BoxRec

I think robinson made a good point when he talked about Quarry's getting tired after the 6th and 7th. I think it was more that and the accumulation than anything that did it. Ali was also quite flat footed against Quarry in some of those rounds, so that might have contributed to his hurting Quarry more than he would the usual opponent. I think the shots Quarry took against Frazier show he had a great chin. I don't think anyone is saying that he had Ali or Frazier or Chuvalo's chin, just a really good one. Norton also hit him with a lot of great shots.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

I Feel Fine wrote:Ali broke him down, that doesn't mean Quarry had a bad chin. We can all point and laugh at Ali's power, but that evil Muslim could hurt you if you gave him the oppportunity. Ali hurt Liston, Bonavena, Frazier, Foreman, Wepner; they had great chins. No one is suggesting that Quarry could not be hurt, just that he was difficult to hurt.

Hold on, mate, no one's laughing. I didn't say Ali couldn't punch --- I said he was relatively light-hitting, & he had Quarry shaken down to his bootlaces toward the end. I never said Quarry had a bad chin, either, simply his chin was not what it is often made to be, & the Ali rematch is testimony to this. The offending punch (for the most part) was Ali's jab. Some powershot, that is. The end came in seven rounds (I think? I have the fight, but can't be bothered going back to check right now), so it wasn't as if it came late, & was coupled with exhaustion, either.

Quarry's chin is oversold.

I don't get your point. Quarry never went down and was never wobbled by any of Ali's shots . . .Ali basically just overwhelmed him with his handspeed and endurance (components which made him one of the very best ever) . . but in terms of Quarry's "chin" that fight doesn't display anything except he could take Ali's kitchen sink and not go down.

edit

DaveV17 wrote:I agree with IFF that when Ali planted his feet, he could punch. Ali was much more dangerous when he got off of his toes and set himself to punch. Quarry was just too small and too slow to compete with Ali.

Quarry was not only much smaller than Ali, he was small for his era. He could look good one fight and lethargic the next. Quarry was a skilled fighter when he was on top of his game but he was inconsistent. He might have beaten a champion in some era but IMO, he was too inconsistent to hold the title for long.

Someone posted that Quarry could have beaten Holyfield...I don't see that. Holyfield would beat him on the inside or the outside. Holyfield was bigger, stronger, faster, and more skilled. In addition, nobody had more heart than Holyfield. Like Ali, Holyfield would be a bad match up for Jerry.

Holyfield fought nothing like Ali. I would say their handspeed was equal, with Quarry having the slightly better left hook than Evander (he hurt big men early with his hook . . .Evander generally needed accumulation). Quarry was a better counter-puncher, better body puncher, and had better stamina. Evander might have a slight edge in strength but he certainly wasn't stronger than Ron Lyle who Quarry whupped on the inside (or Chuvalo who Quarry was outboxing until that 7th round)
Holyfield would make it a fight and it would certainly be competitve, but Holyfield-Quarry would look nothing like Ali-Quarry.

I do agree Quarry was too tempermental to ever hold the title for very long.

I think a fight between Holy and Quarry would be quite exciting actually.

I think Holy wins it, but damned what a cool fight to watch, though having said that I doubt there are few fioghts that Quarry would be in that wouldn't be exciting to watch.

Im inclined to say that Holy stops Quarry late in the bout TKO or cut stoppage.

I really feel that Quarry got better during the 70s at being a late round fighter. The Chuvalo loss was just one of those unfortunate things that happen when you play with a puncher like George.

I think Quarry's biggest weakness is that he would lead with a left to the body and this often saw him being countered and beaten to the punch,
he also drew his right back at times, and guys seemed to catch him with it.

His Thad Spenser fight was one of the best performances that show case such a wide variety of skills and attributes.

He should never have made a come back in the 80s or 90s, but he knew the risk, though the burning desire to recapture that glory or that hunger to be champion never dies even if your physical gifts do

It would be very surprising if Quarry would be competitive with Holyfield for more than a few rounds assuming we are talking about Holyfield at his best (1987-1992).

Holyfield had better stamina; he usually wore his opponents down.
If you look at the fights when Quarry had to fight the truly elite,he fell way short.
Neither Holyfield or Quarry were that good defensively, but Holyfield was an extremely accurrate puncher, which is probably the most underrated part of boxing. He would hit Quarry almost as will. Holyfield gradually wears Quarry down and stops him from an accumilation of blows in the middle to late rounds.
Quarry may come close to matching Holyfield's heart,but he doesn't have near the talent. Holyfield was simply too good.

Having said that, Quarry is better than any heavyweight today.

I mentioned it earlier, but does anyone think a younger Quarry would have beaten Norton?

edit

How about if Norton and Quarry met in 1970 ?

In 1970, Quarry would have beaten Norton easily. Norton wasn't the fighter that he would become. However, Norton started his career late. He didn't turn pro until 1967 when he was 24. He was actually 2 years older than Quarry.
From 1973 (maybe even a little earlier) on he would have beaten Quarry.

Ambling Alp wrote:It would be very surprising if Quarry would be competitive with Holyfield for more than a few rounds assuming we are talking about Holyfield at his best (1987-1992).

Holyfield had better stamina; he usually wore his opponents down.
If you look at the fights when Quarry had to fight the truly elite,he fell way short.
Neither Holyfield or Quarry were that good defensively, but Holyfield was an extremely accurrate puncher, which is probably the most underrated part of boxing. He would hit Quarry almost as will. Holyfield gradually wears Quarry down and stops him from an accumilation of blows in the middle to late rounds.
Quarry may come close to matching Holyfield's heart,but he doesn't have near the talent. Holyfield was simply too good.

Having said that, Quarry is better than any heavyweight today.

I have to disagree. Yes, Holyfield, a sharp accurate puncher, would hit Quarry. Thing is, Quarry, a sharp counter-puncher, would hit Holyfield back, and Evander wouldn't be able to just wade in like he did to a Molasses enveloped George Foreman or lethargic Buster Douglas.

Quarry didn't look near the specimen of Holyfield (especially later on in the 70s, one of the most unremarkable looking specimens to be a top HW contender until nowadays when it's common), but he was a fine athlete with speed and power. He also could slip punches very well, his defense is made to look worse than it is by Frazier and Ali, both guys who made lots of solid fighters look poor defensively. Again, it would be a very close fight, but I see Quarry with the better, more varied arsenal of punches having the edge. Holyfield also always had to take rounds off once he moved above 200 lbs, his stamina is over-rated at HW b/c he was fighting lots of bigger 230 plus guys who tired late and since he could summon late rallies even when he was exhausted.

I don't think this would be a cakewalk, but I don't see how Quarry can win this. Holyfield was as good as or better at literally everything than Quarry.
Yes some of Holyfield's opponents didn't have great stamina, but that doesn't mean that Holyfield didn't. He fought at a very high pace didn't fade in the rounds until the Moorer fight. If anything, you can make an arguement that it was Quarry that had stamina problems.
I think Holyfield could just wade in because he wouldn't be worried about Quarry's punching power and Quarry didn't have that great of a jab.

The proof is in the pudding. Look at what always happened when Quarry stepped up in competition. He had a few moments but never came close to winning.
In the 5 fights against the best 3 fighters (all with varying styles) that he fought, he never made it past the 7th round.
Quarry never even came close to beating anyone as good as Holyfield, much less winning.
If Quarry really had this great punching power, ability to slip punches, counter punching etc. he would have done much better than he did against his toughest opponents.

Ambling Alp wrote:I don't think this would be a cakewalk, but I don't see how Quarry can win this. Holyfield was as good as or better at literally everything than Quarry.
Yes some of Holyfield's opponents didn't have great stamina, but that doesn't mean that Holyfield didn't. He fought at a very high pace didn't fade in the rounds until the Moorer fight. If anything, you can make an arguement that it was Quarry that had stamina problems.
I think Holyfield could just wade in because he wouldn't be worried about Quarry's punching power and Quarry didn't have that great of a jab.

The proof is in the pudding. Look at what always happened when Quarry stepped up in competition. He had a few moments but never came close to winning.
In the 5 fights against the best 3 fighters (all with varying styles) that he fought, he never made it past the 7th round.
Quarry never even came close to beating anyone as good as Holyfield, much less winning.
If Quarry really had this great punching power, ability to slip punches, counter punching etc. he would have done much better than he did against his toughest opponents.

Not worry about Quarry's punching power?? Quarry had real punching power, especially in his left hook and I have no doubt he punched harder than Bert Cooper.

Bringing up the Norton fight is like bringing up the Toney fight for Holyfield . . Quarry was past it and came in on late notice. And your rounds analogy is distorted by the fact the 1st Ali fight was stopped on cuts.

Always lost when he stepped up? I would call Ron Lyle, Floyd Patterson, Buster Mathis, Ernie Shavers "step-ups" and Quarry for the most part dominated them. Sure he lost to Ali and Frazier twice . . but Holyfield's not beating those two either (nor Norton, and I think fights with Chuvalo and Lyle are big trouble for Evander as well)

You seem to be picturing Holyfield just blowing little Quarry away but anyone who stood on the inside with the bigger and stronger Lyle is not going to be awed by Holyfield's punching power nor his Mr. Olympia physique.

DF wrote:"Quarry had real punching power, especially in his left hook and I have no doubt he punched harder than Bert Cooper."

I have a lot of doubt that Quarry punched harder than Bert Cooper.

DF wrote:"Sure he lost to Ali and Frazier twice . . but Holyfield's not beating those two either (nor Norton, and I think fights with Chuvalo and Lyle are big trouble for Evander as well)"

You don't think much of Holyfield do you? Nobody in boxing history beats Holyfield without a war. Holyfield was one of the best ever. He was physically good, strong, quick, and tough, he was mentally strong, and he had great technique. I would bet on Holyfield against all five of the guys you listed.

DaveV17 wrote:DF wrote:"Quarry had real punching power, especially in his left hook and I have no doubt he punched harder than Bert Cooper."

I have a lot of doubt that Quarry punched harder than Bert Cooper.

DF wrote:"Sure he lost to Ali and Frazier twice . . but Holyfield's not beating those two either (nor Norton, and I think fights with Chuvalo and Lyle are big trouble for Evander as well)"

You don't think much of Holyfield do you? Nobody in boxing history beats Holyfield without a war. Holyfield was one of the best ever. He was physically good, strong, quick, and tough, he was mentally strong, and he had great technique. I would bet on Holyfield against all five of the guys you listed.

I do thing highly of Holyfield, but I see Alp as over-rating him.

I won't get into this same argument with a guy who said Scott Frank could be a top contender in the 1960s . . .

Aren't you the same guy who thinks Willard and Carnera are as good as Bowe and Lewis?

demspeyfire - Yes Holyfield got hurt against Cooper, but look at his whole career. Are you seriously going to argue that he didn't have a great chin?
Cooper while a limited fighter, could land a big punch on occasion.

Quarry's power was respectable, but it was far from great. He scored ko's in less than half his fights. Several journeyman went the distance with him.

When I said step up, I think you have to agree that the 3 opponents (1.the guy who beat Patterson,Liston,Frazier and Foreman, 2. Frazier 3. Norton.) All were better than anyone Quarry beat.

How would Holyfield have done against those 3? Well I doubt he would have went 0-5, and he certainly would have went more than 7 rounds in each fight which Quarry couldn't do even once.

Yes, Mathis,Lyle,Shavers etc. were good wins and I said so earlier. Quarry barely beat Patterson, who while still good wasn't as good as he had once been.
Holyfield would have beaten these guys as well. And of course Quarry also lost to Ellis and Chuvalo.

No I don't think Quarry would be overawed and I think he would have given it his all like he usually did. I don't mean to be slamming Quarry here. He was a good fighter. However we are talking a prime Evander Holyfield here. Holyfield has fought so long past his prime that I think a lot of people forget how good he was at his best. Look at his fights when he first became a heavyweight, -Tillis,Thomas,Dokes,Stewart, Douglas. Quarry and Holyfield were in two different leagues.

DaveV17 wrote:Aren't you the same guy who thinks Willard and Carnera are as good as Bowe and Lewis?

No, I never said they lose to Primo Carnera (make it a 20 rounder and yeah I can definitely see Willard outlasting both of them) I think you said something ridiculous like Willard wouldn't get above the Toughman Circuit today.

Alp, so you do see Holyfield beating Ali and Frazier? Again, to include the Norton fight is not really fair to Jerry considering that was clearly a washed up Quarry in with an excellent HW at the peak of his powers.

KO percentage doesn't mean much, Quarry faced an incredible tough calibre of opponent even early in his career, although many of the fighters are now forgotten (like Tony Alongi and Joey Orbillo).

I wasn't suggesting Holyfield didn't have a great chin, I did say Quarry had enough power to get Evander's respect. This is one fight I see going the distance.
Yes, prime Holyfield was great, but look at those names; old Foreman, Dokes, Thomas, Douglas, Stewartm Tillis . . the likes of Ellis, Mathis, Lyle, Shavers, Chuvalo . . not to mention Ali, Frazier, Norton etc. are IMO a clearly superior lot to the fighters Evander was beating up on in the late 80s/early 90s.
That being said, I rank Holyfield higher all-time. Bigger wins relative to his time-frame. And hell, this would be a helluva matchup that I'll concede could go the other way.

DF, you coudl schedule Bowe or Lewis vs. Willard for 100 rounds and Willard won't get out of the first or second anyway. By your comments about Holyfield it is obvious that you are still in the older is better mode.

dempseyfire- Do I think Holyfield would beat Frazier and the Greatest? Probably not. If either one of them was a little off, I think Holyfield could pull it off. Let me it this way, there would be a better chance of Holyfield beating those guys than Quarry of beating Holyfield. Holyfield would be much more competitive than Quarry was.

As for Norton, I have never bought the arguement that Quarry was clearly washed up. I think this is revisionist history. There doesn't seem to be evidence that he was way past it. Quarry was only 29, which isn't old at all, especially for a heavyweight. This was only 9 months after he fought Frazier the 2nd time, and a little more than a year after he beat Shavers. Norton won because he was a much better fighter than Quarry.
You can argue that maybe Quarry was starting to slide, but there was no way that he was that far past his best. He certainly should have been able to do better against Norton than he did.

I think that Holyfield would beat Norton in a tough fight; he certainly wouldn't have been stopped in 5 rounds.

The names that mentioed concerning Quarry -Ellis,Mathis,Lyle,Shavers, Chuvalo; Well first of all, Quarry lost to 2 of these guys. Dokes was better Mathis, and Bowe and Tyson were better than Lyle and Shavers.

A 34 year old Holyfield beat a 30 year old Tyson; that is much more impressive than any win Quarry ever had. Same with Bowe.

Holyfield is going to beat Quarry 9 out of 10 times. Everything would have to fall into place for Quarry to win. He would have to be "on" Holyfield would have to be "off" just for him to have a chance.

I love the whole idea of throwing Holyfield back into the 1970's mix of the heavyweight devision because there's just no way that we would fail to get a plethora of great fights out of it. Of which, a Quarry fight would have been one of the best.

In fact, it's SUCH a good fantasy match up that one is compelled to think of it in terms of a three fight series rather than a one off contest. And, they're so well matched at their best that we'd pretty much need another 30 rounds to work with after the initial 15!

Holyfield was 6-2.5, 205-212, huge heart, great skills, extremely quick hands, accurate puncher, combative, would not be bullied by anyone - EVER. If Holyfield had a weakness it is that he could easily be enticed into a brawl.

For that reason, Joe Frazier would probably be his toughest 70s fight. Holyfield had a variety of punches and he could fight outside as well as inside. He would probably find a way to deal with Frazier's hook (probably by going to his left when Frazier leaned to his left as he did with Tyson). A tough fight, but Holyfield should be able to win with his variety of skills.

I see Holyfield handling Ali. Ali was versatile, but so was Holyfield. Ali would not be able to get any psychological adavantage over Holyfield. Holyfield is probably the strongest fighter mentally that Ali would ever face. Holyfield could pressure Ali and he would be able to box with Ali if Ali wanted to box. Ali had no inside game so he would try to hold Holyfield on the inside and nobody bullied Evander. Ali would find it painful to hold and stall vs. Holyfield. Holyfield would probably let him experience a few head butts to stop the holding. Ali didn't have the punch to bother Holyfield and Holyfield would pressure him as Norton and Frazer did but Holyfield has a much more versatile arsenal. I can't see Ali beating Holyfield.

DaveV17 wrote:Holyfield was 6-2.5, 205-212, huge heart, great skills, extremely quick hands, accurate puncher, combative, would not be bullied by anyone - EVER. If Holyfield had a weakness it is that he could easily be enticed into a brawl.

For that reason, Joe Frazier would probably be his toughest 70s fight. Holyfield had a variety of punches and he could fight outside as well as inside. He would probably find a way to deal with Frazier's hook (probably by going to his left when Frazier leaned to his left as he did with Tyson). A tough fight, but Holyfield should be able to win with his variety of skills.

I see Holyfield handling Ali. Ali was versatile, but so was Holyfield. Ali would not be able to get any psychological adavantage over Holyfield. Holyfield is probably the strongest fighter mentally that Ali would ever face. Holyfield could pressure Ali and he would be able to box with Ali if Ali wanted to box. Ali had no inside game so he would try to hold Holyfield on the inside and nobody bullied Evander. Ali would find it painful to hold and stall vs. Holyfield. Holyfield would probably let him experience a few head butts to stop the holding. Ali didn't have the punch to bother Holyfield and Holyfield would pressure him as Norton and Frazer did but Holyfield has a much more versatile arsenal. I can't see Ali beating Holyfield.

Haha, Holyfield by your picture is frikkin' super-man. I don't see someone who was outboxed by fat light HW Michael Moorer exactly outboxing Muhammad Ali from the outside.

No-one bullied Evander? Bowe pretty much layed right in the inside with Evander and gave him a country whupping. And of course you'll say Bowe beats everyone in the 70s in the first round, but I remember Bowe barely beating a past it Tony Tubbs, who was extremely similar to . . .Buster Mathis.

Yes I tend to favor older fighters . . you simply dismiss them all as crap in your little fantasyland head of yours. No-one can take you seriously.

Ambling Alp wrote:dempseyfire- Do I think Holyfield would beat Frazier and the Greatest? Probably not. If either one of them was a little off, I think Holyfield could pull it off. Let me it this way, there would be a better chance of Holyfield beating those guys than Quarry of beating Holyfield. Holyfield would be much more competitive than Quarry was.

As for Norton, I have never bought the arguement that Quarry was clearly washed up. I think this is revisionist history. There doesn't seem to be evidence that he was way past it. Quarry was only 29, which isn't old at all, especially for a heavyweight. This was only 9 months after he fought Frazier the 2nd time, and a little more than a year after he beat Shavers. Norton won because he was a much better fighter than Quarry.
You can argue that maybe Quarry was starting to slide, but there was no way that he was that far past his best. He certainly should have been able to do better against Norton than he did.

I think that Holyfield would beat Norton in a tough fight; he certainly wouldn't have been stopped in 5 rounds.

The names that mentioed concerning Quarry -Ellis,Mathis,Lyle,Shavers, Chuvalo; Well first of all, Quarry lost to 2 of these guys. Dokes was better Mathis, and Bowe and Tyson were better than Lyle and Shavers.

A 34 year old Holyfield beat a 30 year old Tyson; that is much more impressive than any win Quarry ever had. Same with Bowe.

Holyfield is going to beat Quarry 9 out of 10 times. Everything would have to fall into place for Quarry to win. He would have to be "on" Holyfield would have to be "off" just for him to have a chance.

Come on, you can't go by age in boxing. Quarry had started with tough competition very early, and yes took lots of punishment throughout his career. Like for example Pacquao, by 30 he was pretty much done. These days Heavyweights don't start fighting top 20 opponents until they're 28-29. Holyfield didn't even get to HW until he was 26. By that age Quarry had already fought Ali, Frazier, Chuvalo, Machen, Patterson twice, Ellis, Spencer, Foster etc.

I don't rate the Tyson Holyfield beat very highly, the magnitude of that win was due to his pre-prison reputation. King made sure Tyson didn't get his ass handed to him by Lewis so had him go through the realm of paper champs before fighting a seemingly washed up Holyfield. I definitely see that Tyson not only losing, but getting knocked out by the Lyle Quarry beat. I also don't see the recovering coke addict Dokes as being better than a prime Mathis. Bowe is extremely hard to gauge in terms of a fantasy matchup. Yes he looked great in the first Holyfield fight but other than that only looked impressive vs glass-chinned pretenders (Gonzalez, Seldon, Hide)

DF wrote:"No-one bullied Evander? Bowe pretty much layed right in the inside with Evander and gave him a country whupping. "

I imagine in your fantasyland, Ali was as big as Bowe and as good or better as an infighter. By the way, do you still see Jess Willard beating Bowe and/or Lewis?.