Should Jerry Quarry be in the HOF?

[RozzySean]

To use that logic we should throw Willard and Braddock out of the HOF. The standard has been set. You can't unring a bell. I had Quarry beating Ellis in a very close fight. He is most noted for two losses to Ali which was the greatest champion of all time. Frazier loss to Ali and Foreman two times each. Does that mean he shouldn't be in the hall? The bottom line is we must look at the era in which he fought. To let other fighters in the hall with spoty records in a much weaker era is a crime.

Keep in mind as you read this that I'm talking about the Braddock that emerged from his days working on the docks. The other version is a different story (though still a quality fighter).

No, not really. Willard and Braddock actually won the undisputed championship. Quarry never did. I wouldn't like Quarry's chances against Max Baer. If you had a gun to my head and asked who has a better chance against Marciano, Quarry or Braddock, I would give Braddock the better chance, and heads up Quarry vs Braddock, I would pick Braddock.

Quarry also lost lots of other big fights, and he was beaten soundly by three totally different styles. It's not like one type of boxer was his downfall.

I give all love and respect to Quarry, I really do. He's a guy who really suffered for the lack of a cruiserweight division. Heavyweights were getting bigger at his time - most were 210-220 and he rarely came in at over 200. He would mop the floor with any of the current cruisers and the old CW's I can see beating him at CW are Toney and Holyfield.

Actually, if you going to make a case for Quarry in the hall, that is the best argument you can make. He was cursed with being a 'tweener (too big for LHW, too small for HW), but he made a great career staying in the top 5-10 for so long fighting bigger men.

[DaxxKahn]

I would vote yes, Jerry fought in the HW divisions golden era, he has quality wins, people tend to forget that in that particular era the CONTENDERS were heads above the champions of most any other era....

Jerry holds wins over guys like Floyd Patterson, first man to beat Ron Lyle, Earnie shavers to name a few,...he was a top notch fighter with huge heart

Also he was a big part of that eras history...

People tend to forget that the HOF is not just for champions and not only for the truly elite...The HOF is for fighters who gave to the sport more then others...Jerry gave all he had....He was in some important bouts...It is about fighters who played important parts of history...Jerry fit those criteria

[mrbig1]

I would vote yes, Jerry fought in the HW divisions golden era, he has quality wins, people tend to forget that in that particular era the CONTENDERS were heads above the champions of most any other era....

Jerry holds wins over guys like Floyd Patterson, first man to beat Ron Lyle, Earnie shavers to name a few,...he was a top notch fighter with huge heart

Also he was a big part of that eras history...

People tend to forget that the HOF is not just for champions and not only for the truly elite...The HOF is for fighters who gave to the sport more then others...Jerry gave all he had....He was in some important bouts...It is about fighters who played important parts of history...Jerry fit those criteria

Could not have said it better. It's time to put Jerry where he belongs. In the HOF.

[C-Lo]

Really? I never thought of Jerry Quarry as an elite fighter. More of someone who hung in there with the best.

I wonder how Quarry would be doing in today's heavyweight picture...

[Trainer Monkey]

Really? I never thought of Jerry Quarry as an elite fighter. More of someone who hung in there with the best.

I wonder how Quarry would be doing in today's heavyweight picture...

Wearing a belt

[Kev]

I would vote yes, Jerry fought in the HW divisions golden era, he has quality wins, people tend to forget that in that particular era the CONTENDERS were heads above the champions of most any other era....

Jerry holds wins over guys like Floyd Patterson, first man to beat Ron Lyle, Earnie shavers to name a few,...he was a top notch fighter with huge heart

Also he was a big part of that eras history...

People tend to forget that the HOF is not just for champions and not only for the truly elite...The HOF is for fighters who gave to the sport more then others...Jerry gave all he had....He was in some important bouts...It is about fighters who played important parts of history...Jerry fit those criteria

Not disagreeing with this but are there any Hall of Fame fighters who didn't win a world title? I'm talking post war here, not great black fighters like Sam Langford who never got a title shot in the old days on account of their colour.

[DaxxKahn]

I would vote yes, Jerry fought in the HW divisions golden era, he has quality wins, people tend to forget that in that particular era the CONTENDERS were heads above the champions of most any other era....

Jerry holds wins over guys like Floyd Patterson, first man to beat Ron Lyle, Earnie shavers to name a few,...he was a top notch fighter with huge heart

Also he was a big part of that eras history...

People tend to forget that the HOF is not just for champions and not only for the truly elite...The HOF is for fighters who gave to the sport more then others...Jerry gave all he had....He was in some important bouts...It is about fighters who played important parts of history...Jerry fit those criteria

Not disagreeing with this but are there any Hall of Fame fighters who didn't win a world title? I'm talking post war here, not great black fighters like Sam Langford who never got a title shot in the old days on account of their colour.

I understand what you are saying mate...was not referring to your post with mine just saying in general people tend to think that...

I had actually tackled that topic in my top 25 list in the top 100 of all time thread...When I put Sam Langford in my top 10 of all time

[rjj tszyu]

Tough one! Maybe because in pretty much any other era he would have been one of the major players. I'm not saying definite world champ but in this day and age he would more than likely at least pick up a strap.

[mrbig1]

Jess Wilard was known for beating a tired old Johnson and taking the worst beating in boxing history. He's in the HOF! Understand the standard has been set already. You can't unring a bell. Jerry Quarry is better than Braddock and Wilard. It's not like baseball where a player has to have 500 HR or 3,000 hits. There is no real standard. Jerry belongs in the hall.

[Kev]

Jess Wilard was known for beating a tired old Johnson and taking the worst beating in boxing history. He's in the HOF! Understand the standard has been set already. You can't unring a bell. Jerry Quarry is better than Braddock and Wilard. It's not like baseball where a player has to have 500 HR or 3,000 hits. There is no real standard. Jerry belongs in the hall.

Yeah but as has already been noted both Wilard and Braddock meant much more to boxing history than Quarry did.

Also both Willard and Braddock were undisputed heavyweight champs, Quarrey never was.

[mrbig1]

Jess Wilard was known for beating a tired old Johnson and taking the worst beating in boxing history. He's in the HOF! Understand the standard has been set already. You can't unring a bell. Jerry Quarry is better than Braddock and Wilard. It's not like baseball where a player has to have 500 HR or 3,000 hits. There is no real standard. Jerry belongs in the hall.

Yeah but as has already been noted both Wilard and Braddock meant much more to boxing history than Quarry did.

Also both Willard and Braddock were undisputed heavyweight champs, Quarrey never was.

Man come on. I think we both know Quarry would have been champion in their era. We must look at the era at which they fought. Quarry era was much,much tougher that Braddock or Wilard.

[Kev]

Jess Wilard was known for beating a tired old Johnson and taking the worst beating in boxing history. He's in the HOF! Understand the standard has been set already. You can't unring a bell. Jerry Quarry is better than Braddock and Wilard. It's not like baseball where a player has to have 500 HR or 3,000 hits. There is no real standard. Jerry belongs in the hall.

Yeah but as has already been noted both Wilard and Braddock meant much more to boxing history than Quarry did.

Also both Willard and Braddock were undisputed heavyweight champs, Quarrey never was.

Man come on. I think we both know Quarry would have been champion in their era. We must look at the era at which they fought. Quarry era was much,much tougher that Braddock or Wilard.

I don't really see why at all to be honest. The Hall of Fame is for those fighters who best in their era or who occupied a cherished place in boxing history. You can't put someone in the Hall based on what you 'think' their acomplishments would have been in another era its ridiculous.

In that case Harry Simon should be in there because he would have definitely won world titles if he hadn't have ended up in jail, or maybe Davey Moore who would surely have gone on to do great things had not Roberto Duran ruined him.

The Hall is based on actual acomplishments not hypothetical matchups between fighters of different eras.

[mrbig1]

So using that logic Larry Bird shouldn't be in the basketball HOF because he was only the 2nd or 3rd best player at the time. Quarry being put in the hall is not only about him but the era in which he fought. Ali,Frazier,Foreman,Lyle,Shaver,or Norton. Larry Holmes once said that this era was the best from top to bottom in the history of the sport.

[RozzySean]

Jess Wilard was known for beating a tired old Johnson and taking the worst beating in boxing history. He's in the HOF! Understand the standard has been set already. You can't unring a bell. Jerry Quarry is better than Braddock and Wilard. It's not like baseball where a player has to have 500 HR or 3,000 hits. There is no real standard. Jerry belongs in the hall.

Yeah but as has already been noted both Wilard and Braddock meant much more to boxing history than Quarry did.

Also both Willard and Braddock were undisputed heavyweight champs, Quarrey never was.

Man come on. I think we both know Quarry would have been champion in their era. We must look at the era at which they fought. Quarry era was much,much tougher that Braddock or Wilard.

No, we don't. Braddock was never KO'd and stopped only once on cuts and they were fighting without chambered gloves at the time. He fought half his career with a broken hand. Quarry was KO'd 6 times. There is no way you can say Quarry was TOUGHER than Braddock.

[mrbig1]

Yeah but as has already been noted both Wilard and Braddock meant much more to boxing history than Quarry did.

Also both Willard and Braddock were undisputed heavyweight champs, Quarrey never was.

Man come on. I think we both know Quarry would have been champion in their era. We must look at the era at which they fought. Quarry era was much,much tougher that Braddock or Wilard.

No, we don't. Braddock was never KO'd and stopped only once on cuts and they were fighting without chambered gloves at the time. He fought half his career with a broken hand. Quarry was KO'd 6 times. There is no way you can say Quarry was TOUGHER than Braddock.

You do know Braddock has loss 26 times right?