awesome gerry cooney interview

I found it:

- page 128 & 129 of Stephen Brunt's 'Mean Business'

 

smart guy. I like him

interviewer is a *** tho

 

Thanks RS, That explain's allot, it's been a long time. I also think Cooney would have a had a good shot at beating Weaver.

I don't think Cooney would have ever had beaten Larry, though being more active would have helped, but the payday had been made.

Also the great white hope thing was a card played by King, and maybe some media types. I certainly don't recall Larry or Gerry buying into, or hyping that crap.

I missed my promotion to a gatekeeper, nice.

 

I just did a few google searches looking for information on FIST and couldn't find anything. Too bad if it did indeed go out of business.

As far as Gerry's explanations for not fighting more - He's not wrong about Don King tying up the division, but he did have several fights cancelled due to his own injuries. Also, the Norton fight was supposed to be held in February 1981 on the Harold Smith / Ross Fields super card, but the MAPS scandal happened and the whole thing went out the window.

 

Neil Cavuto can ****ing die. What a horrible interview he gave. Cooney was good though, had pertinent **** to say and I appreciate what he's doing.

Cooney still boxing 30-40 rounds a week is pretty awesome.

 

Cooney is wrong. The commentators have some influence on how the average fan scores a fight. It depends on who the fan is, but to say the commentators have none is wrong.

All it takes is good insight, and perhaps you might look for or see something different that you missed before.

The last I heard on Cooney is he purchased a minor league baseball team.

 

I agree, in fact i think Cooney would destroy Weaver within 3 rounds. It would be a good name on his resume, but at the same time, most likely another quick KO doing not much to prepare him for Holmes.

 

Thanks Rico.

How unfortunate that the fate of the heavyweight title along with the top contenders who worked towards it was dictated by greed rather than by the best talent. I think Cooney would have had a strong chance to beat Tillis in 1981, by virtue of his fast starting abilty and Weaver's tendency to fall behind in the early rounds. If Cooney had fought Weaver on the same night that Mike Dokes had him floored in the first round leading to a controversial stoppage, I think Gerry would have beaten him

 

You are correct about Tillis being Weaver's mandatory in late 1981, immediately after Cooney beat Norton. Even so, Weaver-Cooney could have been signed for early 1982, but it was scuttled because Holmes-Cooney offered much greater financial rewards.

It would have been a bad idea for Cooney's managers to put him in with Weaver instead of Holmes. In 1981, Weaver was in his prime, and he was a tough, seasoned, hard-punching fighter who would have stood a 50/50 chance of beating Cooney. Such a defeat for Gerry would have permanently destroyed the financial bonanza of Holmes-Cooney.

Yes, Weaver was a slow starter and there's reason to believe that Cooney could have blasted Weaver out in the opening rounds -- Gerry certainly had that explosive potential. But nobody knew for certain how the relatively green Cooney would hold up against Weaver, so the fight would have been risky.

 

Most people feel the same way as we do, thanks!

 

Gerry is doing a good thing. Still a well spoken guy. I agree with him that he did not give himself the best shot at being champ. I think fights against pretty durable guys like Tex Cobb and a few others that would have not been a threat but given him 10-12 round confidence. Some fights are for the benifit of the fighter and some are to look good. I dont know how much it would have helped but besides the problems that plagued Gerry outside the ring, he did have kings cockblocking and the wako twins for managers. I guess there goal was to get him a title shot without too much risk and for a big purse. They acomplished that but if Gerry was Champion can you imagine the money he would have made on endorsements alone. I think it was important at that time for a fighter to be undefeated...the Ali/Frazier1 fight battle of the unbeatens and unbeaten George Foreman made an impact....funny but some losses can devastate a fighter but then again there are losses that are great learning experiences and stepping stones to improvement. it is all in the mindset. Any way God Bless you Gentleman Gerry Cooney giving something back to the sport and fighters.

 

Thanks for posting that Cooney always seemed a class guy.

 

I love Gerry , he reminds me of so many things about the heavyweights that were great during the 80's.. It was a very competetive era, and we had some classic fights.. Mister Cooney indeed is and always was a very class guy.........

 

Whilst the stylistic pace of both fighters bodes well for Cooney i would be loathe to put any great stake on him. At the end of the day, what he did best in the big matches was lose.

IMO Holmes made him look perhaps better than he was by fighting an uber cautious fight designed to guarantee the surest win with the least possible risk. There's a very strong chance he could have taken him out early when he had him hurt. Great fight by Larry, and a sure fire plan but.....

Cooney never ever beat a fighter (Even the aged Young victory is bitter sweet) anywhere near as good as Weaver at the time. Weaver by contrast beat Tate and Coetzee as well as going much closer to actually beating Holmes. Even his latter draw vs Dokes was better than anything Cooney ever did.

While Dokes with the aid of Joey Curtis sprung a surprise attack on Weaver he always knew Cooney was going to roar out fast. Weaver negotiated Dokes quite well in the rematch when he knew what to expect.

Funnily enough Cooney would have started a strong fave. With the benefit of hindsight i'd put Weaver 7-5 favourite simply based on the fact that he got the job done on better fighters than Cooney ever did.

At the end of the day this is a GREAT matchup and very open fight.

 

Sometimes i'm thinking the same thing you just said, in that most of Cooney's assessment is based on a fight where he ultimately was outclassed. At the very best, he's a good challenger who fought brave but came up short, but at the worst, he's a way overhyped, limited fighter with a great left hook and little else but his skin color.

My opinion is somewhere in between, but i do give him the benefit of the doubt. The Norton fight was ****ing brutal and he didn't do too bad in the Young fight either. As you say, both were far past their best or even shot, but the manner in which he won makes me believe he was at least a worthy contender.


.... Back to Weaver, i think his jaw is somewhat questionable and he was vulnerable early in the early going. And while Cooney never beat a live contender, Weaver lost most of his big bouts as well, and had more chances to prove himself. For the record, i'm not saying Cooney has anyone but himself to blame for his inactivity, but still...


Now to the million dollar question, since you think Weaver is a little bit better than Cooney, would you say the Weaver win did more for Holmes' resume than the Cooney win?