Gerry Cooney vs Lewis?

Syntax Error · Post by **Syntax Error** » 16 Sep 2006, 13:08

I don't think that Cooney & Lewis belong in the same street historically in boxing terms.

I can't see who Cooney has beaten to suggest that he would have the tools to beat Lennox Lewis.

Cooney was only 33 when he was sparked by a 500 yr old George Foreman even though he was past his best, he wasn't that far gone.

Lewis wins quite comfortably for me.

jezzamundo · Post by **jezzamundo** » 17 Sep 2006, 01:31

Wow, you really do continue to crack me up, Razor. Here's my run down of the matchup:

Power: neither fighter has a real edge
Speed: Lewis
Heart: again, no real edge for either fighter
Endurance: depends which Lennox Lewis turned up. quite possibly Cooney would have the edge here, although Lewis would have the edge in strength which would sap Cooney's energy
Cuts: Lewis, although I don't think this would be a big factor
Chin: Pretty even. Neither great, but neither bad. Possibly a small edge to Lewis, who was only ever starched by two huge punches. Both men had the power to knock each other out, no question.

Lewis outboxes Cooney to win by an early to mid rounds KO or TKO.

Seriously Razor, you ought to check your facts on Lewis:

Rahman is not a journeyman. He is a relatively poor 2 time HW champ.
Watch the tape, Vitali was cut by a punch. This is beyond doubt.
Holyfield II and Mercer were very close fights. It is purely opinion as to who won them (I score Holyfield II to Lewis by 2 points, Mercer to Lewis by 1 point).
Since when was Lewis EVER truly hurt by a body punch?

I do have a question though. What was the illegal tactic Lewis used against Bruno? I have the fight on DVD but never noticed anything. I agree that Bruno was winning the fight though, I had him up 4 round to 2 from memory.

pundit · Post by **pundit** » 17 Sep 2006, 01:33

Lewis by mid-round KO.

Ross · Post by **Ross** » 17 Sep 2006, 01:43

As In said earlier we will never know who would win, but I get amused at all the people who come running to LL defence. Cooney /Lewis is a fight that I think could really go either way. Which comes back to LL was just not that good.
LL was lucky to come along when the division was week and he was able to dominate.
I think Burt Suger sums it up the best when he rated the top twenty H/weights of all time, Tyson and Holyfield rate both come in jsut outside the top ten with LL coming in at 19. For a Champion that many of you seem to think was the greatest fighter ever - coming in 19th by a true Historian of the game says it all.

Lewis was great in is time, does in go dow in history as one of the greats - no way.

Ross

yiddo14 · Post by **yiddo14** » 17 Sep 2006, 05:11

Ross wrote:As In said earlier we will never know who would win, but I get amused at all the people who come running to LL defence. Cooney /Lewis is a fight that I think could really go either way. Which comes back to LL was just not that good.
LL was lucky to come along when the division was week and he was able to dominate.
I think Burt Suger sums it up the best when he rated the top twenty H/weights of all time, Tyson and Holyfield rate both come in jsut outside the top ten with LL coming in at 19. For a Champion that many of you seem to think was the greatest fighter ever - coming in 19th by a true Historian of the game says it all.

Lewis was great in is time, does in go dow in history as one of the greats - no way.

Ross

Personally,having seen that list by Bert,I would say thats one of the worst compiled by any respected boxing figure I have ever seen.
He had James Jefferies rated above Lewis!!!!!!

As I stated previously,it is all down to opinion,but I fail to see how ANYONE,know matter how respected,can say there has been 18,yes 18 better heavyweights in history than Lewis.

yiddo14 · Post by **yiddo14** » 17 Sep 2006, 05:19

Here is Bert Sugars top 10 all time heavyweights......
1.Louis
2.Ali
3.Dempsey
4.Johnson
5.Tunney
6.Marciano
7.Charles
8.Foreman
9.Frazier
10.Holmes

Pretty crap,I think most will agree....

Also,just had a look at his all time p4p top 100.
It's not easy to do(rate 100 best fighters ever)but the second I saw he had Jake Lamotta nearly 30 places higher than Carlos Monzon(no.55 by the way!!!)I switched off.....

So much for Bert Sugars lists eh?

The Great John L · Post by **The Great John L** » 17 Sep 2006, 07:35

Ross wrote:For a Champion that many of you seem to think was the greatest fighter ever - coming in 19th by a true Historian of the game says it all.

Top historian of the game? I thought you were talking about Bert Sugar!?

RazorKO · Post by **RazorKO** » 17 Sep 2006, 10:55

Ross wrote:As In said earlier we will never know who would win, but I get amused at all the people who come running to LL defence. Cooney /Lewis is a fight that I think could really go either way. Which comes back to LL was just not that good.
LL was lucky to come along when the division was week and he was able to dominate.
I think Burt Suger sums it up the best when he rated the top twenty H/weights of all time, Tyson and Holyfield rate both come in jsut outside the top ten with LL coming in at 19. For a Champion that many of you seem to think was the greatest fighter ever - coming in 19th by a true Historian of the game says it all.

Lewis was great in is time, does in go dow in history as one of the greats - no way.

Ross

Good post and Bert Sugar who is a very respected boxing historian is right. Dont forget even allegedly, a BRITISH promoter even said in a Sky One (The channel is called Sky One here, not sure what its called in the UK) progamme whilst talking about the great fighters of the sport that 'Great fighters just do not get knocked out by the likes of McCall and Rahman'. Unlike other promoters and interviewers, Warren speaks his mind and tells it as it is which is why I respect the man.

KOJOE90 · Post by **KOJOE90** » 17 Sep 2006, 11:06

RazorKO wrote:Good post and Bert Sugar who is a very respected boxing historian is right.

I think many here may not agree with your statement.

Ross · Post by **Ross** » 17 Sep 2006, 20:16

Now Bert Sugar is not a respected historian because he does not agree with you guys about LL.
I will look out for a list from yiddo14 next time I watch Friday Night Fights.

We all have our opinions, but you cannot deny the facts. LL was good when no one great was fighting. He got Koed by McCall and Rahman.

Ross

pundit · Post by **pundit** » 17 Sep 2006, 20:43

yiddo14 wrote:Here is Bert Sugars top 10 all time heavyweights......
1.Louis
2.Ali
3.Dempsey
4.Johnson
5.Tunney
6.Marciano
7.Charles
8.Foreman
9.Frazier
10.Holmes

Pretty crap,I think most will agree....

Also,just had a look at his all time p4p top 100.
It's not easy to do(rate 100 best fighters ever)but the second I saw he had Jake Lamotta nearly 30 places higher than Carlos Monzon(no.55 by the way!!!)I switched off.....

So much for Bert Sugars lists eh?

It's a qualified opinion. I've no trouble with that.

Ross · Post by **Ross** » 17 Sep 2006, 21:39

So now you abuse me and call me names because I have an opinion that is different to you.
May be you should run for US president?

Ross

Ross · Post by **Ross** » 17 Sep 2006, 21:41

Good one Razor did you think this post would go on as long as it has?

Ross · Post by **Ross** » 17 Sep 2006, 23:35

My apologies, I didn't realise all posts had to be gramaticly correct, I thought we were posting because we all love boxing and find it enjoyable to debate stuff.
My opinion is based on the fact that LL was koed twice, and on who he fougt and when in their respective careers.

Ross

dr_devious · Post by **dr_devious** » 18 Sep 2006, 04:20

RazorKO wrote: So you truly think the Lewis win over Tyson is credible?

Hell prime Lewis LOST to old man Holyfield the rematch and if Lewis fought Bowe Riddick would of put him in a coma no question.

The win over Tyson is credible in as much as it happened although I admit it was the shell of Mike Tyson. What is also credible is that the younger Mike Tyson ducked Lewis in the mid 90s to the tune of chucking his WBC belt away and paying him $3m to avoid him. Bowe also chucked his WBC belt away rather than face Lewis who kicked his ass in the Olympics. And old man Holyfield didnt beat Lewis in the rematch, though it was a close fight.

The Great John L · Post by **The Great John L** » 18 Sep 2006, 05:53

Ross wrote:LL was good when no one great was fighting.

Tyson and Holyfield weren't great?

Ross · Post by **Ross** » 18 Sep 2006, 07:50

They were great but past their primes.

Question why do some question Bert Sugers standing as a creditble historian? He was involved with the Ring ? as a editor?

Ross

The Great John L · Post by **The Great John L** » 18 Sep 2006, 08:11

Yes, they were past their primes. But can you really fault Lewis for the fact that Tyson and Holyfield didn’t want to fight him when they were a little closer to their primes?

And while we’re at it, please list all of the great HW champions who had other great HWs fighting at the same time? While they were in their respective primes? Let’s see, there’s Ali and Frazier. And….???? Wanna give us a few? And most people would say that Ali was past his prime for the fight of the century. So is there even a single instance of 2 great HWs fighting at their peak at the same time?

Did Lennox Lewis run over your favorite fighter also?

overhand_right · Post by **overhand_right** » 18 Sep 2006, 10:39

Ross wrote:
Tyson and Holyfield rate both come in jsut outside the top ten with LL coming in at 19. For a Champion that many of you seem to think was the greatest fighter ever - coming in 19th by a true Historian of the game says it all.

LOL!!

BERT SUGAR!!

Now thats a man who would never have an agenda against Britsh heavyweights!

Ross mate, sometimes you need to read between the lines. Bert tried his all time top 10 on TV and got laughed out the studio by Holmes & Chuvalo.

Holmes & Chuvalo forgot more about boxing than Bert frickin Sugar will ever read.

Oh wait, he spend years in Boxing Illustrated mocking the 'Horizontal heavyweights of the UK'!

yiddo14 · Post by **yiddo14** » 18 Sep 2006, 10:53

RazorKO wrote:
Ross wrote:As In said earlier we will never know who would win, but I get amused at all the people who come running to LL defence. Cooney /Lewis is a fight that I think could really go either way. Which comes back to LL was just not that good.
LL was lucky to come along when the division was week and he was able to dominate.
I think Burt Suger sums it up the best when he rated the top twenty H/weights of all time, Tyson and Holyfield rate both come in jsut outside the top ten with LL coming in at 19. For a Champion that many of you seem to think was the greatest fighter ever - coming in 19th by a true Historian of the game says it all.

Lewis was great in is time, does in go dow in history as one of the greats - no way.

Ross
Good post and Bert Sugar who is a very respected boxing historian is right. Dont forget even allegedly allegedly, a BRITISH promoter even said in a Sky One (The channel is called Sky One here, not sure what its called in the UK) progamme whilst talking about the great fighters of the sport that 'Great fighters just do not get knocked out by the likes of McCall and Rahman'. Unlike other promoters and interviewers, Warren speaks his mind and tells it as it is which is why I respect the man.

Warren was'nt exactly Lewis' greatest fan......he was up on his feet,cheering when McCall beat Lewis,thats a fact.

I don't doubt Sugar's credentials,and have'nt stated anywhere that I do.
I just think his lists are crap,and far too pro American.
Can anyone here really argue that Jake La Motta was a better fighter than Carlos Monzon!!??!?
Or that Gene Tunney ranks a lot higher than Larry Holmes in the all time top heavyweights!!!!

Lewis whooped 2 of the guys on that top 20 list,and would of crushed Tunney within 5 rounds,so how he finishes 15 or so places behind him is a bit strange......

pundit · Post by **pundit** » 18 Sep 2006, 10:57

yiddo14 wrote: Lewis whooped 2 of the guys on that top 20 list,and would of crushed Tunney within 5 rounds,so how he finishes 15 or so places behind him is a bit strange......

So where do you take this from?
Tunney was a defensive masterboxer, hard to see anyone beat him within 5 rounds.

RazorKO · Post by **RazorKO** » 18 Sep 2006, 12:56

dr_devious wrote:
RazorKO wrote: So you truly think the Lewis win over Tyson is credible?

Hell prime Lewis LOST to old man Holyfield the rematch and if Lewis fought Bowe Riddick would of put him in a coma no question.
The win over Tyson is credible in as much as it happened although I admit it was the shell of Mike Tyson. What is also credible is that the younger Mike Tyson ducked Lewis in the mid 90s to the tune of chucking his WBC belt away and paying him $3m to avoid him. Bowe also chucked his WBC belt away rather than face Lewis who kicked his ass in the Olympics. And old man Holyfield didnt beat Lewis in the rematch, though it was a close fight.

Tyson may of been younger in age, but people seem to forget that Tyson was the undisputed HW champ BEFORE Lewis turned Pro!
Wilfred Benitez was past it at 23, which is the same as Tyson but it seems everybody seems to forget this fact.

Lewis may of been older (1 year to be exact which is nothing) but Tyson was fighting years before Lewis and Lewis has never engaged in the great wars Tyson has been either.

The Great John L · Post by **The Great John L** » 18 Sep 2006, 13:04

RazorKO wrote:…and Lewis has never engaged in the great wars Tyson has been either.

Yeah, because Lewis actually knew how to block and avoid punches. Is that a bad thing?

RazorKO · Post by **RazorKO** » 18 Sep 2006, 13:05

RazorKO's most telling contribution is that he says Lewis was rude and aloof, so are we to assume he refused to shake your sweaty hand or sign a card for you? And? This is a breakdown on who would win how, not a personality contest.

Well your from damn Manchester, of course you're going to suck up to Lewis. And if you actually read my post you would realise that I stated faults of Lewis and analyzed his weakest fights, but from reading this piece of absolute garbage I suppose you didnt.

Oh and why did Lewis KO Razor? Because Ruddock was past his prime? No. Because he was easy to hit and not that good. Standing stock still in front of Tyson (who did the same) and being hit a lot does not make you a particularly dangerous heavyweight for a decent fighter, only for Mike Tyson, who lacked imagination and adaptability.

Ruddock was physically finished after those 2 grueling wars with Tyson, Razor fought with a freaking broken jaws for 10 rounds against the most dangerous man alive, that would finish anybody.
Plus the fact that Ruddock was treated like if he had killed a child the way these British fans were jeering him in Earls Court, Ive never seen such despicable hate from any fans like I do when you watch fights in Britain, all this booing and jeering all so unnessacary.

But if Lewis fought the prepared Ruddock of the Dokes fight or the Reggie Gross fight, the Razor would be wiping Lewis' brains off his gloves.

RazorKO · Post by **RazorKO** » 18 Sep 2006, 13:08

The Great John L wrote:
RazorKO wrote:…and Lewis has never engaged in the great wars Tyson has been either.
Yeah, because Lewis actually knew how to block and avoid punches. Is that a bad thing?

It shows that Tyson was a former shell during the 90's, so 'YOUNGER' but shot, physically and mentally Tyson stood little chance against an absolute Peak Lewis.

Gerry Cooney vs Lewis?

Re: Gerry Cooney vs Lewis?

Re: Gerry Cooney vs Lewis?

Re: Gerry Cooney vs Lewis?

Re: Gerry Cooney vs Lewis?