn't compete with them. He simply was not on their level.

There is little reason to expect a much different result against Norton. He starts off strong, runs out gas, goes into punching bag mode. The usual pattern.

Concerning Middleton's fight against Quarry, I"ll make two points.

1) I read that the referee's scoring of that bout was not accurate. According to the press report I saw, Quarry appeared to be comfortably ahead on points at the final bell. The journo who did the ringside write-up definitely did not agree with the official scorecard, which was alleged to be inexplicably close.

2) Larry Middleton was not a bad fighter in the 1971 to 1973 period. At that point in his career, Middleton was definitely a worldwide top-15 fighter in terms of ability. He could give almost anyone a run for their money. Therefore it doesn't reflect unfavorably on Quarry that he had to go the distance against Middleton in winning a tough fight.

[ronnyrains]

Not necessarily true. He came in at his career highest weight against ScrapIron Johnson (a fight he picked up while on vacation to earn some easy money over an opponent hed already beaten) was untrained, had a much more difficult fight than he should have, and generally looked awful (the decision was booed). So yes, while he had recently had a 10 round fight it wasnt like he was in heavy training or that he was his old self. In reality he had been partying, drinking, doing cocaine, and almost no training. It showed against both Johnson and Norton. He looked bloated and out of shape, and had no stamina. The idea that there is no legitimate excuse for that loss and he simply got beat by the better fighter doesnt hold up. Its not like Norton was a class above Quarry in any way shape or form. Quality wise they were abou equal but Jerry’s strengths would have played havok on Norton’s weaknesses. Prime for prime Jerry beats Ken IMO. Ken was damn lucky he got Quarry in the condition he did (Norton had turned down several offers earlier in his career to fight Quarry) because he had looked pretty shaky in that fight when Jerry threw his bolt going for the KO.

I rate Norton above Quarry on a prime-for-prime basis, and in terms of their relative ability levels as of 1975. And yes, I agree that Quarry was not in peak condition for the Norton fight. His physique looked rugged and sturdy, of course. But it also looked bloated and lacked muscle tone. At 207 lbs, Quarry was fighting at his third highest weight ever.

Overall, however, I thought Quarry put on a tough, aggressive and not-so-bad performance against Norton. For three rounds, Jerry had Ken under heavy pressure, regardless of who was getting the better of the exchanges. Quarry won the third round, even though Norton blocked most of Quarry's blows.

It's clear that Quarry blew his ammunition load and fuel during that third round offensive. Coming out for the fourth, Quarry was drained, and he took a one sided beating from that point on. But even so, it was impressive to see Jerry swing back ferociously while outclassed, and obviously he showed he could take a punch.

Quarry's effort against Norton was that much superior to his effort against Frazier in June 1974. Do you agree?

Jerry won every round over Johnson GIMMIE A BREAK, DID NOT HAVE A MARK ON EM, WHAT YOU SAY you saw THE FIGHT?? as far as Quarry being unrated (1972) Only because he had announced his retirement July 25, 1972 in Pittsburgh PA, touring with Three Dog Night. He boxed and slugged vs Scrapiron,

[klompton]

Gotta love Ambling Alps "I only consider 'excuses' when they suit my argument or a fighter I like" defense. Give me a fornicating break. "Why wasn't anyone talking about Quarry being past it pre-Norton." Uh, they were if you cracked open a newspaper or magazine during the time period. And as for you horseshit rundown of Quarry's career a la calling his fight with Frazier in 69 one sided, or acting like he was easily stopped by Ali. Talk about revisionism. How does a back and forth war with Frazier that landed as the fight of the year get to be a one sided loss in your mind? Both the Ali and Frazier fights were stopped on cuts (he protested both stoppages) and many felt he was he was getting to Ali when the stoppage occurred. As for Ellis he fought that fight with a broken back and still managed to come up short via a majority decision in a fight that if one round changes it goes to Quarry. Quarry fought many more elite fighters than Norton. Id love to see how Norton's mediocre ass looked against the same guys Quarry fought. We'll never know though because Norton has one of the thinnest resumes of any HOFer. He got in based literally on one fight, his one win over Ali. Finally, saying that there are upwards of 100 fighters in the HOF with weaker records than Norton is the height up ignorance. Utter stupidity. Its one of the most moronic statements Ive ever heard in fact. Not surprising coming from a guy who would say that Quarry looks the same to him against Norton as he always did. Anyone can see Quarry looks bloated and of course the fact that hes ten pounds over his best weight illustrates this. But then Ambling Alp sees what he wants to see. Anyone who would make such a statement isn't worth wasting my breath on. Suffice to say Id love to see your list of these 100 inductees with weaker resumes than Norton. Norton has exactly three elite wins on his resume: Ali, Quarry, and Young. The fight was a robbery in which Norton looked like shit, and Quarry was shot to shit. So yeah, good luck finding all of these inductees with exactly one quality elite win.

[oogiebe]

I would have loved to see Quarry vs Norton in their respective primes. Would've been a great fight. Quarry was the far tougher man and could box, counter, and slug. Would be interesting.

[ronnyrains]

Actually I am a former two-time WBS Super-cruiserweight interm champion.

As for out of the ring problems, That's kind of one of my points. Everyone has things going on outside of the ring that they have to deal with. So are we looking into what was going on in Ron Lyle and Earnie Shavers' lives when Quarry fought them? Of course not. Only Quarry. We just assume that everyone else was at peak efficiency when they fought Quarry.

What about Larry Middleton, whom a prime Quarry barely beat?
How about shot Chuvalo, who Quarry managed to lose to?

Everyone was always at their best against Quarry? No one else had to deal with anything?

I’d be interested to hear of how the camps of his opponents went of course. I’m not defending Quarry here just pointing out something I’ve noticed. I could be wrong of course. I’ve got a good few pro fighters as pals and I know what they go thru in and out of camps etc. I’ve also seen guys lose to fighters they are 100% better than due to circumstances, sometimes beyond their control.

they damn well sure were, lets assume your assume, who was outta shape when they fought Quarry? SURELY WAS NOT MIDDLETON, CHUVALO OR EVEN SCRAP IRON!

[Tony1244]

As for Quarry, there are just some points that just don't add up:

-I think he was simply overrated by many people. He was much closer to the Jimmy Ellis, Ron Lyle, Earnie Shavers, George Chuvalo, Oscar Bonavena etc. level than the Ali-Frazier-Foreman level.

- The excuses are lame. Too much partying? Come on. People are quick to latch on on to anything in regard to him.If you are going to use excuses for him against Norton, then you can come up with something for literally every fight.

-He didn't just magically decline right before the Norton fight. Look at this career. Yes he had some nice wins. But look at the time line, you see it all through his career:

1968- Lost to Ellis
1969-Dominated by Frazier and stopped in 7 rounds.
1970-Stopped after three rounds in Ali's first fight in 3 and a half years.
1972-Barely scrapes by Larry Middleton
1972-Stopped again by Ali in 7 rounds. Didn't win a round.
1974-Dominated again by Frazier.

It's not just that he went -5 against Ali, Frazier and Norton. He never got past the 7th round. Won about 3 rounds total in those 5 fights. He couldn't compete with them. He simply was not on their level.

There is little reason to expect a much different result against Norton. He starts off strong, runs out gas, goes into punching bag mode. The usual pattern.

Very accurate and I like Quarry. He hit Norton hard repeatedly and little happened.

[Tony1244]

I would have loved to see Quarry vs Norton in their respective primes. Would've been a great fight. Quarry was the far tougher man and could box, counter, and slug. Would be interesting.

I thought we did. Quarry was only 30 in 1975.

[ronnyrains]

I would have loved to see Quarry vs Norton in their respective primes. Would've been a great fight. Quarry was the far tougher man and could box, counter, and slug. Would be interesting.

I thought we did. Quarry was only 30 in 1975.

AMBLING ALP, ANYONE WHO SAYS QUARRY WAS NOT PASSE HIS PRIME VS NORTON, NEED TO TAKE UP FOLLOWING ANOTHER SPORT, HE WAS FIGHTING TOP TEN WORLD FIGHTERS IN 1967, Norton did not fight the same till 1973, Quarry had twice as many battles! I don't give a damn they were both 29, you have to look at the odometer, Jerry ran his trail, the fght was signed March 12, Jerry had 11 days less to get ready