We all know the Holmes fight but in '87 Gerry challenged Michael Spinks who I believe was defending the Ring Magazine and Lineal title(s)...given that, is Cooney a 2-time challenger or 1-time because only fighting for an alphabet belt makes you a world championship challenger?
2 time because Spinks didn’t lose after the Holmes fight then he fought Coo-ney so Spinks was still holding the ring magazine titles when he fought Coo-ney.
Two time. Spinks wasn't a good champion, but he was the real champion. Tyson's managers acknowledged that. Spinks wasn't the first and won't be the last poor champion.
Spinks was not a poor champion, he was a legitimate champion. He defeated an all time great fighter and true world champion to become the Champion (probably as good or better than say the Jersey Joe Walcott that Rocky Marciano beat). At this time, he was the only legitimate World Champion. He defended it against the same guy. A legitimate title defence. Again, every bit as good as Marciano's defences against Walcott or even Charles. His problem was that from this point, his defences deteriorated. Neither Cooney or Tangsted were considered legitimate No 1 contenders and this combined with the Don King pushed unification tournament which he didnt enter meant that in the media, he actually lost the pretty much undisputed title due to picking easy opponents and sanctioning bodies actions. This was pretty much the first time i can think of this happening, though it would happen again in the future to others.
Spinks was champion, but most of the folks I know (including me) were sure Tyson was going to half-kill him.
One time, he was a novelty, post Jerry Quarry. Gerry Cooney though a hitter was very awkward and feasted on residents from the local Rest Homes. The opponents that he faced were way past their respective primes, Ken Norton and Jimmy Young for example. But his lack of skill was proven against Larry Holmes in 1982, he was fighting a champion who did not qualify for Social Security Benefits, his dreams came crashing down to earth, burned to smithereens. Then fought in the Battle Of The Oldies But Goodies, against George Foreman in 1990.
He was definitely a legitimate lineal champion... But after he took fights against tangsted & Cooney in 86 and 87 most serious boxing fans viewed him as weak. In that respect I would not say that he was a respected or legitimate champion...just the lineal champ. In terms of being a challenger... Yes, Cooney was definitely a 2x Challenger for the heavyweight crown.... But his skills were so limited & he was definitely a second tier Challenger... Much like Marvis Frazier, David Bey & that bald guy with a mullet who Larry Holmes fought.
Not sure who the bald guy with the mullet was lol, but I agree Frazier was easily second tier. David Bey, however, had beaten Greg Page, who was considered by almost everybody to be first tier+ at the time. That made him a perfectly legitimate contender. Holmes knocked the crap out of him.
Spinks was the lineal champion having beaten Holmes. I think the general feeling back then though was that most people thought Iron Mike would beat him. I myself regarded Tyson as no.1 in the division in '87. I'd call Gerry a two time HW title challenger.
