Why Jerry Quarry Deserves a Plaque at Canasota

[HomicideHenry]

This man is often disregarded as just another "white hope" and is unfortunately placed in the same group of fighters as Gerry Cooney and other failed HW's in the past.

This thread is inspired by an article I read a few years back where a columnist for KO magazine blasted Quarry and said the man deserves no place in the Boxing Hall of Fame. I come to Quarry's defense, and these are my reasons why I believe Quarry does deserve recognition and possibly deserves a place in the Hall:


1.) Quarry lost to only THE best damn fighters in the world, he beaten everybody else in the world in the greatest era in HW history! This cannot be over-looked, not many can lay claim to fighting the best fighters in history, let alone be in the greatest era in history.

Floyd Patterson: Quarry went 1-0-1 against the 2x HW champion
Muhammad Ali: Quarry goes 0-2-0 against the 3x HW champion, losing only by cuts
Joe Frazier: Quarry went 0-2-0 against Frazier, losing the first time due to cuts
Ken Norton: Loses to the future WBC champion by TKO (cuts again)

As well as decision losses to Jimmy Ellis, Eddie Machen and a disputed stoppage to George Chuvalo.

2.) Look at the men he had defeated! This can't be over-looked, nobody from today could have beaten the following men:

Earnie Shavers: Quarry KO'd the hardest hitting HW in history in a single round!
Ron Lyle: Quarry won a decision over Lyle, who had dropped Foreman in RING magazine's 1976 FIGHT OF THE YEAR, in 12 rounds!
Buster Mathis: Lost a unaminous 12 round decision to Quarry!

This list goes on and on, Thad Spencer, Brian London, undefeated Mac Foster, Randy Neumann, Lorenzo Zanon and several others!

3.) If Quarry was around in the early 80's and even today, there is no doubt in my mind that Quarry would have stopped the likes of Tubbs, Weaver, Page, Dokes, Tate, Berbick---Klitschko, Rahman, Valuev, Maskaev, Ruiz---the majority of the 80's and current contenders and champions would have been dismantled by "The Bellflower Belter".

4.) If Ingemar Johansson could be elected to the HOF, when he had a disappointing title reign and hadn't faced as many HOF fighters as Quarry did, what really is holding Quarry from being elected? Ingemar went 1-2-0 against Patterson, while Patterson after his title reign was a much better fighter and could only go 0-2-0 against Quarry!

How can you really and honestly say Quarry wasn't a great fighter? Can you honestly say with a straight face that Bowe, Tyson, Holyfield, Klitschko's would have been better than Quarry if they had fought in the 1970's? There is no doubt in my mind that they all would of had a similar record to Quarry's, losing and winning some---cus I can't see Bowe beating Norton or Holyfield beating an Ali or Tyson beating Foreman in the 1970's.

Give "Irish" Jerry a place in the hall or at least acknowledge him as one of the best contenders of all times---if not for his record and his abilities, then out of respect for the dead and what our sport can do to its fighters.

[Seamus]

I agree Jerry Quarry was a very underrated fighter, and I'll even add, that in the first fight with Frazier, he lost a clean knockdown in the first minute of the bout, when Smokin Joe bounced back up off the ropes. In the first bout with Ali, he was also scoring consistently, before being stopped on cuts. That being said I still have to say the HOF has too many undeserving heavyweights already, and I don't think a fighter should get in, based on fights he gave a good account of himself in, but ultimately lost. I could name 10 fighters far more deserving than Quarry, who had they been heavyweights, would have been in a long time ago.

[HomicideHenry]

I don't think Quarry could have beaten Tyson or Holmes in the 80's, but outside of those two men, I do believe he would have beaten any of the WBA titlists such as Tate, Weaver, Page, Dokes, Coetzee.

So I disagree with the assment that he couldn't have won a title, maybe not the undisputed title or even the WBC/IBF title(s) from Larry Holmes, who by and large was the true champion---but Quarry would have beaten any of the WBA title holders, excluding Tyson when he unified the titles.

[overhand_right]

Floyd Patterson: Quarry went 1-0-1 against the 2x HW champion
Muhammad Ali: Quarry goes 0-2-0 against the 3x HW champion, losing only by cuts
Joe Frazier: Quarry went 0-2-0 against Frazier, losing the first time due to cuts
Ken Norton: Loses to the future WBC champion by TKO (cuts again)

As well as decision losses to Jimmy Ellis, Eddie Machen and a disputed stoppage to George Chuvalo.
3.) If Quarry was around in the early 80's and even today, there is no doubt in my mind that Quarry would have stopped the likes of Tubbs, Weaver, Page, Dokes, Tate, Berbick---Klitschko, Rahman, Valuev, Maskaev, Ruiz---the majority of the 80's and current contenders and champions would have been dismantled by "The Bellflower Belter".

I liked the thread title, but too many facts glossed over/altered to suit yoru agenda. Too many times you make out Quarry lost only because of cuts. In the second Ali fight and the Norton fight, JQ was saved by the ref because he was being bludgeoned, not a cut stoppage.

What was so disputed about the Chuvalo loss? Weird yes, but JQ got counted out fair & square.

I like JQ a lot & respect what he did for the sport but better hitters than Quarry never knocked out Tubbs, Page, Berbick & better boxers than Quarry never beat them no way does Quarry beat any of the 80s crew. Maybe John Tate... But Weaver, Holmes, Witherspoon, Page, Dokes had too much skills, stamina, size, power, etc for Quarry.

[JC]

1.) Quarry lost to only THE best damn fighters in the world, he beaten everybody else in the world in the greatest era in HW history! This cannot be over-looked, not many can lay claim to fighting the best fighters in history, let alone be in the greatest era in history.

This is what I always wonder when someone makes a case for people like Quarry to be in the HOF. Surely losing to the best fighters in the world should not qualify you for the HOF, only being one of the best fighters in the world should. George Chuvalo also has a very impressive list of fighters faced but I don't feel he belongs in the hall of fame either.

It was the same when the put McGuigan in and people said "he did be Pedroza who was an all time great", fine but surely being an all time great should be the requirement for entry not just having on on you resume.

[KOJOE90]

I like JQ a lot & respect what he did for the sport but better hitters than Quarry never knocked out Tubbs, Page, Berbick & better boxers than Quarry never beat them no way does Quarry beat any of the 80s crew. Maybe John Tate... But Weaver, Holmes, Witherspoon, Page, Dokes had too much skills, stamina, size, power, etc for Quarry.

Overhand, would you really pick Mike Weaver to beat Quarry? Of course both fighters were a little inconsistant so it's a hard matchup in that respect but taking them both at there best I would have to pick Quarry.

Quarry hung in there and beat fighters who hit as hard if not harder that Weaver, Quarry also hit harder than some of the fighters who stopped Weaver.

If Quarrys mind was right I could see him counter punching his way to a points win or even late stoppage.

[The Great John L]

I like JQ a lot & respect what he did for the sport but better hitters than Quarry never knocked out Tubbs, Page, Berbick & better boxers than Quarry never beat them no way does Quarry beat any of the 80s crew. Maybe John Tate... But Weaver, Holmes, Witherspoon, Page, Dokes had too much skills, stamina, size, power, etc for Quarry.

Overhand, would you really pick Mike Weaver to beat Quarry? Of course both fighters were a little inconsistant so it's a hard matchup in that respect but taking them both at there best I would have to pick Quarry.

Quarry hung in there and beat fighters who hit as hard if not harder that Weaver, Quarry also hit harder than some of the fighters who stopped Weaver.

If Quarrys mind was right I could see him counter punching his way to a points win or even late stoppage.

I am big fans of both Weaver and Quarry, but Quarry was a class above Weaver. I think he would have stopped him in a very entertaining but relatively short fight.

[theone]

I have mixed feeling on this one. Im a huge Quarry fan but I can acknowledge why he's not in the HOF, not winning the title being the most obvious reason. If he had won it just once and lost it on his first defense, I think that would have been enough to get him in.
Its unfortunate for him because he seems to have a better resume than alot of the heavyweights already in and head to head I believe Quarry would have beaten several of them as well.
Victories over Lyle, Patterson, Shavers, Mathis, Spencer, and Mac Foster are extremely inpressive names to have on a record. I know I'm going to get flack over this but I dont believe overall that Schmeling, Sharkey,Baer, Braddock and yes even Dempsey fought or beat a better class of heavyweights than Quarry.

[The Great John L]

I have mixed feeling on this one. Im a huge Quarry fan but I can acknowledge why he's not in the HOF, not winning the title being the most obvious reason. If he had won it just once and lost it on his first defense, I think that would have been enough to get him in.
Its unfortunate for him because he seems to have a better resume than alot of the heavyweights already in and head to head I believe Quarry would have beaten several of them as well.
Victories over Lyle, Patterson, Shavers, Mathis, Spencer, and Mac Foster are extremely inpressive names to have on a record. I know I'm going to get flack over this but I dont believe overall that Schmeling, Sharkey,Baer, Braddock and yes even Dempsey fought or beat a better class of heavyweights than Quarry.

Yes, I think you’ll get some flack from some, but not me. While some will argue that Schmeling, Sharkey, Baer, Braddock and Dempsey have better resumes, I don’t think any of them have a clear advantage in quality of wins, and Quarry’s overall competition was probably as good as just about any HW in history with a few exceptions.

But HOF? Probably not.

[overhand_right]

I am big fans of both Weaver and Quarry, but Quarry was a class above Weaver. I think he would have stopped him in a very entertaining but relatively short fight.

Right so Quarrys gonna bang out Weaver when the all time great Larry Holmes couldnt? Is Quarry a better banger than Coetzee, who nailed Weaver with everything but the corner stool & couldnt budge him. Quarrys gonna bang out Weaver like he did, erm, Ellis? Patterson? Um, Mathis?

A more likely scenario is Quarry coming out all guns blazing as usual, shooting his load early & tiring as we have seen many times before, as the bigger, much physically stronger Weaver starts to bang back with heavy hitting. The ref saves a bloodied & exhausted Quarry somewhere between the 8th & 12th rds...

Weaver: former heavyweight champion of the world, 1980-82, Quarry: perrenial contender.

[theone]

Right so Quarrys gonna bang out Weaver when the all time great Larry Holmes couldnt? Is Quarry a better banger than Coetzee, who nailed Weaver with everything but the corner stool & couldnt budge him. Quarrys gonna bang out Weaver like he did, erm, Ellis? Patterson? Um, Mathis?

Quarry wouldnt have to bang out Weaver. Quarry was more than capable of outboxing him like he did to Lyle, and Mathis. Quarry was tough enough to take what Weaver would mange to land on him and hit hard enough to gain weavers repect.

[overhand_right]

Overhand, would you really pick Mike Weaver to beat Quarry? Of course both fighters were a little inconsistant so it's a hard matchup in that respect but taking them both at there best I would have to pick Quarry.

Quarry hung in there and beat fighters who hit as hard if not harder that Weaver, Quarry also hit harder than some of the fighters who stopped Weaver.

If Quarrys mind was right I could see him counter punching his way to a points win or even late stoppage.

Like i said above Joe, Weaver beats Quarry. I'd bet money on it. Im judging Weaver on his title days. We KNOW Weaver had one punch knockout power & could bring it out at any moment no matter how late in the fight and deep in the water. The way he laid out huge durable champions like Tate & Coetzee with 1 punch kayos is a sight to behold.

Yeah Quarry could give guys hell, but he couldnt beat championship fighters in their prime. Excuses, excuses, he never did it. He might give Weaver a licking early, but he always tires. Beating up on Weaver for a few rounds & actually BEATING him are two entirely different matters. Ask Tate (with a ouiji board), Coetzee, Williams, Holmes..

I know Weaver is no Smokin Joe, but hes not getting blown out by 200ib Quarry, and hes more than proven how freakishly tough he is to me in those Tate and Weaver and Holmes fights. Too big, too dangerous, too much stamina, too much of EVERYTHING. Quarry starts like a house on fire but Hercules douses the fire in the second half of the fight.

Weaver was knocked down v Dokes & criminally robbed of his title by an inept/corrupt ref. He came back and beat Dokes in the rematch, yet was cruelly robbed again. Weaver has more of my sympathy than Jerry Quarry, who BTW i hold in very high regard despite how it may seem...

[The Great John L]

I am big fans of both Weaver and Quarry, but Quarry was a class above Weaver. I think he would have stopped him in a very entertaining but relatively short fight.

Right so Quarrys gonna bang out Weaver when the all time great Larry Holmes couldnt?

I seem to recall Holmes winning by stoppage? Or did they fight more than once?

Is Quarry a better banger than Coetzee, who nailed Weaver with everything but the corner stool & couldnt budge him.

I would say that he was a comparable puncher, and a MUCH better fighter than Coetzee.

Quarrys gonna bang out Weaver like he did, erm, Ellis? Patterson? Um, Mathis?

No, he’s gonna “bang out” Weaver they way Mike Dokes did. While Dokes was quite talented, he wasn’t a great puncher, and he bounced Weaver around pretty good in their first fight.

A more likely scenario is Quarry coming out all guns blazing as usual, shooting his load early & tiring as we have seen many times before,

Many times? Perhaps you should enlighten us, since he seems to have been able to perform quite well in long distance fights. Since you didn’t mention it, I won’t bother to discuss Weaver’s stamina.

Clearly we have a difference of opinion. No problem, because as I said I was huge Weaver fan as well, and while I think Quarry was a better fighter, it’s certainly not a stretch to see Weaver beating him. But in my eyes, this would be the less likely outcome.

[overhand_right]

I seem to recall Holmes winning by stoppage? Or did they fight more than once?

I would say that he was a comparable puncher, and a MUCH better fighter than Coetzee.

No, he’s gonna “bang out” Weaver they way Mike Dokes did. While Dokes was quite talented, he wasn’t a great puncher, and he bounced Weaver around pretty good in their first fight.

Many times? Perhaps you should enlighten us, since he seems to have been able to perform quite well in long distance fights. Since you didn’t mention it, I won’t bother to discuss Weaver’s stamina.

1. Bang out generally means an easy early kayo. Holmes beat him after 11 and a half rds of hell. Quarry is no Holmes, and when he particpated in similar fights, Frazier I & II, Norton, he was dead after 5 rds.

2. Your welcome to believe Quarry was a better puncher than Coetzee, but you wont find many people who agree with you.

3. Dokes bounced Weaver around pretty good did he? Since you dont know, Dokes/Weaver I is one of the most controversial title fights of all time. He knocked Weaver down yes, but the stoppage was an outright robbery. Funny how Dokes couldnt budge or stop Weaver in 15 whole rds of their rematch.

Big deal Dokes put Weaver down once in 16 rds. Chuvalo & Patterson put Quarry down. By the 6th & 7th rds of the second fight, Quarry would visibly WINCE in pain after each shot Ali hit him with. He wouldnt be wincing if Weaver was laying it into him. He'd be looking at a hazy image of a ref counting over him.

Discuss Weavers stamina. 12 rds v Holmes in a hellish fight, 15 rds & pulls out a KO over the much bigger Tate in another gruelling fight, Coetzee 13 rds ditto, 15 rds v Dokes, 15 rds v Tillis. Weavers stamina, even in tough fast fights, check out fine son!

[The Great John L]

Big deal Dokes put Weaver down once in 16 rds.

Dokes dropped Weaver 3 times in the first round of their first fight. While Weaver was up and ready to go after the 3rd KD, there’s not much controversy when you are dropped 3 times and stopped in the opening round. That was a tough fight for me to watch, because even though I live in Doke’s hometown and know a few of his relatives I was rooting for Weaver in that fight. But Weaver did not have the sturdiest of chins, and Dokes jumped on him and took advantage of that.

As far as the Holmes fight, yes it was a tough fight and Weaver fought great. I thought he should have gotten credit for a KD in that fight, but you stated that Holmes couldn’t stop Weaver, and that was not correct.

I really have nothing to add to this discussion, as these are just opinions and our two opinions differ.

[overhand_right]

LOL. Now you have really exposed/embarrassed yourself. Weaver was NEVER down three times v Dokes. He was down ONCE, got up, and the ref stopped it with Weaver blocking Dokes punches on the ropes. Joey Curtis rightly caught hell from the crowd and boxing media for his shitty/shady performance as ref.

This is such a well known fight, just about anybody can come here & back me up. Your account is strictly make believe.

You have never seen the fight!

[The Great John L]

LOL. Now you have really exposed/embarrassed yourself. Weaver was NEVER down three times v Dokes. He was down ONCE, got up, and the ref stopped it with Weaver blocking Dokes punches on the ropes. Joey Curtis rightly caught hell from the crowd and boxing media for his shitty/shady performance as ref.

This is such a well known fight, just about anybody can come here & back me up. Your account is strictly make believe.

You have never seen the fight!

I’d be the first to admit a mistake, and it’s possible that I could have been mistaken about the number of KD’s. So what? When you’ve been watching fights for 40 years, the specifics about a fight can get jumbled.

However, your logic that this somehow indicates that I have never seen the fight is rather simple logic. Can I therefore assume from your previous statement.

Right so Quarrys gonna bang out Weaver when the all time great Larry Holmes couldnt?

That you have never seen the Holmes-Weaver fight? I know you did followup after checking the actual fight result in boxrec, but clearly your original comment was not reflective of reality. Kind of a make believe perhaps?

You must not have much of a life if nit picking these things is such enjoyment for you.

[overhand_right]

Matey, like i said, banging someone out means a quick knockout, which obviously Holmes/Weaver wasnt. It was a long tough hellish brawl, the type that Jerry Quarry always ended up losing, between rds 5 to 7.

Youve lost all credibility with me, no point debating with you since you try talk about fights & fighters that you have obviously never seen.

[The Great John L]

Youve lost all credibility with me...

I guess my life no longer has meaning... :(

[HomicideHenry]

Someone made the remark that Quarry was a great fighter but is undeserving of being in the HOF strictly because he never won a title out of the major organizations let alone the lineal HW title.

That is one of the most misleading and ignorant things to say. Sam Langford and Harry Wills, Sam McVey and Joe Jeanette and George Godfrey never won any title outside of the "Negro HW Title", and they are in the HOF based strictly on who they fought---which was the best fighters.

There have been many fighters, not just HW's, who fought alot of HOF fighters, winning some and losing some, just like Langford and Wills, and have yet to be even considered for induction or given any credit.

I consider Jerry Quarry among them. Sure there are fighters with greater qualifications than Quarry, but the Irishman is no bum, never was a bum, fought harder in defeat, beat some of the best, lost to some of the best, in the greatest HW era of all time---the man stands heads and shoulders over most fighters today, one class up above them.

Had he been in any other era in history, I do think Quarry would have still been a top 10, top 5, if not the number 1 contender in some eras, and could have been a champion in the early to mid 80's. He certainly would have given Holmes a tougher fight than what Tex Cobb, Shavers, Cooney, Ocassio, Evangelista, LeDoux and certainly Marvis Frazier ever would have.

Not to say Quarry could have beaten Holmes, cus I don't think Quarry could have, but I do believe Quarry would have probably beaten every other man in Holmes era, with exception of up and coming Tyson.

[Ambling Alp]

Quarry was unfortunate in that he fought in the best era for heavyweights and did have some nice wins. He probably could have been the champion in a weak era. However, it's not like he ever came close when he fought Ali or Frazier (or Norton for that matter).
He was better than a few other heavyweights in the Hall of Fame - Willard and Braddock, possibly Johannson. However, those guys shouldn't have been elected and it would just make matters worse by putting more guys who weren't quite good enough in.
You certainly couyld make the case that Quarry was better than the title holders of the 1980s (exccept for Holmes And Tyson), but that really isn't the issue. Hopefully Weaver, Dokes, Coetzee, Witherspoon etc won't ever make it either.

Jerry Quarry was a very good fighter, but he wasn't a great fighter, and shouldn't be in the International Boxing Hall of Fame.

[BrocktonBlockbuster49]

Yeah Quarry could give guys hell, but he couldnt beat championship fighters in their prime.

overhand right,



quarry beat a prime floyd patterson. floyds a top 20 heavyweight of all time. floyd became a better fighter in the mid 1960s.

[BrocktonBlockbuster49]

jerry quarry was completley washed up when he fought ken norton. a prime quarry knocks out norton.

[BrocktonBlockbuster49]

i rate quarry # 26 heavyweight of all time. i rate mike weaver high too. i think highly of both.


however I have to go with jerry Quarry here. I think quarry will counterpunch his way to a close decision. quarry was the better boxer than weaver......quarry also had the durability, toughness, firepower to exchange on the inside with weaver.



quarry and weaver were the same size both 6'1 200lb

[The Great John L]

i rate quarry # 26 heavyweight of all time. i rate mike weaver high too. i think highly of both.


however I have to go with jerry Quarry here. I think quarry will counterpunch his way to a close decision. quarry was the better boxer than weaver......quarry also had the durability, toughness, firepower to exchange on the inside with weaver.



quarry and weaver were the same size both 6'1 200lb

Agreed on all points, although most remember the 210-215 lb that Weaver carried later in his career. His peak was probably about 200-205 as you noted.

I have Quarry at 33 and Weaver at 53 and would think it would have been a great fight but also give a slight edge to Quarry.