I think that the highly motivated and in shape Bert Cooper from 1990 to 1992 who fought life and death prime versions of Moorer, Holyfield, Mercer and defeated respectable fringe types in Hipp, Norris, and Willis would have my vote to take down Henry Cooper. It generally took a very big and strong heavy weight to make Bert fold without much effort and usually it came under the worst circumstances such as when he was under trained and going through spurts of drug abuse.. Henry was a good technician with fighting spirit, but he was also somewhat fragile and while he could certainly crack, did not really posses the kind of artillary that Bert was accustomed to dealing with.. Bert was also very strong on the inside and a bull to try and wrestle with. Some of those short, powerful hooks and crosses would take their toll..... I'm going with Bert via stoppage, unless he shows up after a whole night of snorting coke..
Not sure about henry not being likely to stop bert...bert was stopped plenty on one or two rounds...I know mostly by bigger guys, but henry is a man who dropped ali (clay) hard.
Henry Cooper would never fight his own son..forget about it. However, he has gone on record as saying Bert is probably stronger, faster, and a better dancer due to modern nutrition shakes and the Black American genes on his mother side.
I won't dispute what you're saying, but frankly I think there is a collosal difference in the arsenal of men like George Foreman, Riddick Bowe and Corrie Sanders, when contrasted to Henry Cooper... I can't picture HC doing to BC what those guys did... Henry did indeed floor Clay, but in all honesty, this wasn't the mature champion that we all came to know as " the greatest". Clay was 22 years old, had 18 fights, barely weighed over 200 lbs, and in all likelyhood was both cocky and complacent.... I will also ad that while Henry floored a green Clay, Bert decked a peak Holyfield who was a reigning heavy weight champion.. Henry's tendency to cut and bleed, along with Bert's brutal inside fighting game would make for a very hard night for the Englishman, and while Henry could have certainly pulled a few tricks out from under his sleeve, I simply don't like his chances for both sylistic and physical reasons...
Exactly, look at how evolution took place from Joe Louis to his son Lennox Lewis.. Hell, they even changed the spelling of the family name to be more suitable for modern boxing....:good
Henry boxed well though...espically aganst bulldogs...he may be able to out box bert until he lands enough left hooks. I'm not really saying one way or the other, just trying to give a counter argument.
Anything can happen in this sport, especially when you place two very game fighters who both had a long history of blowing hot and cold. In fact, had these men fought 10 times, they might both have won 5 each...
Bert Cooper should take this if he has a good night. Faster, more violent, hit harder, and was larger. Also, didn't cut up like a fine cheese the second a punch touched him. Cooper gets fame as a puncher primarily off of the big left hook against Ali, but to me, that is clearly more the quality of the shot then the power of the puncher. Over the rest of his career, Sir Henry just didn't supply the results to get named a top flight puncher, and Bert without a doubt did.
Henry Cooper was the better boxer, had a good jab. And had KO power in his left. He did cut easily and I dont think his chin was strong enough to take much from Bert Cooper, but Bert could be outboxed and knocked out too. It's a 50-50 fight really.
i think this fight goes the way "h" dealt with jose urtain and billy walker until smoking bert cuts him. smoking bert was eratic but was a genuine dangerman when in the mood. he would hurt henry who was stopped by a body shot from joe bygraves. henry was much more focused and profesional, he could stick burt with jabs all night but he beter hope bert dosnt cut him. I give bert a real chance. [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymxG25VC-Xk[/ame]