Young was rated #6 by the WBC when he fought Cooney. Cooney was rated #1 by the WBA. I have the Ring August 1980 issue with ratings as of April 1,1980. Cooney was rated #5 by Ring and Young was rated #10. Ring Ratings as of April 1, 1980 Larry Holmes (champ) 1. Mike Weaver 2. John Tate 3. Gerrie Coetzee 4. Michael Dokes 5. Gerry Cooney 6. Leroy Jones 7. Bernardo Mercado 8. Leon Spinks 9. Scott Ledoux 10. Jimmy Young 11. Earnie Shavers 12. Muhammad Ali 13. Eddie "The Animal" Lopez 14. Ossie Ocasio 15. Greg Page 16. George Chaplin 17. Mike Koranicki 18. Randy Mack 19. Jimmy Abbott 20. Marty Monroe
It’s all opinions. Spinks beat Holmes TWICE. In 1985 and 1986. I believe Holmes was 35 at the time. That’s a hell of an accomplishment. A guy that “sucks” (you word) at the weight isn’t winning that fight. You say Holmes was ripe for the picking. And he had clearly lost a step, but he was still getting it done. 7 years later in 1992 Holmes in his 40’s now was good enough to beat a top rated Heavyweight contender in Ray Mercer. How could he do that if he was so far gone in 85 and 86? He only lost by a couple of points to McCall for the WBC strap in 95 for Christ sakes!!! And he was ancient compared to the fights in 85 and 86. Spinks was Not Great at Heavyweight. But you said Tyson showed us he sucked. Mike Tyson at that time was an absolute wrecking machine at the peak of his powers and Spinks was at the end. No version of Spinks ever beats that Tyson, period. But that Tyson would lay waste to many former Heavyweight champions. Yet Spinks as a Heavyweight in your eyes is judged solely on this fight....??? Like I said it’s all opinions. And maybe I'm a little biased, my view maybe a little clouded, I grew up watching Spinks, I’m from Missouri (not far from STL) and a massive fan of his. But I honestly believe with every fiber of my being to discount his two victories over Holmes is silly.
I agree. Michael Spinks beat Holmes easier in 1985 than Oliver McCall did in 1995. Mercer couldn't even beat Holmes in 92. And Holyfield came damn close to losing the world title to Holmes on cuts the same year. In no way did Michael Spinks "suck" at heavyweight.
Answer me this, do you think it was adequate that gerry only fought one round between October 1980 and June 1982? I dont care how good a fighter is. Thats not enough fighting to do himself justice in a title fight. Don king did everything he could to prevent Cooney from getting enough rounds in before fighting Larry. Can you imagine Tyson being put on ice that long before challenging for a title?
Of course it's just opinions. But I still think Holmes kicked Spinks' ass in that second fight, hard, and so do the majority of fight fans and people actually involved in the sport. Holmes off paper is a two time champion. Spinks was still a young man for a boxer when Tyson beat him, and quite a few ring pundits picked him to beat Mike. Really. No disrespect intended, as you intimated we're just throwing around our thoughts here.
For gods sake chok, seriously. There's not enough on Cooney's resume to stand up alongside the top contenders of the day!!!!!! If he actually fought a few we could stand up and judge in black and white, one way or another. I don't doubt for one minute he would have been in the mix if he actually stepped up but there is zero proof as it stands. The guy had some potential for sure but this potential was offset by mental issues. One loss basically completely railroaded his career and potential. I am not degrading him for this as his problems are well documented and it's quite understandable why things went the way they did. Besides his out of the ring problems he also had to deal with confidence issues possibly brought on a little by the way he was so carefully managed. This even manifested at times into anxiety issues as fights drew nearer. We will never know what he might have become but at the end of the day he may not have held up mentally no matter what path he took.
The contenders of the day? Obviously his career lost momentum. Ultimately It was really over for him after the Norton fight and that’s what he will be judged on. And I accept this. A separate issue though, is how Cooney value stood at the point of challenging Holmes. At that point with sensational knockout wins over albeit older names like Young, Lyle and Norton he stands above all of the others. Dokes at the point of challenging Weaver only beat Tommy Thomas, George chaplain and Lynne ball. Who remembers those guys? Weaver at the point of beating Tate had only beat Scott Ledoux on points and harry Terrell after failing against Larry. Coetzee at the point of winning the WBA title was coming off a draw against Thomas and a win over Ledoux after failing twice already to win that bogus belt. Witherspoon? Just 16-0 and barely beat Renaldo Snipes on majority decision. Luis Acosta And Alphonso Ratliff... Page? A stopage of Rick Keller, Larry Frazier on points and Renaldo Snipes-on points. That earned him a vacant title fight...
He had the guys under contract that Cooney would have benefited from fighting. Guys like Berbick, Snipes etc.
Cooney seems to think so. Perhaps his own management isolated him somewhat. There is a case for that. But If you didn’t go in with Don you didn’t get those fights. King had options on everyone who went through Larry. Through his son, he also had a lot of the top ten contenders on his books. To be fair, Gerry probably made more money had he won himself one of those worthless recognition belts.
While i have stated many times i didn't think Spinks would have had much shelf life at heavyweight facing decent contenders i would never say he sucked there. Beating a Holmes at 75% capacity is still a good win as shown by Holmes form when he came back some time later. I would agree his durability was suspect at heavyweight. Tyson mightn't overly prove it as he got some big guys out of there impressively but the questions there for sure. Holmes was never a big puncher and had lost some snap to boot but still hurt him on occasions. I'd be worried about anyone scoring the first bout for Holmes. Holmes looked terrible and Spinks won that clearly for mine. Tho I've not scored the second properly i always thought Holmes won it. It was no-where near 95%. It was however the majority. It's fair to say the fight was close. I wonder if Kool Kev has this one up for scoring. Spinks efforts were still good. Holmes tho way past his best was still tough with all that experience and skill. Spinks was pretty speedy as a heavyweight and had that awkward style. He ambushed Holmes a bit with those fast little flurries. Almost like sneak attacks from memory. Cooney was ordinary but it's still a little notable that Spinks beat him decisively and stopped him taking into account where Spinks had come from. Cooney still had huge power and as you said Spinks may not have overly taken a heavyweight punch. You are looking at it all the wrong way. The best thing Spinks ever did was move up. He made an absolute legend of himself beating Holmes and doing the 175 to heavyweight double. The other two things are - 1. He made infinitely more money than he would have staying at 175. There were no big money fights on the horizon and he made very good money for Holmes, big money for Cooney and HUUUUGE money for Tyson. 4 mil for Cooney and 13.5mil for Tyson. He got over 20 mil as a heavyweight. He wouldn't have made a fraction of this no matter how long he fought at 175, particularity given....... 2. His big knee troubles. Spinks had trouble well before the Tyson fight and would have likely had a stunted career. His knees are why he never came back. So he made immense money while he could and hammered out the best reputation he was ever going to. He did enough at 175 for any half decent fan to know he was a front line ATG there. Sure the casual fan mainly remembers the Tyson flogging but it set him up for life. Yes Larry was running on fumes. He had been for a while. Like over the hill Ali he was still somewhat awkward tho which is a tribute to how great they once were. Holmes would have beaten Spinks easily at his peak.
I think Gerry's own management isolated him quite a bit. It's a matter of opinion as to whether this was a good thing or not. Were they isolating him from opponents who might beat him, from Don King, or both. They got him A LOT of money with very little risk, as you point out. Cooney pulled out of or postponed, seemingly, a lot of fights. Is that his fault or his management's? Was he injury prone, were these actually mental issues, or was that some sort of strategy by his management (i.e. "we say you're injured, so you are injured and you say that you're injured!")? The cancelled fights sure lost him a lot of experience and rounds. As much as I hated Don King's stranglehold on the heavyweight division (and Bob Arum was certainly complicit), I don't think that was the main factor of Cooney not getting fights that would give him some rounds. Or, to be more succinct, Don King didn't keep Cooney out. It was the way he did business. Anyone who didn't sign with him would have a tough time getting fights. If Cooney and management had gone for it, Don King would've signed Cooney in a flat second. Cooney was a moneymaker and Don loved the green. As an aside, to illustrate King's willingness to sign whomever will make him money, I went to the Peter-McCline card at MSG. Andrew Golota was on the undercard. I wondered around that time why King would sign Golota at that stage of his career. His best days were over. At MSG I realized why. Golota brought out more fans, mostly from the New York Polish community, than anyone else on the card. It was a sight to see. Those guys LOVED Golota. I just know Don King noticed and went, "I'll have a piece of that action."
Excellent post. I agree with all of these points. On one hand we have Cooney saying he didn’t get the fights he needed (and him blaming not being with King for that) and on the other hand we have him making the most money out of fewer fights than anybody who fought for Don King at that time. At the end of the day Cooney was a financial success yet a career disaster. I’m sure there are plenty of champions who were a financial disaster who would swap a little career success for the financial success Cooney had.
