Gerry Cooney vs Gerrie Coetzee

Coetzee rose to the occasion, unlike Cooney. He was more accomplished and better rounded as a fighter.

 

Cooney KOs him in 1 rd. To big and fast

 

I think Cooney overwhelms him before he has time to wear down and choke.

Cooney KO 6.

 

Agree with this 4 d same reasons stated here .
Cooney was **** . Coetzee is overrated and was not very good (or otherwise how would u excuse his losses , more losses than wins @ top level) , but still better than Cooney whom was 1 of d very worst famous fighters ever .

 

Cooney was DEFINITLEY overrated ! His team were stark raving bonkers putting him in with Holmes when they did.

 

Well yes and no... Coetzee probably has some better wins, but lost plenty of times to some of the better opponents he faced, ie Tate, Weaver , Page,etc.. I'm told his loss to renaldo Snipes was a robbery, but I haven't seen it, so I'll leave that one alone....

Coetzee did get a big win over Michael Dokes, but apparently Dokes was in poor form for that fight and might very well have been beaten by Cooney as well, had Gerry faced THAT version of Dokes. Cooney would have had the size advantage along with being the greater puncher and possibly the fast starter. Neither man had what one might call an iron chin, but both had plenty of fire power to inflict damage on the other... I guess it depends on who got the better start, but I can't see this going more than 5 or 6.

 

Coetzee had the better durability of the 2, both had power, Cooney had a tremendous Hook and Coetzee the Bionic right hand.....I see Coetzee's chin being a factor and Cooney's frailty coming into play Coetzee by KO

 

Coetzee had that long long amateur career and had never been off his feet prior to the Weaver fight. The Gerry Cooney durability and ability to absorb is not in the same area code.

 

Things changed since 1976 . Coetzee is not even d greatest white south African heavyweight .

Not 2 mention that I doubt if Coetzee was any greater than George Chuvalo . I really doubt if Chuvalo would have been stopped by those who stopped Coetzee . Don't forget that Stander was 34 in 1976 , think of a 1978 Frazier , 2000 Tyson , 2006 Tua (wouldn't have been stopped by Coetzee though) , 1957 Marchegiano :yep , how does a KO over them (Tua aside 4 that matter) by a much bigger man effect that much bigger man's legacy ?
If Stander was 5 years younger then it would have meant much more .

 

I'll channel this post to dead Pat

 

Coetzee also had many more chances to rise to the occasion than Cooney. Cooney's career for all intents and purposes was over post Holmes - he never again fought with any regularity or had any serious preparation for name fights.

Gerrie was known as an absolute choker pre Dokes, who entered the ring quite high from many accounts. He was nicely beaten by Weaver and Tate, but to be fair Weaver was a really good fighter as was Tate for a short term and Gerrie supposedly had trouble with the slippery canvas vs Tate, quite possible.

Having said all that i agree with people erring on the side of caution taking Coetzee as he was more proven had more of his heart in boxing. There's a very live chance however that Cooney pre Holmes could have taken him out. Cooney was a harder more dangerous puncher than anyone Gerrie ever fought and there's a chance he could have been overwhelmed.

Safe money is on Coetzee tho, he had a murderous punch himself.

The more i think about it the more electric this fight would have been as a matchup.

 

He beat old, washed up versions of Norton, Lyle, and Young, was done for after the Holmes fight, got destroyed by the much smaller Spinks and was crushed by an older George Foreman....compared to that, Coetzee's "resume" and accomplishments are stellar, practically. The bionic right connects before the Cooney left hook and it's all over. Cooney had no heart for the sport.

 

Cooney had some heart for the sport first career, as showcased in the Holmes fight.

What does Spinks and Foreman have to do in a serious discussion about these guys matching up at their best? Well, unless we talk about Coetzee getting ko'd by a middleweight in Barkely. Not to mention getting sparked in under 2 minutes against Frank Bruno. Imagine is that had been a Cooney hook? Same result. Come to think of it the "much smaller" Spinks and "older" Foreman would have cleaned up Coetzee too, especially if we look at the washed up version as you are.

But no, all 4 fights have zero place in the discussion if any sort of balance and seriousness is required.

If boxing were this simple and cut and dried there would never be an upset, and peak Cooney over peak Coetzee would not exactly be much of an upset.

I'd put Coetzee a narrow but deserved 7-5 fave.

 

Spinks was Cooney's age , shorter and so much massless compared 2 Cooney , that I can't find d appropriate word 4 it .
It reflected a lot on Cooney's chin and technique .
Foreman was 7 years older , obese and partially disabled , again he was also shorter . It did have relevance on Cooney's (lack of) worth .
Barkley was at least 6 years younger than Coetzee which is a lot considering that Barkley was years removed from his prime , so imagine how dead Coetzee was .

 

In the five year duration that Cooney had been mostly inactive, Spinks had dominated the light heavyweight division, and won the heavyweight title... Cooney had fought all but three times within that period, and against lesser opponents... He showed up for the Spinks fight at a career hight weight, and boxed all but 1 round in nearly 3 years...