green young mike tyson 85(9-0) vs a peak gerry cooney 82!!

Its specificed in the thread title.

 

No, you're not being a dick at all [and no offense taken], but I'm not entirely sold on 1982 Cooney being peak. Certainly, he was at his best trained, but there's no substitute for steady competition. Gerry had less than four total minutes of action in the two years prior to his challenge of Holmes, and less than five rounds between December 1979 and June 1982 [when he faced Larry].

After Holmes, Cooney should have gotten right back on the horse before 1982 was out. That was priceless experience which might have produced a clear cut peak for Gerry, but like Foreman after Kinshasa, he blew the opportunity to further evolve and get right back into contention due to mental frailty. [Cooney-Cobb in 1983 might have revealed everything we needed to know about Gerry's skills and stamina, and I think this oft discussed fantasy matchup would have been a box office smash after their challenges of Holmes, probably the biggest nontitle HW bout of the 1980s.]

 

The power in Gerry's hook never abandoned him, as he showed towards the end of round one against Foreman after a two and a half year layoff. The body's there to be hit, and Michael Spinks had a spindly one. [Tyson's first knockdown of Michael was with a right to the body.] Even today, I wonder why Cooney didn't just obliterate him with a hook to the liver.

 

The Norton and Holmes fights are as about as good as Cooney is going to get. I really don't see what else could be aruged as his peak. He never got his rounds in, and that cost him against Holmes when it was clear he didn't have enough gas to go the distance.

Not relevant to the topic at hand though, this about the #2 Heavyweight in the World coming off an easy KO of Norton against a 9-0 19 year old kid. No trainer in their right mind would make this fight. I'm not surprised by people picking Tyson in retrospect of what he became, but legends have to be crafted properly, they have to get their rounds in, even one as raw talented and well schooled as Kid Dynamite.

And if your taking Holmes at his word, he admited Cooney hurt him with body shots and was saved by the bell when one landed in the closing seconds of a round. But Holmes was the best in the world at this time, he had survived hairy moments against Weaver, Shavers, and Norton. He knew the ropes. Tyson at this point had not even been in a competitive pro fight with a live opponent.

 

Because Cooney was semi-retired and brought in to face the Champ because of his name value. Spinks had no intentions of being a fighting Champion and was saving up for his retirement. Cooney was a guarenteed win over a name.

Tucker might very well have beat Spinks had he not vacated the title to avoid him and make the big money Cooney fight.

 

Cooney by very close decision.His experience will help him survive Tyson's scary moments.

 

Cooney was into drugs at the time he fought Spinks. Cooney was at his best in '81, before being messed up.

 

Tyson by early KO. Too fast and skilled for Cooney.

 

The Cooney of 1982, that fought Holmes would have beat Mike to a pulp, in 1985, Tyson was just a green 19 year old kid, that didn't even have his man strength yet, yea he kept knocking over tomato cans, wino's and forklift drivers, but nobody with Gerry's skill..

Cooney was 29, in his prime would have enjoyed a height advantage of almost a foot, he is as tall as the Klitchkos, without the muscles, but hit harder than Mike and had more experience, and lets be real Tyson always had problems with tall fighters..

I think COONEY would have won a decision, with Mike hitting the canvas at least once during the fight...

 

Obviously they wouldn't have put Tyson in there with someone at that level in '85. A peak Cooney was not a tomato can and would have probably knocked Tyson out.

 

x2.