January 2002 - July 2006 - The Jerry Quarry Foundation

look so easy. |
|9/9/03 11:29:36
AM|Roadscholarette|Chicago||roadscholarette@hotmail.com||||10|Angelo - I agree
re different sorts of displays. I love watching a couple of really good
fighters, and would any day over a couple of cavemen. What I think most fans
find most compelling though are the skillful fighters who also reach back to the
world of the Neanderthal. While timing and great athletic ability and skill
enter in, many of the best contests are more ~fights~ than boxing.
Have to disagree with you ,Road'ette. Jerry clearly, to me at
least, was a better boxer than Joe, and his combination of
aggressive counterpunching and slugging had Joe behind early in
both fights.>I think Jerry was a more complete fighter than Joe (and
Ali), though not better in the ring, fighting. Practice of fundamentals vs
execution, IOW.Quarry did everything right fundamentally. Can anyone find a flaw
in his skills? I do see Frazier as the harder puncher, and he was faster. His
jooka-jooka, grinding, give a punch, bob a punch, slip a punch, whap a punch was
a style like the word "boxing" sounds. Frazier rarely won early rounds (which
would have been Mike Tyson's best, and probably only chance to take him). Quarry
forced Joe to shift into high gear in the first round of their first fight, one
that Jerry won anyway. He made Joe pick it up a gear and put the
less-conditioned Quarry away in fightI. A wicked body shot badly
hurt Jerry in fight II, or Jerry would have had a chance to win by
boxing Joe, who he hit often. >I dunno about that. By the time of the
body punch, Frazier had clicked into that deadly rhythm, and it wasn't too long
after that that Joe actually backed away from JQ, waiting for the uncertain Joe
Louis to stop the fight, which people in the crowd were yelling for him to do.
Frazier took Quarry seriously, but I think this would have always turned out, in
ten times, with about the same results as Frazier-Foreman.Don't
agree Jerry was better boxer
than Ali, especially defensively.>Ali had better native physical talent,
but not considering that, I think on a neutral checklist of what each did right
and what they did wrong, Quarry would have come out ahead. He just couldn't
execute on the same level Ali could. A fighter with less talent than Ali would
have found himself in real trouble, and often. I do think Jerry was
actually a better athlete, as
his 'Superstars' performances indicate. Ali had
a birth defect in his left foot, which hindered him not at all in the
ring, but kept out of other sports, I believe. Guys, can you confirm
this for me?>I never knew that about his foot. I read once that Knicks
players were impressed by Ali's natural physical giftedness. I don't think Ali
ever did anything else, though I think he would have been good at most sports he
dedicated himself to to the degree that he did boxing. My husband said the same
was true with Frazier (who also did nothing else, sports-wise) in the Super
Stars - he darned near drowned in the pool. Didn't Jerry play other sports?
Bodies build up memories, and the more things a person does, the more well
rounded they become - like the old saying about learning to ride a bicycle. You
never forget how.Frazier vs Shavers? Joe, no question. Shavers had the
Big One, but nothing else that could have competed on a level with the vast
array of things Frazier would have brought to the fight. |
|9/9/03 01:48:45 PM|Kent|La Habra, Ca||kentallenent@aol.com||||10|Jerry did have
some flaws, technically. He held his hands too low at times and he also stood
too upright for a short fighter in some of his fights. But it is true he had
more skills than most of the general public thought he had. He was not just
some brawler who only could go toe to toe and hope for the best.I don't
agree that Foreman would beat Frazier ten out of ten times. Joe just got caught
early and he never recovered in the first fight and in the second fight Joe was
a shell of his former self. To have a chance to beat Foreman, a fighter