BoxRec

Brian London
Henry Cooper
Gerry Cooney
Jerry Quarry
George Chuvalo
Richard Dunn

Quarry beats him probably a KO
Chuvalo is left standing in a close one going either way.
Beats Cooper, London, Dunn IMHO London and Dunn by KO
Cooney...it aint goin' all the way, someone goes down, I'm not sure who.

BoxBuzz wrote:Quarry beats him probably a KO
Chuvalo is left standing in a close one going either way.
Beats Cooper, London, Dunn IMHO London and Dunn by KO
Cooney...it aint goin' all the way, someone goes down, I'm not sure who.

Agreed, though I'll take Morrison over Cooney.

I'd favor Tommy over London and Dunn.

Morrison-Cooney is 50/50.

He loses to Quarry, Cooper, and Chuvalo.

dempsey can you give details on the Cooper Morrison hypo?

Buzz: I just see Cooper a much more well rounded fighter and having the conditioning and boxing ability to avoid getting KO'd early (which would be Tommy's only shot) and then take over the fight in the second half and likely stop a fatigued Morrison. Henry had a superior and more active left jab and was a better counter-puncher. And with Cooper, Morrison's hook is more powerful but I don't think he has a hand-speed advantage, enabling Henry at times to "hook with the hooker" in this instance.

Il Duce wrote:

ThatOne wrote:Brian London
Henry Cooper
Gerry Cooney
Jerry Quarry
George Chuvalo
Richard Dunn

Tommy Morrison

* KO 3 over Brian London
* KO 7 over Gerry Cooney
* W Dec 12 over Jerry Quarry
* W Dec 12 over George Chuvalo
* KO 2 over Richard Dunn

What about Cooper?

The only one from the list I think definitely beats Tommy is Jerry Quarry.

Cooper and Cooney are pick 'em fights. I'd favor Tommy slightly in both.

I'd pick Tommy confidently over the rest.

gilgamesh wrote:The only one from the list I think definitely beats Tommy is Jerry Quarry.

Cooper and Cooney are pick 'em fights. I'd favor Tommy slightly in both.

I'd pick Tommy confidently over the rest.

I think Chuvalo'd be tough.

BoxBuzz wrote:Quarry beats him probably a KO
Chuvalo is left standing in a close one going either way.
Beats Cooper, London, Dunn IMHO London and Dunn by KO
Cooney...it aint goin' all the way, someone goes down, I'm not sure who.

I'd pretty much agree with this.

Cooper has an outside chance but nothing more.

I'd favour Morrison slightly over Cooney and Chuvalo but not enough to place a bet.

I think Tommy's strategy for the Foreman fight beats Cooney. Morrison was quick, and could let go some real whipping scary shots. One of those hits are going to find a 6'7'' Cooney.

Regret saying it at this unfortunate time, but Morrison was very overrated. He stopped Tillis, Pinklon, the Truth, and Ruddock, all well past there best. For that he's gotten the reputation as a huge puncher. In addition to that he had a poor chin.

RIP, but Morrison is getting badly over-rated here (maybe partially due to sentimentality over his passing). The guy was ambushed in 1 by Bentt (who was then completely annihilated by Herbie Hide) and struggled mightily vs journeyman calibre Joe Hipp, Ross Purrity (only salvaging a draw), and Terry Anderson. His chin was poor, he had porous defense, and his stamina was atrocious.

As a fighter he gets way too much traction from the Foreman victory. Foreman was 44 years old, had an off-night in which he was lethargic the whole fight (I think the more active and quicker Foreman who fought Evander would've beaten Morrison), and the fight was still competitive. Ruddock was also slow and overweight and Morrison still needed a dramatic come from behind left hook to win in that one.

Chuvalo and Quarry at their peaks would've decimated Morrison. I'd pick the early 70s versions of both to still beat Morrison.

I mean heck even though I pick him over London, I think a fight with a prime London and Morrison probably would've been competitive for however long it lasted.

You are badly underrating Morrison here in my opinion, Dempsey - honestly what I'm reading here are responses that don't seem to vary in the slightest to what people wrote 10 years ago re Morrison. Nothing has changed to these eyes.

Morrison's draw in a good fight versus Puritty sure looks better than Wlad totally imploding against same. Essentially you've taken the most negative slant possible in every fight you've mentioned and have essentially deprived Morrison of any fighting worth. He was no great and would never make for a long lasting champ but his punch power is axiomatic and undeniable. There is no way a fair judge can watch the man fight and think his power is not world class. First hand accounts from Ray Mercer, George Foreman, and Lennox Lewis et al attest to the man's phenomenal punch. The brutally honest Mercer who holds his hands up and admits he lost the Spoon fight rates Morrison as the best hitter he fought. That counts for something.

You afford Foreman a contentious off-night versus Morrison and yet allow Morrison no off-night against Bentt. Doesn't add up for me, the Foreman fight was a fine performance to these eyes, and Thomas, Tillis, Mercer, Hipp, Williams, Foreman, Ruddock, and Lewis are a respectable body of work, especially combined with an endless series of brutal, cartoon violence style KOs against the Usual journeymen Suspects.

He was no great but he was great to watch and his balls and power make him a live body against anybody in history, particularly more modern glass chinned giants with 15 defences and a lunatic level of credit against whales.

loaded_gloves wrote:You are badly underrating Morrison here in my opinion, Dempsey - honestly what I'm reading here are responses that don't seem to vary in the slightest to what people wrote 10 years ago re Morrison. Nothing has changed to these eyes.

Morrison's draw in a good fight versus Puritty sure looks better than Wlad totally imploding against same. Essentially you've taken the most negative slant possible in every fight you've mentioned and have essentially deprived Morrison of any fighting worth. He was no great and would never make for a long lasting champ but his punch power is axiomatic and undeniable. There is no way a fair judge can watch the man fight and think his power is not world class. First hand accounts from Ray Mercer, George Foreman, and Lennox Lewis et al attest to the man's phenomenal punch. The brutally honest Mercer who holds his hands up and admits he lost the Spoon fight rates Morrison as the best hitter he fought. That counts for something.

You afford Foreman a contentious off-night versus Morrison and yet allow Morrison no off-night against Bentt. Doesn't add up for me, the Foreman fight was a fine performance to these eyes, and Thomas, Tillis, Mercer, Hipp, Williams, Foreman, Ruddock, and Lewis are a respectable body of work, especially combined with an endless series of brutal, cartoon violence style KOs against the Usual journeymen Suspects.

He was no great but he was great to watch and his balls and power make him a live body against anybody in history, particularly more modern glass chinned giants with 15 defences and a lunatic level of credit against whales.

The Purrity loss is also a huge black mark on Wlad . . .besides Morrison every other top 10 guy Purrity faced (and several non top 10ers) beat him, so I don't think that's a biased angle.

I'd be happy to chuck up the Bentt fight to a fluke if Morrison also hadn't shown chin issues vs Purrity, Mercer, Williams, Ruddock or struggled to beat journeyman opponents etc. I also don't often talk about "off-nights" and fighters (as anyone can make that excuse at any time) but I think exceptions can be made for fighters in their mid 40s. Tommy vs Bentt was in the absolute prime of his career.

I agree he had great power. I agree he was very entertaining. But that doesn't make him a "live body vs anyone in history." The one-sided Lennox beatdown showed what happened when Morrison stepped up to a true A-rater.

ThatOne wrote:Brian London
Henry Cooper
Gerry Cooney
Jerry Quarry
George Chuvalo
Richard Dunn

Outside of Quarry, Morrison beats the rest of the men on the list. Provided that it was the Morrison who showed up bringing his A game 100% to the fight. Chuvalo would go the distance with him, but then again, who didn't? I still see Morrison out punching him to a decision win. The most interesting of the fights listed, though, is that of Cooney versus Morrison. Whoever lands first and most often is winning that fight. Cooney's jab was not that good, he had bad defense, etc. I can see Tommy surviving Cooney's onslaught and managing the win.

I know I will get alot of flack from the Cooper fans and Ali true believers, but much as I love 'Enery he was probably the most over-rated, over-blown, over-hyped British fighter of all time. He is forever a legend cus he dropped Ali---- but then again, so did Banks and I dont see great fanfare for him. While he was a good counter puncher, he certainly wasn't above and beyond the domestic level. He was probably the best Commonwealth champion ever, but whenever he stepped up he got dominated and humiliated. Johansson starched him, as did Patterson, etc. People are also forgetting in this fight scenario Cooper was only 185 pounds and Morrison was in the 220 pound range. Morrison, unlike Cooper, was also a fast starter. It's a pick em sort of fight, yes, but I gotta lean toward Tommy on this. Why? He did better with world ranked fighters than Cooper did.

Rover wrote:

gilgamesh wrote:The only one from the list I think definitely beats Tommy is Jerry Quarry.

Cooper and Cooney are pick 'em fights. I'd favor Tommy slightly in both.

I'd pick Tommy confidently over the rest.

I think Chuvalo'd be tough.

Yeah he would, I kinda skimmed over Chuvalo. I'd take him over Tommy too. Close decision