Gerry Cooney, was inactivity his downfall?

Controversial
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 9152
Joined: 13 Jul 2002, 18:29

Gerry Cooney, was inactivity his downfall?

Post by Controversial »

I've just been looking at Cooney's record and didn't realise how inactive he was before fighting Holmes and Spinks. He only had 3 fights (6 rounds) in the 2 and a half years before facing Holmes, two of these ending in the 1st round. By the time he fought Holmes the last fight he had was the 54 second blast out over Norton 13 months earlier, poor poor preparation.

Then 5 years later he fought Spinks and again only had 3 fights in all that time. By the time he fought Spinks he hadn't fought for 13 months and that fight ended in one round, again terrible preparation. Then of course he took another 3 years off and fought Foreman.

Why was he so inactive, was he blocked out by King or something else? With regular fights do you think he would have achieved more?
fatcity69
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 419
Joined: 11 May 2008, 16:18

Re: Gerry Cooney, was inactivity his downfall?

Post by fatcity69 »

I think he was not experienced enough to handle Holmes, though I doubt he would ever have beaten Larry, even if he'd been more seasoned. After the Holmes fight he lost all his confidence and so that along with long periods out of action led to his losses against Spinks and Foreman.
Really his management should have kept him much more busy prior to a title shot and then put him in with Weaver or Dokes for the WBA title rather than going after Larry. Weaver vs Cooner would have been a great match, I would go for a Weaver win but Cooner would have had a better chance than he did against Holmes.
fatcity69
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 419
Joined: 11 May 2008, 16:18

Re: Gerry Cooney, was inactivity his downfall?

Post by fatcity69 »

To be fair to Spinks, he fought a great fight against Cooney too.
SaadOffTheDeck
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 19602
Joined: 04 Jun 2009, 07:38

Re: Gerry Cooney, was inactivity his downfall?

Post by SaadOffTheDeck »

I think he was inactive because he didn't like Boxing. Oh, and no I don't think it would have made a difference.
fatcity69
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 419
Joined: 11 May 2008, 16:18

Re: Gerry Cooney, was inactivity his downfall?

Post by fatcity69 »

He was overprotected by his managers prior to the Holmes fight and in the end began doubting himself due to the 'protection'. He was just as talented as Gerrie Coetzee, probably more so, but he didnt go through the fights that would have developed him like Coetzee did so he never really got a chance to fulfil his potential.
SaadOffTheDeck
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 19602
Joined: 04 Jun 2009, 07:38

Re: Gerry Cooney, was inactivity his downfall?

Post by SaadOffTheDeck »

I think he maximized his talents. There are only so many beatings a man needs to take and, like I said, Gerry openly talks about how much he disliked Boxing.
Controversial
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 9152
Joined: 13 Jul 2002, 18:29

Re: Gerry Cooney, was inactivity his downfall?

Post by Controversial »

Found this interview with Cooney from 2011. He seems to blame inactivity and Don King as he wouldn't sign for him.......

J.S: You were a huge star at your peak; how did that affect you - the pressure to become great?

G.C: The Great White Hope” tag never bothered me. That was all bullshit! I never paid attention to any of that. That never added any pressure. That was just Don King’s doing, and his attempts to make more money. But King did affect me as a fighter, because I couldn’t get any fights because I wouldn’t sign up with him. The lack of experience in not being able to get more fights and not being able to grow and develop, that really was a big deal to me. That is definitely the biggest and most important thing I would say on the subject of what shaped me as a fighter - the lack of experience due to not having enough fights. When I KO’d Ken Norton, that was a big deal, but I wasn’t able to get another fight before going into the biggest fight of my life against Larry Holmes. Consequently, I had it in my head going in to the Holmes fight that I couldn’t go the distance, that my stamina might be lacking. I wanted to go the distance to prove wrong the people who said I couldn’t do it.

J.S: Who were the “good” people you worked with in your career?

G.C: One of the best people I worked with who helped me and made me the fighter I was, was my trainer Victor Valle. A great person, he was a great trainer. But because I never had the number of fights I needed, I never actually learnt how to fight properly until after my career was done, or almost done. When I was young, it was like ‘go get ’em, go get ’em.’ Later, at the end, when it was too late for me, I learnt how to play a guy, how to set him up, how to take my time. But when I was young, I never had that chance. And it affected me that the public didn’t understand why I wasn’t fighting enough. That frustrated me.

J.S: Which early fights helped to shape you into a contender?

G.C: Some of my early fights did help shape me into the fighter I became; even though I never fully developed as I should have done due to not fighting enough - I fought just three times from December of 1979 to the fight with Holmes in 1982! I beat a guy called Animal Lopez, and I beat him quite easily by wide decision. That experience was great for me. And my quick stoppage wins over Dino Dennis and Norton; they helped me a whole lot.
fatcity69
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 419
Joined: 11 May 2008, 16:18

Re: Gerry Cooney, was inactivity his downfall?

Post by fatcity69 »

Controversial wrote:Found this interview with Cooney from 2011. He seems to blame inactivity and Don King as he wouldn't sign for him.......

J.S: You were a huge star at your peak; how did that affect you - the pressure to become great?

G.C: The Great White Hope” tag never bothered me. That was all bullshit! I never paid attention to any of that. That never added any pressure. That was just Don King’s doing, and his attempts to make more money. But King did affect me as a fighter, because I couldn’t get any fights because I wouldn’t sign up with him. The lack of experience in not being able to get more fights and not being able to grow and develop, that really was a big deal to me. That is definitely the biggest and most important thing I would say on the subject of what shaped me as a fighter - the lack of experience due to not having enough fights. When I KO’d Ken Norton, that was a big deal, but I wasn’t able to get another fight before going into the biggest fight of my life against Larry Holmes. Consequently, I had it in my head going in to the Holmes fight that I couldn’t go the distance, that my stamina might be lacking. I wanted to go the distance to prove wrong the people who said I couldn’t do it.

J.S: Who were the “good” people you worked with in your career?

G.C: One of the best people I worked with who helped me and made me the fighter I was, was my trainer Victor Valle. A great person, he was a great trainer. But because I never had the number of fights I needed, I never actually learnt how to fight properly until after my career was done, or almost done. When I was young, it was like ‘go get ’em, go get ’em.’ Later, at the end, when it was too late for me, I learnt how to play a guy, how to set him up, how to take my time. But when I was young, I never had that chance. And it affected me that the public didn’t understand why I wasn’t fighting enough. That frustrated me.

J.S: Which early fights helped to shape you into a contender?

G.C: Some of my early fights did help shape me into the fighter I became; even though I never fully developed as I should have done due to not fighting enough - I fought just three times from December of 1979 to the fight with Holmes in 1982! I beat a guy called Animal Lopez, and I beat him quite easily by wide decision. That experience was great for me. And my quick stoppage wins over Dino Dennis and Norton; they helped me a whole lot.
Good interview... he says himself that he did'nt fully develop due to his lack of experience and fights. 3 fights in 3 years isnt maximizing your talent.
SaadOffTheDeck
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 19602
Joined: 04 Jun 2009, 07:38

Re: Gerry Cooney, was inactivity his downfall?

Post by SaadOffTheDeck »

I don't think he would have been any better. That's my point. I was impressed when he clobbered George Chaplin, that's probably his best win.
fatcity69
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 419
Joined: 11 May 2008, 16:18

Re: Gerry Cooney, was inactivity his downfall?

Post by fatcity69 »

So you don't see how having more fights and therefore more experience can improve a fighter?...
SaadOffTheDeck
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 19602
Joined: 04 Jun 2009, 07:38

Re: Gerry Cooney, was inactivity his downfall?

Post by SaadOffTheDeck »

LOL, I never said that. I don't think it would have improved Cooney. More likely than not, somebody would have gotten to his chin before he cashed the big paycheck.
HomicideHenry
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 18722
Joined: 08 Sep 2005, 00:43

Re: Gerry Cooney, was inactivity his downfall?

Post by HomicideHenry »

Controversial wrote:I've just been looking at Cooney's record and didn't realise how inactive he was before fighting Holmes and Spinks. He only had 3 fights (6 rounds) in the 2 and a half years before facing Holmes, two of these ending in the 1st round. By the time he fought Holmes the last fight he had was the 54 second blast out over Norton 13 months earlier, poor poor preparation.

Then 5 years later he fought Spinks and again only had 3 fights in all that time. By the time he fought Spinks he hadn't fought for 13 months and that fight ended in one round, again terrible preparation. Then of course he took another 3 years off and fought Foreman.

Why was he so inactive, was he blocked out by King or something else? With regular fights do you think he would have achieved more?
Prior to the Holmes fight, Cooney was scheduled to face Earnie Shavers. However, an injury in sparring prevented the match from taking place---- and in Cooney's place was Tex Cobb. If you watch the fight film, they will tell the tale as I just stated and Cooney is doing color commentary. That answers your first question, anyways as to why he was inactive prior to the Holmes fight.

As far as the inactivity gaps after Holmes until Spinks, Cooney by that time had turned into something of a headcase. The loss to Holmes was more than he could take and started battling cocaine addict and the bottle. He ate through his finances, and his family pressured him into fighting again---- and let's be honest here, Cooney was pretty much a puppet in his father's hands and couldn't say no. He had to take care of his entire family, who were leeching off of his successes. That's why he came back against George Chaplin, etc. Those fights helped balance out his drug habits and leeching family--- and when the Spinks fight came along, Cooney couldnt turn it down. It was mostly all for money though, the fight was a rouse as Cooney wasnt even a top ten contender anymore. But alot of people figured with Cooney's size and power he would give Spinks problems---- unfortunately all the rust and drug addiction caught up with Gerry, he couldnt pull the trigger.

As for the gap between Spinks and Foreman, Cooney eventually got off the drugs and got into the business of promoting fights. As a matter of fact, he promoted George Foreman once or twice before actually fighting George. Why Cooney ever decided to come out and fight him is beyond me---- as Cooney hadn't fought in five years and was greying. However, despite all this, Cooney did rock Foreman early on and that was a punch Foreman said hurt him more than anyone else ever did in his entire career---- but he caught Cooney soon afterwards, and Gerry finally retired for good. I think he did it solely to boost his revenues as a promoter.
SaadOffTheDeck
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 19602
Joined: 04 Jun 2009, 07:38

Re: Gerry Cooney, was inactivity his downfall?

Post by SaadOffTheDeck »

That's probably a blessing for Cooney, I don't know if he could have lasted with even that faded Shavers. Tex took some serious leather. I don't recall Cooney doing commentary on the Hearns/Cuevas card. Granted, it wasn't televised live at all, but CBS had it the following week. I just remember Ryan & Clancy, but I'll take your word for it. Many years ago. Your timeline is definitely off as that was 1980, well before the Holmes fight was even thought of.
Esquire
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 177
Joined: 21 Oct 2008, 22:55

Re: Gerry Cooney, was inactivity his downfall?

Post by Esquire »

He didn't like boxing and he had a very serious drinking problem. He'd be the first to tell you that. I don't know the man but I grew up in the same bars that he frequented.

Nonetheless, he made lots of money and fought three hall of famers. Not a bad career for a guy that didn't like fighting.
loaded_gloves
Cruiserweight
Posts: 1907
Joined: 09 Mar 2011, 12:18

Re: Gerry Cooney, was inactivity his downfall?

Post by loaded_gloves »

To Cooney's great credit, he got back up against Holmes and went on to hit him with some humongous shots. There are a lot of good names who would break under Cooney's terrifying punch power but unfortunately for him Holmes was steel in the chin and belly.

I think Cooney showed great character in the Holmes bout, and had he been down against other men he might well have got up to whack them, given what he showed against Holmes. That in itself would totally alter how posterity views him.

I do feel for the man- Don King had an unhealthy monopoly on the heavyweights and he screwed all of them. I don't blame Gerry for not signing with him, even though it did irreparably damage his career and ultimately his reputation.

If, if, if . . .
Controversial
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 9152
Joined: 13 Jul 2002, 18:29

Re: Gerry Cooney, was inactivity his downfall?

Post by Controversial »

Apparently Cooney has said Holmes has told him that he would have beaten him if they fought a year later and Cooney had better prep.
Seamus
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 16983
Joined: 31 Jul 2005, 23:38

Re: Gerry Cooney, was inactivity his downfall?

Post by Seamus »

Cooney needed to face some moving targets, but his handlers preferred washed up punching bags instead. His stoppage of Jimmy Young was probably his best.
Ambling Alp II
Super Middleweight
Posts: 15097
Joined: 04 Nov 2012, 18:31

Re: Gerry Cooney, was inactivity his downfall?

Post by Ambling Alp II »

As others have mentioned, his heart was not really into boxing all of the way. He really did not seem to know if he wanted to be a fighter or not.
He had some ability. He was not as slow or uncoordinated as some people think. He put up a very creditable performance vs a prime Larry Holmes. It was a competitive fight, which is more than you can so for many of Holmes' opponents that he defended the title against.

It hurt him quite a bit that he was inactive. After the Holmes; fight, a good management team would have stepped back and make a good decision of what to do next. He needed experience, and he need to learn how to win a tough when he could not just blow out his opponent. He also seemed to be lacking confidence.

After the Holmes loss, he probably should have one fight against a tomato can to get some confidence back. Then gradually fight better and better competition. Someone like Tex Cobb would have been an ideal opponent. Cobb had a great chin, fought hard, but had little defense, and was not that hard of a puncher. He probably would have given Cooney a tough 10 round fight. James Tillis would have been a good fight for Cooney as well following Cobb. He needed experience against different styles of fighters who weren't pushovers, but unlikely to actually beat Cooney. (Of course the opponents that you want aren't always available.)

After a few fights, then it would be time for him to sink or swim and go for the WBA title. He was never likely to beat Larry Holmes. How he would have done vs Dokes, Coetzee, Page etc. is the big question and we really don't know the answer.
Dart340
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 304
Joined: 01 Jan 2007, 18:55

Re: Gerry Cooney, was inactivity his downfall?

Post by Dart340 »

There have been some very educated and intelligent takes on Cooney in this thread and I wholeheartedly agree that Cooney's physical abuse by his father and being almost literally being forced to become a boxer against his will played a part in his career shortcomings.

Where I disagree is that Cooney actually lived up to his potential. I'd lay odds that if Cooney would've had his heart in boxing or not, had he come out looking for blood against Holmes he would've found it more times than not. That fight, to me, is the epitome of a fighter deliberately putting handcuffs on himself. I've always contended that Cooney passively "tanked" that fight by not coming out looking for the KO because he didn't want to end up more deeply entrenched in boxing with even more pressure and expectations than he was already saddled with. As a result, I think we didn't see half of what he was truly capable of.
Nile4000
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 7111
Joined: 17 Sep 2005, 15:21

Re: Gerry Cooney, was inactivity his downfall?

Post by Nile4000 »

This is not to degrade Gerry, he seems like a cool guy, but his heart wasn't really into the sport( like his contemporary Page), and that's what hurt him. Even if he was active, can't see him beating a Dokes, or Witherspoon, possibly a Weaver, or Carl Williams, if he connects.
Ambling Alp II
Super Middleweight
Posts: 15097
Joined: 04 Nov 2012, 18:31

Re: Gerry Cooney, was inactivity his downfall?

Post by Ambling Alp II »

I believe he gave all that he had against Holmes. He was just not talented enough and not experienced enough. Once in the ring, I think he gave all that he had.
It really is too bad that he never fought Dokes, Witherspoon etc.
SaadOffTheDeck
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 19602
Joined: 04 Jun 2009, 07:38

Re: Gerry Cooney, was inactivity his downfall?

Post by SaadOffTheDeck »

Ambling Alp II wrote:I believe he gave all that he had against Holmes. He was just not talented enough and not experienced enough. Once in the ring, I think he gave all that he had.
It really is too bad that he never fought Dokes, Witherspoon etc.
Agreed, that was the best effort of his career. I don't think a Witherspoon fight would have went well for him.
HomicideHenry
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 18722
Joined: 08 Sep 2005, 00:43

Re: Gerry Cooney, was inactivity his downfall?

Post by HomicideHenry »

I used to think at one time, as a fan, that if Cooney had fought Gerrie Coetzee rather than Holmes he would have won the WBA title. However, as time goes on, I dont know if he could of. Coetzee, despite his shortcomings (injured hands, inconsistancy, etc) had the best overhand right of the 1980's heavyweight division and you seldom ever seen him hurt with a single shot. Cooney was the most powerful man in the division but I dont know if he could have stood up to Coetzee, mainly because Gerrie took the harder route and he was the far more accurate puncher. Same logic and thinking goes with Dokes and Witherspoon. That being said, though, I do think Cooney would have beaten the majority of contenders and fringe hanger on's in the 1980's. Quite a feat, needless to say, considering this was a man who all but loathed boxing and only stayed in it to have the love and support and affection of his father.
HomicideHenry
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 18722
Joined: 08 Sep 2005, 00:43

Re: Gerry Cooney, was inactivity his downfall?

Post by HomicideHenry »

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:That's probably a blessing for Cooney, I don't know if he could have lasted with even that faded Shavers. Tex took some serious leather. I don't recall Cooney doing commentary on the Hearns/Cuevas card. Granted, it wasn't televised live at all, but CBS had it the following week. I just remember Ryan & Clancy, but I'll take your word for it. Many years ago. Your timeline is definitely off as that was 1980, well before the Holmes fight was even thought of.
From what I remember of the contest they said even then Cooney was the #1 contender in the WBC, what's amazing is despite the inactivity, etc. he was able to maintain that ranking. As for whether Cooney could have beaten Shavers or not--- I think he could have. After all, Cooney fought a very similar brutal puncher who was well passed it in Ron Lyle. And sure, Tex took alot of leather, but then again, who didn't Tex take alot of punishment from?
SaadOffTheDeck
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 19602
Joined: 04 Jun 2009, 07:38

Re: Gerry Cooney, was inactivity his downfall?

Post by SaadOffTheDeck »

HomicideHenry wrote:
SaadOffTheDeck wrote:That's probably a blessing for Cooney, I don't know if he could have lasted with even that faded Shavers. Tex took some serious leather. I don't recall Cooney doing commentary on the Hearns/Cuevas card. Granted, it wasn't televised live at all, but CBS had it the following week. I just remember Ryan & Clancy, but I'll take your word for it. Many years ago. Your timeline is definitely off as that was 1980, well before the Holmes fight was even thought of.
From what I remember of the contest they said even then Cooney was the #1 contender in the WBC, what's amazing is despite the inactivity, etc. he was able to maintain that ranking. As for whether Cooney could have beaten Shavers or not--- I think he could have. After all, Cooney fought a very similar brutal puncher who was well passed it in Ron Lyle. And sure, Tex took alot of leather, but then again, who didn't Tex take alot of punishment from?
That was before Cooney fought Lyle and Norton. You sure you have the right fight?
Post Reply