cooney gets a lot of crap for being a hype job and not being able to take a shot but he was even on the cards vs holmes through 10 rounds. he wasn't near as bad as some make him out to be. fury is still improving so right now i'd take cooney and fairly easy.
I tend to agree. Fury's a giant, but Cooney was huge as well, with the reach to touch and he power to hurt Fury very badly.
Surprising as it may be to some, these guys are about as close in size as Evander and Bowe were, though they're both giants. Which really illustrates how size at heavyweight is overly and ridiculously emphasised as a H2H anything. Three inches in height difference and current Fury, who is in good shape, is about thirty pounds heavier than Cooney was when he fought Holmes. No, really. ...Really. Incredible, no? Anyway, I take Cooney by stoppage. Simply a better and more proven technician and an elite puncher to boot, which Tyson cannot lay claim to. Fury is a good fighter and I don't know where his ceiling is, and he's surprised me by surpassing where I thought he'd be by now, quite a bit, but nothing I've seen so far would make me favour him over Cooney, who is underrated like most contenders during dominant reigns.
Fury's still an unknown quantity when it comes to top level boxing. Going on what we know,I have to say Cooney.
Cooney KO 2. After Fury hits himself in the face he gets tagged. Even though hes the smaller fighter, Cooney at 6 foot 6 with arguably the most powerful left hook in the history of the division wins easily. Gerry had solid fundamentals as well. Fury is a joke imo.
Sounds weird, but the trump card of the Cooney left hook makes all the difference in the world here. Both men present huge targets -- both will get hit plenty in any given fight. Cooney could land it to the body, and would get there. Not without eating plenty of leather from Fury, but I think he could take the abuse and wobble the big man.
fury is game, hes young, hes big and has a pretty good workrate for a giant. Of course Fury is fighting slower paced men who huff and puff after 2 rounds which flatters him but you cant knock him for the era he was born into. 25 -30 years ago he would need to take off 30lb to keep up with the pace of heavyweights of the period but today there is no need. Cooney set the world alight. The way he stood up to Holmes was reminiscent of the way Ray Mancini fared against Arguello, he might have lost the battle but still proved he could and should have come again like mancini did. Gerry established that he had the tools, the heart and even championship seasoning even losing to Holmes. Weaver and Smith fared far worse against Holmes and still became champions. Bruno fared worse against witherspoon, Coetzee fared worse against Weaver etc etc. In fact Cooney and Carl Williams were the only good heavyweights who never became champions from that era. He was that good. Fury? No.
Michael Spinks wiz e hendikapt ni stopt Cooney, old , obis end diseibeld George 4man stopt Conney, mature eijd patetik panching Larry Holmes stopt Cooney ,, Fury iz @ list going 2 fait David Haye. E superior h2h sret 2 Tony Thompson bat olso 2 Ken Norton, Jimmy Young end Ron Lyle (espesheli de vershens of dem wum Cooney fot)
Cooney cracks Fury a couple times and Tyson is down. I simply think Cooney hits harder than Fury and their less than stellar beards nearly even out. Gerry by ko/tko first three rounds.
Cooney hits hard, somewhere down the line hes gonna connect to Tyson (Fury) and when he does, it will be all she wrote. Fury has the tools to outbox Cooney, but he needs to fight a very displined fight. Fury can also punch a bit, when he wants to. Furys getting Kod IMO. Replace Cooney with Haye and you get the same story
