Say Cooney fights Weaver instead of Larry for the title. Who wins? I’m picking Weaver- he lands that left and Cooney gets KO.
Cooney by early stoppage Weaver was a notoriously slow starter, and I don't think Weaver would be allowed to get into the fight. On flip side theres always possibility that Weaver weathers the early storm, then drags Cooney into deep waters and drowns him. But I'd favour Cooney early in all honesty.
Coetzee is better than Cooney & he open up real hard on Weaver early on & did not win have to go with proved fighter Weaver is proved many times winner with tops level heavyweight & Cooney is not proved like this
If Cooney lands solidly enough early, Weaver is done. But I see Weaver possibly taking Cooney into deeper waters. Weaver stops him after the 13th round.
Everything you say is true. But it’s only half the story. For as good as mike weaver was, he also lost to lesser men. Needed some come from behind wins in fights that he was losing. And the size gap between him in Cooney would be greater than it was with some of the better guys he fought. For all his shortcomings, Gerry Cooney was a fast starter who punched very hard. It’s possible that Weaver COULD win. But it would most likely have to come later. And the amount of punishment he’d likely sustain early on would narrow his chances
This is a good observation and a balanced take. Weaver has several early round KO losses. He had that odd chin where he was vulnerable early, but once he warmed up he could be a force of nature with improved durability. I wouldn't bet on it happening here tho. Cooney on the other hand was a fast starter and would target both body and head with vicious combinations and underrated inside skills for a tall man. On paper you'd have to favor Cooney because of the matchup, especially because both guys favorite punch is the hook and you should never trade hooks with people. Cooney by KO within 1-3 at least 60% of the time. Kind of a bad matchup.
Mike Weaver, God bless him, is really good person but, skill wise, was not that good. But he got into a state where he worked very hard and achieved some success because he was a heavyweight. The heavyweight division has, since the late 70s , been the home of slackers. For a minute there Mike didn't slack. Now, Cooney, though he didn't win a title, peaked higher than Mike. He would have beat John Tate pretty easily. At his best, the day he got in the ring with Holmes, he would stop Weaver in 2.
Cooney was ruined by addiction, like so many other good 80's heavies. I would pick him at his best, but character matters, so I say Weaver has the better odds.
much you say here is not true. most is wrong. also you patronise towards Weaver. essentially it appears Cooney ' validation "" comes mainly from a " gallant Loss ' with Holmes. & even in this area Weaver has done better also. Cooney is about nothing opposition in career except loss to Holmes & win with fading Young. yes, he can punch. Weaver also can punch. & Weaver has excellent jab & is skilled boxer also. learned the craft coming up from the lower levels as opponent & clubfights. Cooney " would have beat John Tate pretty easily" is just the ' complete BS "". with respect
Cooney never did it what you imagine. the only " live ' ' top boxer he went against with. Holmes. not the great start. down knocked early round 2. . & Holmes was not power-punch type boxer. &what else? Young. who is passing the prime & a nothing puncher. Cooney reputation based on destroying ' corpse "" Lyle & Norton. is all.& loss to Holmes Weaver went against a lot of top boxers & some mixed results . Tate, Coetzee & Tillis win run better by far anything Cooney will ever do. & consistency in the high level from 1979 to 1985. even pass his peak he made good fight with Pinklon Thomas & he KO Carl Williams in 2 round. superior boxer clear
