Jerry Quarry v Henry Cooper 1968

I have not seen that fight for a few years but I did see it, oscar won but I thought the rounds that karl did not get bundled down were close and competative. simular to chuvalo-bonavenna what I remember of it.

cooper always said he found southpaw mildenburger easy to handle.

oscar went 10 rounds against big hubert hilton after cooper knocked him out in 2 rounds.

 

Bonavena was pretty damn dominant. Short of knocking Mildenberger out there isnt a lot more you could do to win a fight. He knocked him down four times and at best you might be able to give him 3 rounds if you are being objective. Who cares who did what to Hubert Hilton. We are talking head to head matchups not who did better against what journeyman fighter. I pick Quarry over Cooper by KO or TKO by round 6. I pick Quarry over Bonavena by decision, BUT I think Bonavena had a style that would be poison to Cooper and think he would run Cooper out of the ring early. It doesnt mean he was better to me than Quarry, just that styles dictate the outcome of a fight.

 

styles often often dictate the outcome of a fight but i find it useful to gauge fighters abilitys against comon oponents in the way an odds maker might. in 1968 cooper and quarry were about the same size, cooper slightly taller and quarry about 3 pounds heavier but cooper was way older at that time.

cooper was a prety sound boxer and quite adaptable against bigger stronger guys that were slower. his win over 34-1 ring magazine fighter of the month jose urtain in coopers final year as a pro was a master class. urtain was a power house not unlike bonavena who like henry was also beaten by foley.

foley, patterson and ali were all slick and fast. these were the fighters who did beter against cooper.

Against non champions cooper was about as good as anyone for a short time. he deserves an even chance at his 1960-63 best with bonavena, quarry and chuvalo because against common opponents his victorys are comparable. he could live with most contenders.

 

Depending on the year, the outcome would be different.

1966,,,,,Jerry was a bit young.
1967,,,,,Jerry had stamina problems.
1968,,,,,After the loss to Jimmy Ellis, a summer water-skiing accident.
1969,,,,,Brutal knock-out losses to Joe Frazier and George Chuvalo
1970,,,,,Comeback of the year by Knocking out Mac Foster, but TKO cut-eye loss to Muhammad Ali.

 

Urtain was nothing. He was considered protected even by European standards in Europe during his time. It was felt he was being coddled and promoted to a championship. Its not exactly impressive when your two best victories are over Blin and Bodell (and Blin actually avenged his loss). Sorry but beating Urtain doesnt really impress me. Cooper SHOULD have beaten Urtain. A lot of guys who werent even on Coopers level beat him. Do you think Quarry, Bonavena, Ellis, Chuvalo, Folley, etc wouldnt have beaten Urtain? I think all of those guys would have been huge favorites to beat him in one sided fashion.

 

What was brutal about the Chuvalo loss? He was dropped and however one views the stoppage (which was strange) he appears fine at the end.

 

Kl,

I'm from New York.
Everyone knows Jerry was spending his time in New York at the Irish Pubs,
instead of training.
He was not in shape.

 

Even if that were true, of which there is no proof, it still doesnt change what actually happened in the ring and certainly doesnt make it a brutal stoppage.

For a guy who was out of shape he sure did a great job of winning every round on my card and busting up Chuvalos face so that it was unrecognizable (and pretty damn gross).

 

Cooper had a good left hand but ultimately I see him being too suspectible to Quarry's counters. The fight would probably end quite dramatically with Cooper doing fine until getting dropped.

 

yes I would expect those guys to beat urtain also. I was merely demonstrating that jose was a strong man (rock lifting champion) and that even in coopers last fights he could still handle a powerhouse type mauler.

bonavena would not "walk right through cooper" if henry could handle guys as strong as urtain as an old man. at his best cooper could live with most elite contenders.

Urtain beat 4 european champions and the ring magazine put him on their cover. at 34-1 cooper was the first man to stop urtain. he wasnt "nothing".

 

Urtain somehow lost to Alberto Lovell, who is probably the worst heavyweight boxer I've ever seen.

 

that was years after the beat down an old cooper gave him. quarry lost to cramer but i wouldnt bring that up.

urtain (who never boxed as an amatuer) also knoked out richard dunn quicker than both ali and jimmy young did and dunn beat tiger wiliams.

 

Two very different situations. Urtain never accomplished a thing at world level. Bonavena on the other hand was proven against the best. He even gave hard fights to Muhammad Ali and Joe Frazier.

 

hm i suppose,
i did not read 1 title correctly.
in 1 year 1968, my m8 Enry' wud not win .
Too Old.

 

I could not agree more. urtain was a poor mans version of bonavena at a lower level, cooper, an old cooper handled him. I was demonstrating that if a poor version of cooper and a poor alternative of bonavena resulted in a win for cooper then a peak henry has an even chance against bonavena. both henry and oscar lost to foley, patterson and ali after all. its the same level.

cooper was just as proven at world level as bonavena and chuvalo, he beat 12 rated contenders and always gave ali a hard fight.