Both men displayed offensive firepower but had obvious, glaring faults to go along with their respective power. Would do you think would win and why?
My instincts tell me Cooney, though Sanders could have gotten him at any time. Cooney's faults showed mainly against right handed fighters who were also generally good boxers. In addition, all three of his defeats came against the upper tier of his division and all following layoffs ( including the Holmes fight. ) Sanders showed vulnerabilities early against Nate Tubbs and Hasim Rahman. I think Gerry's power and fast starting ability, along with Sander's tendency to mix it up early, could have led to a short night, but the same could have happened in reverse.
good analysis:good. i have to say that cooney showed more talent in his relatively brief career and even briefer prime. sanders has fast hands, a decent chin, and solid power but like you pointed out showed weaknesses early on. i just think cooney had more going for him and his chin gets something of a bad rep in retrospect; it was average but not as terrible as portrayed. i lean towards cooney unless sanders sneaks in that left early but even that, i feel, is a long shot
Sanders. Much faster hands in a 2 round bout. I sure don't see the Cooney defense handling a the trajectory of a southpaw since he stood right in front of everyone. Sanders also has a real nice right hook in there. Usually it's the right hand that catches the southpaws and the Cooney right hand was no where near as dangerous as his left.
You know most of his career Sanders had the repuation of having a fragile chin. It was only after the Vitali fight people started saying he had a solid beard.
Every time this fight comes up, I always go with Sanders. In a nutshell, his quick southpaw attack could pose a serious problem for Cooney, plus Corrie is the one who actually proved he was good enough to win the Big Fight.
I wouldnt write Sanders off so quickly either but I would still favor Cooney. Besides the Klitschko win, Sanders career was basically ****.
you know what, that's true actually. the only other fight i could point to is the rahman fight: despite the ending he took some decent bombs in that one. still, he wasn't terribly durable in his career as a whole.
Sanders did not make his rep beating on past their prime older fighters. His win over Wlad towers above anything Cooney ever did. Sanders had faster hands, better defense, better skills, and looked to have more grit than Cooney had. I'd pick him to stop Cooney.
...Hmm. I have to favor Cooney by stoppage but hell they can both take the other out. These are both underrated fighters, imo. Not great but pretty good. Cooney could get caught like Wlad, his reaction time isn't wonderful and his hand speed is pretty lackluster whereas Sanders had kind of deceptive speed and the southpaw thing going for him. But I say Cooney is the harder hitter, about the same as far as skill, slower but bigger and more able to impose it. And Sanders might be more vulnerable. He took some wicked stuff from VK. I think the more serious Sanders is, the better shape, and the better punch resistance?
I think Sanders Chin issues were mental. Similar to Danny Williams. In some fights Sanders could take a good shot in other fights he did not. I do not think Sanders had a bad Chin.