January 2002 - July 2006 - The Jerry Quarry Foundation

popularity, and also raise public consciousness. Responses?|
|1/2/04 04:57:22 AM|Kent|La Habra, Ca||kentallenent@aol.com||||10|Some good
points Gerry. I especially agree with doing away with PPV except for the
biggest possible fight in a given year. Ironically, by trying to cash in on
PPV, the boxing industry is limiting the amount of money they could make in the
long run because the broader the appeal of a sport, the bigger the audience and
the more money to be made. PPV, by its very nature limits wide spread
appeal.A fair ranking system is a good idea and I have some ideas of my
own. The problem with making ranking fairer is promoters would lose control of
the sport and they will fight it with all of the influence they have. The
sanctioning bodies would also lose power, so they are agaisnt it. It doesn't
mean we can't point out the problems and work towards fixing them. I
will map out my ideas on how a ranking system can be run in another upcoming
post.|
|1/2/04 10:34:25
AM|Roadscholarette|Chicago||roadscholarette@hotmail.com||||10|Everyone who goes
to a ballpark or tunes in to a game on TV isn't a rabid enthusiast, but is still
part of the fan base, and the same would be true of boxing, as it was in days
past, when fights were on TV, or people in big cities could actually go to one.
Most people today couldn't name more than a couple of fighters, and they'd
probably be Tyson and Ali, not necessarily for their boxing either.One
thing that hurts boxing enormously is that it's such a dangerous sport. I
suppose it's naive to ever hope for centralized authority, but if there was,
they could not only enforce fair matchups at appropriate times, but also
mandatory layoffs after knockouts (gym and in fights), as well as forced
retirement after X number of KOs in a given time frame, and after a total number
across a career, period. They could also go with headgear and large gloves,
though those don't afford the amount and type of protection people generally
think they do. Besides, denials aside, fans like the excitement afforded by the
possibility of a knockout. "We" humans are not as civilized or compassionate as
we like to congratulate ourselves on being.Boxing is a little like drugs
were when they started. When drugs weren't affecting rich white kids, nothing
was done, no one cared. They only became a crisis when they moved out into the
suburbs. Lots of people know there are problems in boxing, that it's corrupt,
unregulated, and that men get really messed up, but it's out of sight, out of
mind. The average person doesn't relate - they might have seen a bout or clips
on television, but they've never even been in a real fight, much less in the
ring. |
|1/2/04 11:37:21 AM|Massimo|Roma||4||||10|Yesterday I' ve seen Quarry-Shavers...
WOW !Quarry was unbelievable in that fight, what a fighter ! Probably he
wasn' t a one-punch knockout artist, but was fearless, with great hand speed and
great talent ! He humilieted Ernie Shavers !RS-What does it mean "
manifesto" ? ))))). No, I don' t need you for " manifesto" !|
|1/2/04 01:23:57
PM|Roadscholarette|Chicago||roadscholarette@hotmail.com||||10|Massimo -
Shavers himself admits that he was an underdeveloped fighter,
concentrating too much on his tremendous power, and not enough on technique. It
would figure that he'd have trouble with someone like Jerry Quarry, who was
impeccably skilled in boxing fundamentals, moves, tricks, and was more
experienced as well, and with better fighters. He caught Shavers, and Ernie
didn't have the wherewithal to recover. If Shavers had caught Jerry, it might
have been a different story, though JQ could almost certainly take a punch
better than ES."Ernie hit me so hard, he shook my ancestors in
Africa!" - Ali"If Ernie Shavers hit any harder, I'd shoot him!" -
Tex Cobb"I'm not going to fight you Ernie - you hit too hard!" - George
ForemanA manifesto is a body of belief, generally held to be true, but
in any event, a statement of intent and guiding principles, usually by a group