Gerry Cooney vs Wilders opponents.

I always preferred Cooney lol

 

Yes. Gerry was a beast that night (LOL). Getting floored in round 2. Afraid to let his hands go. Rusty from a year away from actual combat.

Just a monster. (LOL)

If Cooney broke his left hand early against Stiverne, like Wilder did his right hand early in their first fight, Cooney would've mentally collapsed.

Wilder won title fights with broken hands, he won a title defense with a broken hand AND a torn bicep.

Stuff like that happens when you have a long reign. You have to overcome it.

That's not what Cooney did.

People can go on and on about how physically talented Cooney was, but the guy didn't have the mindset to be a champion. That's why he wasn't. He fought in an era where there were a lot of winnable belts. He didn't win any. Hell, they couldn't even get him in the ring most years.

And, had he managed to win one, he couldn't have held it together for five years. He didn't hold it together for five straight years EVER when he was boxing.

 

I liked Cooney when he was fighting. But I tended to root for Coetzee more probably because he fought more.

I remember working as a busboy the night of Holmes-Cooney. The cook in the kitchen was getting updates of the fight on the radio he was listening to. And I remember coming in the kitchen with a bunch of dishes and he said "Cooney went down in the second." And I said, "You mean Cooney knocked him down in the second?" And he said no.

I couldn't even picture that in my mind at the time. I'd totally bought in. (LOL)

 

like Buster

 

And I’m not sure if Cooney ever beat anyone who Wilder wouldn’t highlight reel ko.

 

I agree One hundred percent, but what part of that proves that Wilder ever beat anyone good enough to beat EVEN Gerry Cooney?

what did Wilder hold onto for five years? The guy wasn’t even a champion either.

wilder had one fight where the result was going to prove who the best fighter in the world was. And, just like Gerry Cooney, Wilder lost that fight. He flunked it. He was stopped. Went out on his shield but he was stopped. Just like Cooney was.

I think even the mentally collapsed version of Gerry Cooney beats Stiverne. Why not? Who had Stiverne ever beat who was worth a full cheese sandwich?

Again, what reign did he have? One of the Klits retired and somebody decided Stiverne and Chris freaking Arreola were the next best two heavyweights in the world and put a belt on the line!

in 2014 there were a lot better fighters available than Arreola and Stiverne in the division. Wlad, Povetkin, Fury, chagaev...when did either of those two beat any of those guys? So how can the result of that Stiverne- Arreola match produce a legit champion?

All this is true. And laugh as loud and as long as you care to over that one. Just don’t think for one second Wilder could have done any better against Larry Holmes than Cooney did

 

Fair point. It can’t be proven otherwise.

Jimmy Young might have schooled Wilder, but I wouldn’t bet on it.

 

Wilder was the WBC heavyweight champion for five years. Just like Larry Holmes was the WBC Heavyweight Champion for five years.

 

That doesn't mean anything.

When Larry Fought Shavers the second time, you could argue that this fight was to decide the best heavyweight in the World. Larry was the only dominant heavyweight from then on until losing to spinks.

Wilder had one fight like that. And lost.

 

You mean compared to Larry Holmes' WBC reign? Compared to fighting Alfredo Evangelista, Lorenzo Zanon, Scott Frank, Lucien Rodriquez, Tex Cobb, Scott Ledoux, Leroy Jones, Ossie Ocasio, Renaldo Snipes ... the corpse of Ali?

Wilder had a fine reign.

What kind of reign did Cooney have, again?

If you haven't figured out over the past 30 freaking years that if Cooney was meant to be a champ he would've been then there's no point in even typing. Cooney didn't have the mental makeup to ever be champ. He just didn't. Fun fighter to watch. That's undeniable.

But don't confuse entertaining contenders with entertaining champs. Wilder was a champ.

 

How on earth did you come up with that? (LOL)

Because Shavers was rated #1 by the WBC?

WBC ratings don't seem to matter when talking about Wilder. They sure mean everything when talking about Holmes.

Don't be a hypocrite.

 

I wasn’t including Shavers WBC rating. I was using Shavers status at having just annihilated Ken Norton..the guy who took Larry to a split decision.

That year shavers had the most impressive win than any other contender.

After Ali’s loss to Spinks the Norton-Young fight produced the second best heavyweight in the world. But once Ali beat Spinks then retired.. that left whoever beat Norton as top banana.

This isn’t complicated.

when did Wilder beat anyone who had the most impressive win among the contenders?

 

Shavers was 35 and had already been shut out by Holmes. The Norton win was an upset. Shavers wasn't the #2 heavyweight in the world in 1979 any more than Scott Ledoux was the #2 heavyweight for leaving Norton in a heap at the end of their fight that same year. Shavers was the WBC's top contender. That's all.

John Tate and Gerrie Coetzee were younger and were fighting for the WBA belt a few weeks later. And Coetzee had a one-round win over the last WORLD champ Spinks.

Whatever. I was a big Shavers fan back then. And I don't recall anyone saying the winner of Holmes-Shavers was going to be the best heavyweight in the world. Ring still recognized Ali, and he'd beaten Shavers and Norton, too.

I have no idea where you're getting this. I think you just made it up while we were discussing this.

Doesn't matter. We aren't talking about Shavers and Holmes. It's how Cooney would've done against Wilder's opponents.

Considering Cooney could only get himself mentally and physically prepared to fight once a year after turning 25, even against the likes of Eddie Gregg, and considering he had at least a dozen proposed fights called off because he got hurt or claimed he was hurt, or was too drunk to train, I'm guessing he wouldn't have done well.

Nice guy. But he was too self-destructive and too mentally weak to reign for any period of time at all.

 

it’s a shame he never DID fight or beat a guy like Coetzee. Would certainly put to bed a lot of these ideas about him not being able to beat a good opponent

 

I have always agreed with this part. Cooney never proved he was champion material..and neither did wilder.

Yes they were fighting for a belt. But why should they have been fighting for a belt? Ali, Holmes, Norton, Young Shavers were the top men at that time. They were higher regarded than ex champion Spinks who had lost to Ali. They were higher regarded than Tate.

Yes. This was a good result. I have long believed coetzee should have fought Larry off the back of this. And had he, there would have been no need for a bogus parallel championship. Instead the WBA gave Coetzee Tate to fight rather than Holmes.

Whatever tate had done, it wasn’t enough.

Tate never beat anyone like Spinks had he? In fact Coetzee nor Tate had beat Young or Norton or Shavers so I don’t get why people give any credence to a belt being tagged to their fight. it did not make the winner a champion just because the WBA put a belt on it. There was no cause to do this.

Tate and Wilder have this in common. When he beat Stiverne it meant less than Tate beating Coetzee.