Mike Weaver vs Gerry Cooney (1982)

If Weaver survives the early rounds, he takes Cooney out late, but he may well not survive the early rounds.

True 50/50.

 

Only 2 scenarios.

Either Cooney jumps on Weaver and finishes him early.

Or Weaver weathers the early storm and stops Cooney late.

Weaver could be a slow starter so there's definitely a window of opportunity there for Cooney.

But Weaver was a very good distance fighter aswell, where as Cooney hasn't showed the same feats in the 2nd half of the fight.

It's not a fight I'd like to bet on put it that way.

 

Cooney’s team actually did go for Weaver’s WBA title first … but it didn’t happen because a court injunction forced Weaver to fight James Tillis instead.

It was a Bob Arum power move. He didn’t control Cooney but he did control Tillis. And he controlled the WBA (he admitted candidly to sending sacks of money to WBA honchos to make various fights).

Oddly, Weaver was obligated to make a mandatory defense and Cooney was No. 1 in the WBA. Arum forced a meeting of the board. Weaver’s attorney attended but was not allowed to speak. Arum ‘persuaded’ the WBA that Tillis should get the shot instead and the courts backed the WBA ruling (in effect saying it’s their title and you have to play by their rules or they can take it away), which meant the contract for Weaver vs Cooney wasn’t enforceable until after that fight had taken place.

By that time, Cooney had signed to fight Holmes. Weaver got an injunction to halt ticket sales for Holmes-Cooney until he could make his case at a hearing that his contract with Cooney was still enforceable (after the Tillis defense was done) but a few days later the judge ruled that Holmes-Cooney could go forward and Weaver didn’t have a case (basically the date for his Cooney contract had passed so he had no leg to stand on, legally).

As for if it happened, Weaver as noted was a slow starter and Cooney a fast starter. I think Gerry jumps on him and bombs him out for a TKO early.

 

The third scenario is that Weaver catches Cooney during his fastish start and gets him out of there.

Weaver is far more proven but he will have to be ready to roll early as he was in the Dokes rematch. Weaver could also take a good punch during his best few years. He took Coetzee's right hands and came back to pole axe him.

I'll favour Weaver and give Cooney a good punchers chance.

 

Like others have said, this a true 50/50 fight. Anyone else look back on this era of heavyweights and think it was underrated? The 70's and 90's get a lot of love but the early 80's had a lot of talent as well.

 

Probably this. Weaver at his best was excellent.

 

Most fighters would have prospered from the experience Cooney garnered against Holmes. He put forth a good showing vs a conservative Holmes and the stoppage was hardly traumatic a far as stoppages go. The trouble was he was mentally weak and capitulated after the loss. Admittedly it was no ordinary loss as the whole black vs white hope and media/fan interest was out of this world. Sure, he also had some family history and the like. There was a lot of talk about Cooney not wanting to fight this guy or that guy and being quite negative, or something like that. If he was strong mentally he would have come out the other side a better competitor.

He's a great bloke tho. I'm glad he's still around boxing and loving it. What did he say, he didn't really know how to fight until after he'd finished fighting? He's an interesting story.

 

Cooney. And I like him big in this.

Just do not like the Weaver defense against those brutal left hooks early. And that left uppercut may have been an even more dangerous punch for Mike to absorb.

I just think the crowd is behind Cooney and this is another one of those bouts where he can be devastatingly effective. Weaver will be right in front of him w/ a big reach disadvantage and Mike is hardly a twinkletoes in there.So his mobility and footwork won't bail him out. And he'd have to be fully sweated up during the referee instructions. And that was another thing Weaver was hardly the best at doing.

 

That is a pathetic quote by Cooney. His management made him great money for a fighter who was flawed and could lose at any time.

 

I lean towards Weaver, the more proven fighter.

 

Cooney being a fast starter and a huge puncher would give him an edge over weaver who was much smaller and tended to start off slow. But weaver also proved he could overcome big men who could punch over the long duration of a fight such as Tate, Coetzee and Mercado. So I supposed this could end in a couple of different ways. I selected Cooney to win on the polls but not with too much conviction. Hercules was a hard competitor forged in some very hot fires. I would never count him out.

 

Weaver-Cooney was definitely signed:

https://www.upi.com/Archives/1981/0...ght-bout-scheduled-for-October/4344362635200/

Maybe they’re saying they should have waited until after Weaver-Tillis and gone forward with that?

Thing is, Weaver was a bit of a mess at that time. He beat Gerrie Coetzee and didn’t fight again until Tillis a year later, then didn’t fight again until 14 months after that vs Michael Dokes.

He was trying to get past some sort of promotional options with Arum and also, I think, trying to get out from under his management at the time. So maybe that tied him up until some contracts expired.