Holmes vs Cooney

just because someone dosen't win the title dosen't mean they are bad. Gerry had a nice career, I'm sure he made more money than you morlocks! LOL He did fine in the holmes fight. And after his boxing was done he set out to help boxers who needed help. Dosen't sound like a loser to me!

 

You need to know something about boxing to post here. This isn’t a site for bored basement dwellers

 

You make no sense. You r the 1 living in la la Biden land Snowflake.

 

To be honest, I always felt that Larry Holmes vs Gerry Cooney was a political type of match, I do not like to say that but I viewed it as such. Cooney was not ready for Larry, who did he fight to merit such a match? He fought two has been's from a local rest home, Ken Norton and Jimmy Young, both had seen better days. He did not face any credible opponents, he did not face Tim Witherspoon, or a Pinklon Thomas, not even a James Broad, they rushed poor Gerry. Money is fine but to get a reputation tarnished like that is not good. Jerry Quarry had a much better career than Cooney, at least Quarry fought better opposition. They were not on Geritol like Cooney's best wins.

 

. I don’t support Joe Biden... and you don’t understand anything about boxing. You need to educate yourself

 

Now now fellows, we have another website for that, it is called The Lounge.

 

Cooney fought who they told him to fight. His job was to fight. He was protected a bit too much by his management. They milked his whiteness for all it was worth. Gerry would have fought whoever they told him to fight.

 

He goes by President Elect Biden now. Joe gave that clown a prison pounding. Joe came out Smokin!!!!

 

"IF" ....
Yeah, what if Evanglista or Marvis Frazier iced Larry in 1 round ??
What if my cousin Tom who you've never heard of got a fight with prime Larry and KO'd him with a perfect punch ?

If winning a fight by breaking an opponent down for stoppage doesn't decide who is BETTER then what's the point ?
And if one guy was better, the other guy wasn't good enough.

The reason Cooney didn't spark Larry out in 1 round is because he wasn't good enough. There's 100% proof right there. They fought. We can't pretend he was good enough to win when it was proved that he wasn't.

 

He is a situation where had he fought a Weaver or Dokes he might have done better, but he would have always lost to the Holmes,Spinks and Foreman guys who were on top. He always did.

 

Great post! Right on!

 

Gerry Cooney could've been part of that heavyweight round-robin of the early 1980's, where he was in the mix with the rest of the contenders: Berbick, Coetzee, Dokes, Page, Snipes, Thomas, Tillis, Weaver, Witherspoon, fighting each other, winning some and losing some. Jerry Quarry did it during his career (since the two are often compared).

Now Cooney is a healthy and presumably wealthy 64 year-old. Four of the other ten fighters I named passed on in their early fifties. As a humanitarian I have to favor the low-risk high-reward route that Cooney took. As a fight fan I favor the route the other men took. Life is full of contradictions.

Some fans may hold a grudge against guys like Cooney (or Pete Rademacher) who kind of scammed their way into big payday title shots. I think it's part of what makes boxing so interesting.

 

like a lot of people say, Cooney needed more than a one round blow out behind him to tackle Larry. Just one round in 13 months.

But take a look at the challengers for titles in those days. How many rated guys did they all beat? Even the good ones like Carl Williams, Pinklon Thomas, Tony Tubbs, Tim Witherspoon. Tony Tucker. Did they ever have better wins on their records than Gerry Cooney had before challenging for titles? I don’t think so.

...and none of those guys beat Larry either!

Larry deserves more credit for beating a guy like Gerry. At no point did any of those guys, who also didn’t beat Larry, ever look like better challengers to the title.

 

The lounge is back ?