interesting match a peak Gerry Cooney 1980-82 vs a rusty 1977 George Foreman

The Cooney of 1980-82 was more aggressive and confident, but he was still untested. When he fought Holmes, he was decked and shaken in the second round against a good puncher, but not one of Foreman's power. While Gerry fought a game fight until it was stopped in the 13th, had even a 1977 George floored him in the second round, I cannot see him lasting much longer (as it happened in real time).

Cooney had a lot of potential, and in his developing years needed to have some wins against tough opponents who could give him a good fight over the distance. Had he developed proper seasoning, he might have picked up at least an alphabet title during the 80s.

 

Holmes was a technical boxer who was able to time that right hand perfectly as the two men were coming in at each other. While Foreman hit much harder than Holmes, the mechanism by which Larry was able to land on Cooney was much different and something that a late 70's Foreman didn't posses. Furthermore, Cooney had been off for 13 months and had only seen 54 seconds of boxing action within a near two year period. I think the best version of Gerry surfaced around 1980 and diminished quickly.... For the record, I'd still pick even a 70's Foreman to beat Cooney, but its not so cut and dry in my eyes.. Remember this was the guy who was beaten by the light hitting Young, floored twice by Ron Lyle and was seeing Jesus in the locker room after the Young defeat....

 

How many big, powerful, hard-punching guys did George Foreman really fight though? To say that no "walk right in and slug" guys could deal with Foreman is a bit shortsighted in my humble opinion. Lyle basically did that and came within a hair of KO'ing Big George. Foreman didn't face enough of those types of fighters to make that sort of statement. It's sort of like the guys who say no short, come forward fighter could ever beat George Foreman just because Frazier could not and because Cus D'Amato supposedly said so.