Gerry Cooney vs Wilders opponents.

Deontay Wilder was the WBC champion for five years just like Larry Holmes was the WBC champion for five years.

Deontay Wilder won a WBC title from a guy while another man held the world title just like Larry Holmes won a WBC title from a guy while another man held the World Title.

The big difference between Wilder's WBC reign and Holmes' WBC reign is Wilder lost his title in the ring to the World Champion Tyson Fury. Holmes vacated his WBC title because he didn't want to fight Greg Page, and fought 10-fight pro Marvis Frazier instead.

Deontay Wilder isn't anything like John Tate. Tate held his WBA belt for five whole months and was never heard from again. Wilder held his for five years. And even after he's lost, you guys can't quit bringing him up.

I know you're trying to drag Wilder through the mud for some reason, when we're supposed to be talking about Cooney.

But it isn't happening.

Cooney wasn't going to be champion for five years no matter what. He could barely manage one ring appearance a year after he turned 25, even without a belt, because he was so mentally weak.

Wilder was the WBC champion for five years. He was a fine champion. Get over it already. It happened.

And he could very well be the world champion by the end of this year. So you'd better prepare for that, too.

 

They weren't the top men at the end of 1979 when Holmes-Shavers and Tate-Coetzee met. I get the feeling you weren't around then.

 

I do agree with this - Cooney has ability more than Wilder imo. And at his best he beats any version of Wilder. However in the real world - Cooney was a mess from the Holmes fight on - he had major alcohol issues, major cocaine issues and major confidence issues. Like many of the fighters of the 1980s succumbed to. His lifestyle would probably not had led to a long reign had he even been able to defeat Holmes. All is fair. Wilder fights often and seems to have a clean lifestyle he deserves credit for that.
However when both men faced the recognized best fighter in the division Holmes and Fury - although Fury wasn’t viewed that way as he himself went through a booze and drug period and was viewed as finished by some, both men failed. Wilder failed twice doing worse in the second time.
To be somewhat fair to Cooney he had as much if not more pressure put on him than any fighter I recall. The hype the promoters and media applied on him to be a white champ was insane. Wilder was quietly built up facing soft touches in Alabama. He faced nothing like the pressure Cooney did, even his second match with Fury didn’t match the hysteria of Cooney vs Holmes.

 

Enough of the "pressure" garbage.

Enough excuses 30 years on.

Everybody fighting for the world title has pressure. Everyone fighting for a sick child has pressure. Everyone defending the title has pressure to hold on to what they have. Everyone who has defended a title for five years has pressure. Everyone who has suffered a torn bicep that has rolled up their arm and a broken hand in the same fight and STILL WON is facing pressure.

Fury won the title from Wlad and imploded before he even managed a defense. Joshua caved in to the pressure fighting a fat late sub Andy Ruiz in New York.

They all experience pressure. Cooney didn't experience MORE than anyone else.

And Cooney doesn't beat any version of Wilder.

Over the last 10 years of Wilder's career (2011 to 2020), he's had 30 fights. And he's gone 28-1-1 with 27 KOs and successfully defended the WBC title 10 times, including a two-knockdown draw against the current World Champ.

Over the last 10 years of Cooney's career (1981-1990), Cooney had 7 fights and his record was 4-3.

And they had to drag him kicking and screaming into the ring those seven times, because he'd pull out of a fight if he felt the slightest pang of a problem. Forget pressure, in his own way he was a prima donna of the highest order.

I was a fan of Cooney's back in the day as much as anyone. But I'm not a kid anymore. Please stop with the AT HIS BEST COONEY BEATS ... stuff.

At his best, Cooney was a contender for a couple years.

At his best, Wilder was a WBC champion for FIVE YEARS.

There is a GULF of difference between the two accomplishments. Honestly.

 

Lol sorry you got triggered. Cooney >Wilder all day

 

"Cooney At His Best" > Everyone. (LOL)

 

Wilder is a better fighter than Cooney ever was, I'm kind of freeked out that so many people think differently. It makes me wonder if they're all being serious.

Cooney beat guys past their prime. Even if Wilder beat "lesser" competition, they were prime and in his time. And he didn't beat all deadbeats, he had to beat a certain number of contenders to keep the title.

Wilder's right is more powerful even than Cooney's left, and Wilder does have two hands, unlike Cooney. Wilder has landed some serious left hooks himself.

Wilder badly needs to live boxing basics for months, moving and jabbing. Then he has a much better chance to regain the title. As long as he fights the way he does, he'll only win against guys like Joshua and Ruiz if he lands flush consistently. And Joshua at least has improved enough to where that might not happen, same with Fury.

I honestly believe Wilder has more potential than any heavyweight out there. He just has to become a MUCH better boxer, and stop relying on his power. Otherwise he's going to get beat again.

Cooney was a really good heavy when he fought Holmes. But Holmes seems to demoralize him as much as Ali Foreman...he lost whatever potential he had and let's face it folks, Wilder certainly has a better chin than Gerry.

 

nah just Wilder lol

 

You must not know Choklab

 

You are putting too much importance on the belt here and not enough on the deeds. Beating Norton in the year where he was regarded as probably the best active heavyweight in the world meant more than beating Stiverne when most people didn’t know who he was.

In 2014 Wlad was regarded the best in the world not Stiverne.

Povetkin was regarded better. Fury was regarded better. Just because the WBC put a belt to that Arreola fight won’t make Stiverne better than the men Stiverne didn’t fight.

Stiverne was better than Arreola. But who was he? Wilder beats the man who beats Arreola. That’s all that was.

In 1978 Ali was the real champion but he retired. And even beating Spinks, Muhammad was no longer the best in the World anyway. With Spinks defeated that left whoever beats Norton as most likely the best heavyweight in the world. Even Without a belt.

The big difference is wilder having the WBC belt was based on nothing. Larry having the WBC belt mean something because without that belt he had still beat enough men to be sensibly regarded the best in the world. Added to this Holmes later beat the returning linear champ. Wilder did not. Wilder could not beat the returning linear champion..and this was without facing anyone previously regarded as even the worlds number two.

And in the scheme of things, without a governing body, it would not have mattered that he fought Marvis. In another era Page might have been asked to meet Witherspoon to determine who was the logical contender to Larry, a fight that really happened & Greg lost anyway. Larry was still the champion. He had not lost.

Joe Louis took smaller fights while a logical challenger was being decided. Larry was actually negotiating to meet Coetzee who then would would have been regarded as better than Page. The fight was signed for.

Wilder was never a champion. In comparison to Larry, Wilder had the WBC recognition when it was worthless. He beat the ring #4 to win it and effectively defended the #4 position against nonentities.

The champion makes the belt.

look at the Ring ratings. Wilder was installed as the second best in the world because that was as high as he got.

Year by year rankings show wilder fought far fewer of listed contenders in the 5 years the WBC was recognising him than most other #2 rated guys did without titles.

 

All this is true. I agree with this.

but having a belt when Wilder had this belt equals having no value as a champion because he did not beat Joshua, Wlad or Tyson Fury. Who were always rated above him.

he was defending nothing. Wilder was literally fighting build up fights that the WBC were labelling as title bouts.

The kind of guys a teenage Mike Tyson fought every two weeks before he was champion.

 

Cooney is overrated here, he wouldn't do as well as Wilder. He had serious personal problems that wouldn't allow him to defend so many times, even against such a bad competiton.

That said, comparing Wilder to Holmes is even funnier. Wilder wasn't the heavyweight champion at any point of his career and he lost to Fury (twice by fair scoring) when he could win himself such a claim. Holmes was undisputed champion, one of the best ever at this division. Wilder with his career wouldn't make my top 30.

 

The absolute truth. The value of the WBC title was based merely on beating the lowly regarded Chris Arreola in a vacant title bout. It never went beyond this.

 

Cooney was the legitimate number one contender to Holmes after he bombed out Norton in 90 seconds. I don’t believe at any point Wilder was the second best heavy in the world. His “belt” was meaningless. He never fought Wlad or Joshua or Povetkin and not Fury. His handlers who had matched him perfectly to a glossy record finally slipped up putting him in the ring with Fury believing Fury’s drug addictions and light punching would be able to secure Wilder a solid win. He failed twice making it more evident why It was him out of the top heavies (Wlad, Joshua, Povetkin, Fury) never faced any of them.
Let’s not forget Cooney was 24 when he was on his run and only had a little over 20 fights meanwhile Wilder was fighting club fighters til he was 30.

 

100%