Jerry Quarry vs Marco Huck
-
Cojimar 1946
- Super Welterweight
- Posts: 1692
- Joined: 01 Mar 2015, 05:00
Jerry Quarry vs Marco Huck
Who wins over 12?
-
HomicideHenry
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 18722
- Joined: 08 Sep 2005, 00:43
Re: Jerry Quarry vs Marco Huck
Jerry Quarry is one of those guys who gets talked about so often he becomes overrated, unfortunately. I used to hear it all the time, "If he was only fighting in a different era he would have been world champion," but I'm not so sure about that.
I think he would have been a top 10 contender in most heavyweight eras, but he simply would have been too small for the current era too--- which is why I like the fact you have him matched up with one of the more recent cruiserweight champions.
Huck lost to the likes of Steve Cunningham and Alexander Povetkin, the former by knockout and the latter by close majority decision. He also lost to Oleksandr Usyk. But he did have some pretty good wins against Ran Nakash and Denis Lebedev.
All in all it seemed to me he wasn't the best cruiserweight around even though he had a lot of title defenses, and his success at heavyweight was not all that good.
Quarry had losses to Ali (twice), Frazier (twice), Norton, Chuvalo, Ellis, and Machen. However, he had wins against Shavers, Patterson, Spencer, London, Mathis and Lyle. Even the old, shopworn, out of shape Quarry was able to come back to stop Lorenzo Zanon who would fight Larry Holmes for the title three years later.
Huck was a tough man, but so was Quarry. Huck may have boxed better, but Quarry was more ferocious. Huck may have had double digit title defenses, but one can argue Huck fought in a comparatively weak era of cruiserweights whereas Quarry was a top ten contender through much of the 1970s. I'd say that evens it out in terms of accomplishments.
Whether it be 12 or 15 rounds, I think Quarry comes back to pour it on in the final stanzas to grab himself a decision. I figure Huck survives the early Quarry onslaught, and wins the middle rounds, but Quarry rebounds. "Rematch!," is the word being thrown around afterwards.
I think he would have been a top 10 contender in most heavyweight eras, but he simply would have been too small for the current era too--- which is why I like the fact you have him matched up with one of the more recent cruiserweight champions.
Huck lost to the likes of Steve Cunningham and Alexander Povetkin, the former by knockout and the latter by close majority decision. He also lost to Oleksandr Usyk. But he did have some pretty good wins against Ran Nakash and Denis Lebedev.
All in all it seemed to me he wasn't the best cruiserweight around even though he had a lot of title defenses, and his success at heavyweight was not all that good.
Quarry had losses to Ali (twice), Frazier (twice), Norton, Chuvalo, Ellis, and Machen. However, he had wins against Shavers, Patterson, Spencer, London, Mathis and Lyle. Even the old, shopworn, out of shape Quarry was able to come back to stop Lorenzo Zanon who would fight Larry Holmes for the title three years later.
Huck was a tough man, but so was Quarry. Huck may have boxed better, but Quarry was more ferocious. Huck may have had double digit title defenses, but one can argue Huck fought in a comparatively weak era of cruiserweights whereas Quarry was a top ten contender through much of the 1970s. I'd say that evens it out in terms of accomplishments.
Whether it be 12 or 15 rounds, I think Quarry comes back to pour it on in the final stanzas to grab himself a decision. I figure Huck survives the early Quarry onslaught, and wins the middle rounds, but Quarry rebounds. "Rematch!," is the word being thrown around afterwards.
Re: Jerry Quarry vs Marco Huck
Overall, Huck could win that fight. He was able to win Povetkin, although he was robbed. Of course, Quarry was very tough and had a chance to pull out a KO win, as Huck sometimes blew it in a good or even fights, the Cunningham and Glowacki bouts illustrate that. However, there would be more chances of Huck winning.