Holmes vs Cooney

And, yeah, I'd make prime Tate a favourite over prime Cooney.

But we never got to see fights like that involving Cooney. And it wasn't because fighters like Tate didn't take risks. Tate did.

 

I think only with the benefit of hindsight could you make Tate favourable over Cooney because of the Coetzee win. But I imagine, by the time Cooney was in a position to face somebody like Tate, it’s around the time Tate’s already been badly knocked out by Weaver. And the jury was still out on Tate when that happened. So it’s like was Tate ever much on any other night?

There is an argument beating Coetzee was Tates “Tokyo” moment. He never did anything else. What was his next big win of the 1980s?

 

Good post.

 

Tate destroyed super puncher Knoetzie who I would favor to KO Cooney early. I would favor Coetzee to also. And Weaver. These were solid contenders and a champ who fought everyone around contenderize they could.

 

Oh chok. Knoetzee was ring rated #6 when Tate stopped him. Even Bobick had been in the middle of the ten until not long before Tate. Tate was quite highly regarded when champion and some even thought he was the legit champ ahead of Holmes. A unification was being built up and looked forward to. Coetzee barely won a round and was conclusively outboxed.

Cooney feasted on former names that were past it to near geriatric. As Unforgiven explained to you Young was by far his best win as he still had a tick of life in him. He was also stopped by a legal cut which in my book is a 100% legit way to win but quite a few in here don't seem to be able to comprehend this simple matter so even that win might be diminished a bit in the eyes of "some".

 

Not a liberal, nor am I "race baiting", especially not a "snow flake". This country was built on racism and people like you who deny it is THE main reason it can't get past it.
Of course you wouldn't think it was racist if your in the majority. But that's the main issue with people like you. You refuse to acknowledge others pain and points of view. You think you know, but that's your arrogance showing its ugly head.
Your words tell me exactly what's in your soul. Your bigotry shines through in those few words you posted. When people like you die off, this world will be a much better place.

 

Obviously delusional. I see no color, but you, that's all you see. Find Jesus and save your soul.

 

If you hate the US so much Flash, just leave. Find yr perfect country.

 

Fair points as always.

my main thing is, at the point he challenged for a title, Cooney was able to make the bigger splash.

whatever wins Tate scored toward getting selected (over even Larry Holmes) to feature in a WBA vacant title fight, john did not have wins that surpass Cooneys when Gerry challenged for a title.

I don’t see how knoetzee and Bobick can outflank Norton and Young. Even As old as they were.

Norton obliterated Bobick. Knoetzee was as untested as Tate was.

And this isn’t rewriting history to say that. The results bare this out.

 

Up until he got beaten by Weaver Tate was far more proven than Cooney ever was chok.

Cooney never ever defeated a bonafide top 10 contender. Young had slipped slightly out of the 10 and Norton was on the edge as well, not to mention over the hill.

Tate's win over Coetzee outstrips any win of Cooney ever - comfortably.

Cooney was the result of brilliant marketing and career staging. Truly sensational actually. Cooney was white, well spoken in an are where they where longing for an exciting heavyweight champ and man could he punch. Faded big names where feasted upon and poor Joe Average had no clue they were past their use by date. Hell, many established experts where completely fooled and lured into a sense of false hope and expectation.

The amount of boxing names picking Cooney to beat Holmes was staggering. Not all were fooled tho and quite a few where out there telling it exactly like it was - Cooney had feasted on a bunch of big names that were no longer much good. He was grossly unproven they said and he hadn't fought anybody to show that much of anything. They were proven to be correct tho some might say Cooney did go a little better than they predicted.

Could Cooney have beaten legit top contenders? Who would know? He never beat one in his life. It's certainly possible, particularly against guys that seem a good stylistic fit like say, a Berbick. Then again the flipside is possible too.

 

I believe young was rated 6 at fight time also believe norton was rated too

 

But too bad that both were way past their prime years to take credit for beating a top prime contender.

 

You are right Flash. There is endless objective evidence that race is a huge factor in how people react, treat others & life fortunes.
Whether we *measure* how folks assess the same resumes with typical say black or white names, punishments for the *same* crimes depending upon who are the accused & who are the victims, or tests of immediate, subconscious bias-this is a deeply conditioned, huge factor.

Morlock when you use a primitive "love it or leave it" comment, you are copying a low, hateful mentality.
And it is not even internally consistent-should you leave because you rage that liberals supposedly control everything?
Folks who say they "do not see" color are almost always in denial about their own bias.
And white people overwhelmingly underrate both the prevalence & effect of racism.
I happen to be white.

Flash I just would not let hate corrode your heart...While things would be dramatically better without say the massive number of those conned by Trump to Fear & Hate & distrust every individual & institution that opposes his relentless criminality & incompetence...
It is also better not to effectively wish them dead.

Some are basically decent & can be reached. If they are treated with respect, while continually having reality reflected to them.
Eventually, it will be increasingly hard to find people who admit to supporting (or at least enthusiastically supporting) the likes of Trump.

 

I support him, you're hate is showing pal!

 

This content is protected