Should Jerry Quarry be in the HOF?

[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.

[Kev]

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.

Quarry never won ANYTHING though, he even failed to win the NABF title.

Just becuase he fought the best doesnt mean he should be in the Hall of Fame, he didn't beat of them and that's the point.

John Ruiz has much more claim seriously a two time world champ one of the few in boxing's illustrious history, only stopped once in his entire career. Great trilogy with Evander Holyfield.

If you put Quarry in the HOF you have to open the door for a whole slew of other fighters. Let's keep it exclusive,

[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.

Quarry never won ANYTHING though, he even failed to win the NABF title.

Just becuase he fought the best doesnt mean he should be in the Hall of Fame, he didn't beat of them and that's the point.

John Ruiz has much more claim seriously a two time world champ one of the few in boxing's illustrious history, only stopped once in his entire career. Great trilogy with Evander Holyfield.

If you put Quarry in the HOF you have to open the door for a whole slew of other fighters. Let's keep it exclusive,

I agree, We should keep it exclusive,But you can't unring a bell. The standard has already been set.

[Kev]

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.

Quarry never won ANYTHING though, he even failed to win the NABF title.

Just becuase he fought the best doesnt mean he should be in the Hall of Fame, he didn't beat of them and that's the point.

John Ruiz has much more claim seriously a two time world champ one of the few in boxing's illustrious history, only stopped once in his entire career. Great trilogy with Evander Holyfield.

If you put Quarry in the HOF you have to open the door for a whole slew of other fighters. Let's keep it exclusive,

I agree, We should keep it exclusive,But you can't unring a bell. The standard has already been set.

Who less deserving than Jerry Quarry is in the Hall? Even Barry McGuigan was a world champ

I just don't see how any post war modern era fighter can be in the Hall of Fame if they never even won a belt.

You mentioned Larry Bird in an earlier post but he's won a bunch of awards and had held many basketball records, widely regarded as one of the best ever.

Can you really say the same for Quarry who fought the best but lost to them all and didn't even win so much as a NABF strap?

[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?

[Galaxy]

I think so!

He fought the best fighters of his era (arguably the best era ever)

You got guys like Johannson (RIP) in there, then I think its only fitting to put a tough SOB like Quarry in there too!

[Galaxy]

IMO if you put Quarry in any other era he could have & probably would have been among top guys... I think that says a lot about him!

[Kev]

IMO if you put Quarry in any other era he could have & probably would have been among top guys... I think that says a lot about him!

You could say that about putting Tim Witherspoon in the current era though, it's irelevent.

You can't put someone in the Hall of Fame based on how you think they might have done in a different era, the Hall of Fame is about ACTUAL acomplishments not fantasy

[Galaxy]

IMO if you put Quarry in any other era he could have & probably would have been among top guys... I think that says a lot about him!

You could say that about putting Tim Witherspoon in the current era though, it's irelevent.

You can't put someone in the Hall of Fame based on how you think they might have done in a different era, the Hall of Fame is about ACTUAL acomplishments not fantasy

Agree & imo how Quarry performed in what is arguably the best heavyweight era ever is an accomplishment within itself...

Johnannson is in there, Braddock is in there & I feel Quaary should be too