Rethinking Henry Cooper

I think after Chuvalo lost to Terrell and Cooper lost to Ali and Patterson that Chuvalo and his manager Irving Ungerman began talking about the Lonsdale Belt again and how Cooper was avoiding George. But as you say, I think that's about all they did was talk about it probably to drum up interest for George's fights in Canada against guys like Jean Claude Roy. They didn't seem to care enough to pursue it probably because the promoters over there would have required some more build-up fight in England and George and Ungerman didn't want to go through that again. And I don't think Cooper was all that confident he could beat Chuvalo either, so he let sleeping dogs lie.

 

I don’t think that would have been the case. Chuvalo lost to known opponents who fought in the UK like Joe Erskine, Pete Radmacher and Corletti. Cooper was very familiar with those kinds of guys watching them lose to himself or to men he beat in London. Henry would not have feared Chuvalo one bit.

 

According to Cooper's autobiography, the fight didn't happen because there just wasn't enough money on the table. As he put it, "We could stay at home and get easier fights for more money."

 

Yes this is true but it is important to note this was in 1966 around the time both Cooper and Chuvalo were challenging Ali in title fights. Chuvalo as a late substitute for Terrell in his hometown right after the loss on coopers undercard to Eduardo Corletti. So both guys were distracted by fights with Ali.

“George Chuvalo, the Canadian champion, challenged me to defend my Empire title at Toronto on April 18 1966. But as Jim always said he was too ugly. We only liked good looking fighters! That was good as excuse as any. Chuvalo was a rough handful, but the silly thing was the money they offered. Canada was always behind the UK and USA for money. They offered £8,300, but we could stay in London and get easier fights for more money.”

 

Not strictly true. That was his “on reflection” opinion by 1969 when he was looking for one last big money fight. He was referring to Joe Frazier being all wrong for him and that like Sonny, style wise Wicks would never have taken the fight.


“With Ali we’d have gone in every day of the week. But not Liston or Frazier. Both are sluggers, coming forward and hitting hard, giving you no rest, and two stone heavier.”

Earlier in the book Cooper explains the reasoning in 1958 where Wicks took the higher ranked Zora Folley over a lower ranked Sonny Liston:

“He told Levine. “I don’t know who Liston is but I don’t want him” Levine said “so you will take the top two then?”. “Yeah” said Jim. Wicks knew he wouldn’t get Archie Moore for the money that was offered. To his surprise Folley took us up”

 

"But as Jim always said he was too ugly. We only liked good looking fighters!"

I think we need to read between the lines on this one. Chuvalo was a very Gene Fullmer-ish fighter. And by that I mean, he didn't care where he hit you or what he hit you with as long as he hit you. No matter what way you look at it, with Cooper's propensity for self-bloodletting, he was going to come out of this fight a mess. There was no prim and proper Marquis of Queensbury rules with George, this would have been ugly.

 

I agree whole heartedly. Cooper didn’t need Chuvalo, especially when George was losing to Corletti.

 

I think we could look at that both ways. With Chuvalo in Britain - clearly there to familiarize himself to British fans - there was that undeniable push to fight Cooper for his Commonwealth title. However, the loss to Corletti may have been used more as a "Good, we're off the hook" in having to fight Chuvalo. A loss shouldn't have derailed the fight unless you wanted it to. If a loss was the catalyst for scrubbing a Commonwealth title fight, then Cooper never would have defended it against Dick Richardson, Billy Walker or Johnny Prescott, who were all coming off losses (Prescott was coming off 2 losses) when Cooper defended against them. Personally, I think Cooper should have taken the fight. What did he have to lose? At the end of year '65 Ring ratings Cooper was nowhere to be found, whereas Chuvalo was #3. Moreover, I don't know how kind British officials were to Chuvalo's style, especially with an idol like Cooper in the other corner. He would have to be on his best behavior or flaunt a DQ. Perhaps it came down to Cooper's people already in talks with Ali's people for the May title fight and didn't need a struggle before that. Many variables to look at.

 

I think your right, as Coopers people were already in talks with Ali for a May title fight, they won’t risk fighting Chuvalo in April for peanuts just ahead of a world title chance.

Ali’s people wouldn’t want Cooper to risk it either because Cooper represented the best payday for Ali until he fought Frazier in 1971.

Win or lose Cooper would have been cut against Chuvalo in an unimportant fight and would never be ready in time for a stadium fight that summer.

.

 

This analysis sums up my thinking on the topic as well.

 

One thing about Henry Cooper, because of his following in London, he represented probably the best pay day for any contender outside of the world champion.

 

Pretty sure Chuvalo never boxed Erskine Choklab.

 

Would certainly have got cut. Chuvalo not much shorter, but heavier. Lost to some he shouldn't, but so did Henry. Would have been the toughest guy Henry ever boxed, and if he managed to win, his best ever.

 

Actually, Chuvalo lost on a DQ in 5 to Erskine.

 

Henry was a very limited Fighter. Small for a Heavyweight, fragile around the eyes, totally one handed and by no means blastproof but over the years, these things have made me admire him more. He knew all this but still backed himself.
Cooper trained like a monk and always fought with immense courage and commitment. He also carried himself like a Champion. Dignified and modest.