09.12.2012 Views

January 2002 - July 2006 - The Jerry Quarry Foundation

January 2002 - July 2006 - The Jerry Quarry Foundation

January 2002 - July 2006 - The Jerry Quarry Foundation

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

and 50% a slip. I think that Holyfield did beat Tyson fair and square in<br />

the first fight. He gave him a good whipping. I don't know who would have won a<br />

Tyson-Holyfield in 1991. <strong>The</strong> Mac Foster knockdown was similar to the<br />

Shavers knockdown. JQ could hit guys with wonderful flurries of punches. Maybe<br />

he wasn't a one punch knockout artist, but his killer instinct was<br />

awesome.I think that now Laila Ali' vs Mike Tyson would be a good<br />

matchup. Tyson's career is over. He should have retired after the first fight<br />

with Holyfield. He doesn't need money. If even Bill Gates gave him all his<br />

property, after a week Mike Tyson would already be full of debits. He would buy<br />

51 tigers, 43 Ferrari etc. I am afraid about his health. He should quit his ring<br />

career. I don't want him to become an invalid.Ernie-Now I see<br />

what kvetch means ! It's not even in the dictionary. Now I'm gonna use it to<br />

whip Italian asses.|<br />

|8/6/04 05:59:19 AM|Evren|London||@||||10|Ernie - <strong>The</strong> Irish boxing scene is very<br />

dire, unfortunately. <strong>The</strong>re are very few 'Irish' fighters out there. Kevin<br />

McBride is an 'Irish' guy, you have Noel Magee at Super Middle and Eammon Magee<br />

at Junior Welter - who was recently badly injured in a gangland attack. <strong>The</strong>re<br />

were very few shows held in Ireland in the last few years.Shavers vs Simms<br />

was a good brawl and the Holmes vs Weaver fight was a great one.|<br />

|8/6/04 11:47:02 AM|Mike|Philly||Yammagamma300||||10|Fran -Whats your point ?<br />

About what fights we saw live, I saw alot of fights live, so what.that don't<br />

give me any advantage over anyone. |<br />

|8/6/04 04:06:12 PM|Kent|La Habra, Ca||kentallenent@aol.com||||10|I see a lot of<br />

fights live and it does give someone a different perspective than seeing boxing<br />

on T.V. Some punches that seem strong in person don't look as good on T.V. and<br />

vice versa, where some don't look so good live and look better on T.V. <strong>The</strong><br />

cheering of the crowd can influence how a person sees a fight, the announcers on<br />

T.V. do the same for the home viewers. Different camera angles can also change<br />

how effective punches look just as a person sitting in another a section of an<br />

arena can see a punch differently. Another thing, someone can look away for a<br />

split second at a live fight and miss an important punch or moment in a fight<br />

and the fans and media often don't have the luxury of instant replay that is on<br />

most broadcasts.Seeing boxing live is not better than watching it on<br />

television it is just different. But I prefer live as there is no way a<br />

television can convey the atmosphere surrounding a fight card. This is an<br />

experience that all fight fans should experience.|<br />

|8/6/04 05:26:59 PM|Massimo|Roma||4||||10|Kent-I'd like to know<br />

something more about the subject "how to judge a round". I don't know that much<br />

about that. For instance, what is the minimum that a fighter has to do to win a<br />

round if the other fighter doesn't do anything ? Do you think that an hard punch<br />

to the face is enough to win a round ? And what about a couple of jabs ? Or a<br />

couple of body punches ? How do you judge the second round of Frazier-Bonavena 1<br />

? 2 or 3 points for Bonavena ? I know that the judges in America almost never<br />

declare a round a draw. I think this is a mistake, because in this way it<br />

can happen that a fight with (or having) many close rounds can be scored very<br />

differently by the judges.Thanks |<br />

|8/6/04 11:13:42 PM|Ernie Laxalt|Reno, NV||elax66@aol.com||||10|Massimo, I've<br />

wondered about "the in's and out's" (that is, the whole subject, including<br />

nuances) of scoring, too. When we were kids in California in the 50s and 60s,<br />

they always announced they were using the California Simplified Scoring System.<br />

I don't know if it was designed this way, but in practice, it always meant 10<br />

for a winner of a round, 9 for the loser. If you got your man in real trouble or<br />

knocked him down, you'd win 10-8. I suppose if you really messed him up, knocked<br />

him down a couple of times, maybe until the bell saved him, then you might get<br />

an 10-7 round. At the end, the 2 judges and the referee counted the totals.<br />

As to HOW you scored, I always did it in a mostly intuitive way, looking for<br />

who dominated the round, who landed more effected punches, whose plan seemed to

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!