BoxRec
It is currently 26 Dec 2014, 15:38

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 69 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Holmes vs Cooney
PostPosted: 18 Apr 2009, 03:25 

Joined: 16 Oct 2006, 14:26
Posts: 241
I heard somewhere that Cooney was ahead on points before Holmes stopped him! Can anyone verify this as true?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Holmes vs Cooney
PostPosted: 18 Apr 2009, 03:29 

Joined: 24 Apr 2007, 22:34
Posts: 4421
Location: Adelaide, Australia
~ time: 2:52 | referee: Mills Lane | judge: Duane Ford 113-111 Holmes | judge: Dave Moretti 113-111 Holmes | judge: Jerry Roth 115-109 Holmes~
~ WBC heavyweight title ~
Cooney had 3 points deducted for low blows

From Boxrec.

Far from being ahead on points. But it is one of those boxing lore's
that some writers and HBO may be fond of establishing. Regardless
of the low blow deductions...Holmes was in control, and the Roth
score cards are more realistic than the other two Judges who seemed
to be pro Cooney. I say this as I have a copy of this fight that allows
you to see the judges cards after each round. And they score big
for Cooney all to often.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Holmes vs Cooney
PostPosted: 18 Apr 2009, 03:55 

Joined: 15 Nov 2002, 09:53
Posts: 13432
Cooney was always fighting a game but losing battle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Holmes vs Cooney
PostPosted: 18 Apr 2009, 03:57 

Joined: 24 Apr 2007, 22:34
Posts: 4421
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Agreed. No doubt about it, Cooney left it all in the ring that
night.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Holmes vs Cooney
PostPosted: 18 Apr 2009, 07:58 

Joined: 16 Dec 2008, 06:55
Posts: 1056
Robinson wrote:
~ time: 2:52 | referee: Mills Lane | judge: Duane Ford 113-111 Holmes | judge: Dave Moretti 113-111 Holmes | judge: Jerry Roth 115-109 Holmes~
~ WBC heavyweight title ~
Cooney had 3 points deducted for low blows

From Boxrec.

Far from being ahead on points. But it is one of those boxing lore's
that some writers and HBO may be fond of establishing. Regardless
of the low blow deductions...Holmes was in control


- Actually, the fight was Cooney's the whole way to win or lose. Holmes took his worst beating, and I must commend his durability having watched him take a dozen Tyson shots after being knocked down hard twice before Holmes is KOed. Easy to hurt but very tough to finish.

Easier to outbox as Gerry used a magnificent wincing body attack on Holmes along with some good cracks to the jaw. Unlike many I rate Cooney's talent and skill level very high since it was obvious he had no legs under him early in the fight with the flash KD, in the 2d rd as I recall. Holmes otherwise barely touches him until his legs finally give out with Holmes glaring at him. Wouldn't have made it that far without excellent boxing to negate Holmes.

The shots started straying low late in the fight because he was running out of steam and losing control of his form. He'd never been past 8 rds and was coming in after a long layoff. Probably more than a bit discouraged to see Holmes still standing after well past it Young and Norton had gone down so easily.

Cooney lost 4 total points including the flash KD, meaning had not the lowblows and KD occurred, Holmes would've been behind 109-115 x2 and 111-113. Cooney laid the blueprint for a tall boxer to outbox Holmes like Spinks was able.

The myth is that Holmes was some kind of invincible master boxer, when in fact even a past prime Norton was able to get to him easily through the whole of their fight. Holmes' success was primarily due to his chin and ability to recover quickly from big shots that he took and that he showed a lot of fire when he was on the attack.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Holmes vs Cooney
PostPosted: 18 Apr 2009, 11:01 

Joined: 29 Oct 2003, 22:56
Posts: 5705
BRR somehow manages to make his posts more ridiculous each passing day . .a pretty remarkable feat I may say :D


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Holmes vs Cooney
PostPosted: 18 Apr 2009, 13:21 

Joined: 15 Oct 2008, 12:36
Posts: 36
dempseyfire wrote:
BRR somehow manages to make his posts more ridiculous each passing day . .a pretty remarkable feat I may say :D

You may.
I watched the fight the night it happened,Holmes controled it the entire way.
And a knockdown counts as a 2 point deduction,not 1.
Cooney was never really in that fight.
And that low blow,was one of the most blatant and brutal Ive ever seen,it was an uppercut for christs sake right to the twig and berries,I wince just thinking about it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Holmes vs Cooney
PostPosted: 18 Apr 2009, 16:45 

Joined: 06 May 2002, 06:13
Posts: 4176
Location: Watching Peter Kay
dempseyfire wrote:
BRR somehow manages to make his posts more ridiculous each passing day . .a pretty remarkable feat I may say :D


He's a joke.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Holmes vs Cooney
PostPosted: 18 Apr 2009, 17:20 

Joined: 16 Dec 2008, 06:55
Posts: 1056
Trainer Monkey wrote:
And a knockdown counts as a 2 point deduction,not 1.


- Some of you gents musta swallowed all your silly putty when you were children.

If a fighter dominates the round and suffers a flash KD, he's not supposed to lose the round by 10-8. That's a 9-9 rd, but of course judges can pencil in whatever nonsense they want with no repercussions.

However, just running with your delusions, it means that Cooney was even more dominant on the scoring than I previously noted, being ahead on pure boxing by 116-108, 116-108, and 114-110 before deductions.

Subjectively, you can make a case for Winky outboxing Williams for example, but not by the official record. Cooney was winning most every round on pure boxing, but being deducted points until such time as Holmes has the winning total.

It's no wonder boxing can pull the wool over your eyes so easily, you can't add or subtract!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Holmes vs Cooney
PostPosted: 18 Apr 2009, 19:19 

Joined: 06 May 2002, 06:13
Posts: 4176
Location: Watching Peter Kay
BroughtonRulesRefuge wrote:
Trainer Monkey wrote:
And a knockdown counts as a 2 point deduction,not 1.


- Some of you gents musta swallowed all your silly putty when you were children.

If a fighter dominates the round and suffers a flash KD, he's not supposed to lose the round by 10-8. That's a 9-9 rd, but of course judges can pencil in whatever nonsense they want with no repercussions.

However, just running with your delusions, it means that Cooney was even more dominant on the scoring than I previously noted, being ahead on pure boxing by 116-108, 116-108, and 114-110 before deductions.

Subjectively, you can make a case for Winky outboxing Williams for example, but not by the official record. Cooney was winning most every round on pure boxing, but being deducted points until such time as Holmes has the winning total.

It's no wonder boxing can pull the wool over your eyes so easily, you can't add or subtract!



You are a funny little man.

You really think Cooney was dominating that fight?

There is no hope for you.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Holmes vs Cooney
PostPosted: 18 Apr 2009, 20:07 

Joined: 24 Apr 2007, 22:34
Posts: 4421
Location: Adelaide, Australia
BRR
While I sometimes agree with you. This is not one of those things. I think
your dislike for my favourite Holmes is obviously clouding your thinking.
I however shall entertain you and rewatch this fight, and try to see it from
YOUR angle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Holmes vs Cooney
PostPosted: 18 Apr 2009, 20:49 

Joined: 15 Oct 2008, 12:36
Posts: 36
Robinson wrote:
BRR
While I sometimes agree with you. This is not one of those things. I think
your dislike for my favourite Holmes is obviously clouding your thinking.
I however shall entertain you and rewatch this fight, and try to see it from
YOUR angle.

But how are you going to get to Mars,which is the only possible angle he could have been watching it from.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Holmes vs Cooney
PostPosted: 19 Apr 2009, 00:38 

Joined: 16 Dec 2008, 06:55
Posts: 1056
Robinson wrote:
BRR
While I sometimes agree with you. This is not one of those things. I think
your dislike for my favourite Holmes is obviously clouding your thinking.
I however shall entertain you and rewatch this fight, and try to see it from
YOUR angle.


- Average westerner is pretty poor at math. This is clearly, at the very least, a math thing.

Math don't lie, 1+1=2. People lie though, or don't understand. Moreover, my dislike for Tyson is greater than Holmes or Mr. E. H. Field, so why don't I rate them over him?

Well, perhaps answering that question is asking too much of a forum that 66% pick a doughy Bert Cooper as their favorite 90s fighter. Then they start complaining about today's heavies not being as good and out of shape.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Holmes vs Cooney
PostPosted: 19 Apr 2009, 01:44 

Joined: 06 May 2002, 06:13
Posts: 4176
Location: Watching Peter Kay
BroughtonRulesRefuge wrote:
Robinson wrote:
BRR
While I sometimes agree with you. This is not one of those things. I think
your dislike for my favourite Holmes is obviously clouding your thinking.
I however shall entertain you and rewatch this fight, and try to see it from
YOUR angle.


- Average westerner is pretty poor at math. This is clearly, at the very least, a math thing.

Math don't lie, 1+1=2. People lie though, or don't understand. Moreover, my dislike for Tyson is greater than Holmes or Mr. E. H. Field, so why don't I rate them over him?

Well, perhaps answering that question is asking too much of a forum that 66% pick a doughy Bert Cooper as their favorite 90s fighter. Then they start complaining about today's heavies not being as good and out of shape.


Yawn.

Still have Cooney dominating?

Poor sap.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Holmes vs Cooney
PostPosted: 19 Apr 2009, 01:47 

Joined: 24 Oct 2006, 18:03
Posts: 125
Location: Montana, USA
I remember Cooney's corner instructing him to 'hit the funny bone'... I felt that was an instruction for deliberate low blows in that bout. Later his trainer said he meant that Cooney should hit under Holmes' elbow for body shots to the ribs which I find a little hard to believe considering the numerous low punches.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Holmes vs Cooney
PostPosted: 19 Apr 2009, 02:46 

Joined: 24 Apr 2007, 22:34
Posts: 4421
Location: Adelaide, Australia
BRR
A maths problem you say....?

Norm

I dont think that Cooney's low blows were intentional. Just in his awkwardness
he found the happy spot on Holmes. He was landing legal body blows that were
borderline. Its just one of those things. One thing for certain..intentional or not
they hurt all the same.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Holmes vs Cooney
PostPosted: 19 Apr 2009, 07:27 

Joined: 16 Dec 2008, 06:55
Posts: 1056
Robinson wrote:
BRR
A maths problem you say....?


- Indeed, you may be math illiterate. Do the math if you don't accept my math.

If you can't understand the math to do it, then stop arguing with the clerk over your change handed back to you.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Holmes vs Cooney
PostPosted: 19 Apr 2009, 09:45 

Joined: 24 Apr 2007, 22:34
Posts: 4421
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Im not arguing...with the clerk....


Like I said...I think that two of the judges had odd scores.
I shall score the fight shortly and let you know how I had it
with and without the deductions at the time of the stoppage.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Holmes vs Cooney
PostPosted: 19 Apr 2009, 14:23 

Joined: 12 Aug 2007, 23:32
Posts: 495
Location: Texas
if i remember correctly, the fight was even on the cards through 10 rounds.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Holmes vs Cooney
PostPosted: 19 Apr 2009, 15:45 

Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 07:26
Posts: 1081
Wow, I sorta agree with BRR, scary :)
To say that Holmes controlled the fight is imo wrong, he hung tough but was clearly bothered by Cooney on many occasions during the fight. As for the scoring I think Cooney was at least on even terms without the deductions but of course the low blows did warrant some kind of reaction. In the end Holmes won it fair and square, no argument there but I always thought Cooney could have taken the title with a different build up. No long lay-off and a couple of tough distance fights in the-run up could have done the trick.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Holmes vs Cooney
PostPosted: 19 Apr 2009, 15:59 

Joined: 29 Oct 2003, 22:56
Posts: 5705
I'll agree it was a competitive fight but Holmes even without the low blow deductions was ahead at the time of the stoppage. To call the 2nd round KD that make Cooney do the funky chicken a 'flash knockdown' . . . wow.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Holmes vs Cooney
PostPosted: 19 Apr 2009, 19:28 

Joined: 16 Dec 2008, 06:55
Posts: 1056
dempseyfire wrote:
I'll agree it was a competitive fight but Holmes even without the low blow deductions was ahead at the time of the stoppage. To call the 2nd round KD that make Cooney do the funky chicken a 'flash knockdown' . . . wow.


- Oh, brother, another one who can't do 3rd grade arithmetic, a poster boy for the decline of American education and boxing.

Cooney landed a left hook that made Holmes do a little jig, the difference being he recovered in a flash whereas Jerry went down, but was immediately back up. Holmes couldn't do anything with him and Cooney goes another 11 rds.

Cooney wasn't hurt, it just the first time he'd likely suffered a flush punch in his pro career. You've already forgotten that Cooney fought weak set ups going into this fight, beating a couple of past it names, not prime heavies contender types that represented a threat. That's why Holmes wanted him, Cooney was a baby in development like all the others Larry robbed the crib for his defenses.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Holmes vs Cooney
PostPosted: 19 Apr 2009, 19:41 

Joined: 24 Apr 2007, 22:34
Posts: 4421
Location: Adelaide, Australia
I think Cooney was the one along with his management and everyone
else that wanted Holmes. Sure Holmes made good $ from the fight.

Of all the Holmes title challengers Cooney was one of the more deserving,
it is only post Holmes that many sit back and point out how 'crap' Cooney
was but....the man had some good name wins (yes over past it opponents
but he destroyed them!!!), he also had power, size and ability that in 1982
was very real and scarey.

He was a guy geared towards one big moment...he failed and while did his
best to come back...all to late....never amounted to anything better than a
man who was built up for one fight.

The Cooney that fought Holmes in 1982 was an extremely dangerous and
hard hitting man that could have been a champ, or atleast won the title
in a lot of other era's.

It seems it is your dislike for Holmes which see's you discrediting his opponents
and his clutch on the reign. We can do this with every Champ and his opponents
lets have a look at Burns, Jeffries, Johnson, Dempsey, Louis, Charles, Marciano,
Patterson, Ali and so on...nit pick the guys they 'struggled' against, or allowed
to challenge them.

As for Cooney being even or ahead on points...even if he was...even.....IF... Holmes
still stopped him and won !!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Holmes vs Cooney
PostPosted: 19 Apr 2009, 20:20 

Joined: 16 Dec 2008, 06:55
Posts: 1056
Robinson wrote:
... Holmes
still stopped him and won !!!!


- Holmes legit win doesn't negate the scoring and the way the fight played out.

He was exposed by every good boxer he faced, so I'm putting to rest this myth of him as a master boxer. He had some nice paper attributes yet barely scraped by a battle worn Norton. Cooney who just bonked hisself out after 13, and of course Spinks who completely shut him down the first fight. I thought a pigeon was gonna land on the top of his peanut haid in that fight he was so frozen up.

A legit well deserved win over Cooney and I've never said otherwise. He took a lot of punishment while showing heart, but no, quite the opposite of a master class performance.

And sure, if some Rocky fanboy come out here touting Rocky as some kind of master wunderkind boxer, of course I would set him straight. Rocky fans tend to be smarter than Holmes fans though, so we seldom see that.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Holmes vs Cooney
PostPosted: 19 Apr 2009, 22:08 

Joined: 08 Sep 2005, 00:43
Posts: 7108
Quote:
And sure, if some Rocky fanboy come out here touting Rocky as some kind of master wunderkind boxer, of course I would set him straight. Rocky fans tend to be smarter than Holmes fans though, so we seldom see that.



"And if the truth be told, Rocky Marciano couldn't carry my jock strap!"

-Larry Holmes-


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 69 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: