BoxRec

Thoughts

I think I had Holmes winning 8 of the 12 rounds, I could see someone having it slightly closer, but with the knockdown and the points taken away for low blows Holmes was comfortably ahead. As a side note, still don't understand how Cooney got penalized 2 points for one low blow.

I don't score fights that I don't see in real time. But I remember the fight was competitive until about the 9th round. After Holmes knocked Cooney down in the 9th, I think Holmes took control of the fight. Before that it was a good, competitive fight.

I thought Cooney was competitive up until 10th round or so, had he not been deducted points I would of actually had him ahead until he gave up the next two-three rounds before being stopped in the 13th.

Anywhere from 2 to 4 is reasonable.

Yeah, I saw the fight . . . What part of "I remember the fight was competitive until about the 9th round" needed a dissertation from you?

You had the wrong round for the knock down. There was never a single moment from the time it was announced to when the fight ended that it looked like Cooney had a chance to win. It was a game effort, but he was thoroughly out-classed.

yes, I just watched the 9th again. For some reason I remembered a knockdown rather than Cooney hitting Holmes in the balls; I thought that came later. I still think it was competitive until that round, however - even with the second round knockdown.

2 solid rounds and I could give him 4 in what was a somewhat competitive fight.

I haven't watched it in awhile but I think I gave him 4 rounds. Holmes took over in the second half but it was a pretty competitive fight; not the one-sided beatdown some revisionists make it out to be. Larry had to dig in that fight.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:You had the wrong round for the knock down. There was never a single moment from the time it was announced to when the fight ended that it looked like Cooney had a chance to win. It was a game effort, but he was thoroughly out-classed.

The round he had Holmes rocked made me think he had a hell of a shot at doing so.

dempseyfire wrote:I haven't watched it in awhile but I think I gave him 4 rounds. Holmes took over in the second half but it was a pretty competitive fight; not the one-sided beatdown some revisionists make it out to be. Larry had to dig in that fight.

Too true. Quite possibly the hardest fight Larry had while as champion. For a guy who was inactive for over a year and had beaten relative stiffs, Cooney was deadly. I factored Cooney as being even, if not ahead, going into the 9th round--- point deductions or not. I'll always argue that power punches and making a fight of it, sometimes means more than a high volume amount of jabs.

He got his attention, Holmes was never rocked. People just wanted him to be. It was no more difficult than Bonecrusher Smith. Spoon & Williams were obviously much more difficult as were Shavers, Weaver and Snipes. Those guys actually did rock him.

So no, it wasn't remotely possible that it was his hardest defense. Not in the top 5, but it wasn't his easiest either. Gerry gave a good effort.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:He got his attention, Holmes was never rocked. People just wanted him to be. It was no more difficult than Bonecrusher Smith. Spoon & Williams were obviously much more difficult as were Shavers, Weaver and Snipes. Those guys actually did rock him.

So no, it wasn't remotely possible that it was his hardest defense. Not in the top 5, but it wasn't his easiest either. Gerry gave a good effort.

Asside from the knockdowns from Shavers and Snipes, I think Cooney won more rounds than those guys did. Also as for your comment about Holmes not being rocked, he said in an interview that Cooney hit him with a shot at the end of ( I believe ) the sixth round, that he was grateful didn't come sooner. Holmes was never down against Gerry or in trouble, but those shots were hurting him.... F-ck, those punches would've hurt anybody.

drunkenpiper36 wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:He got his attention, Holmes was never rocked. People just wanted him to be. It was no more difficult than Bonecrusher Smith. Spoon & Williams were obviously much more difficult as were Shavers, Weaver and Snipes. Those guys actually did rock him.

So no, it wasn't remotely possible that it was his hardest defense. Not in the top 5, but it wasn't his easiest either. Gerry gave a good effort.

Asside from the knockdowns from Shavers and Snipes, I think Cooney won more rounds than those guys did. Also as for your comment about Holmes not being rocked, he said in an interview that Cooney hit him with a shot at the end of ( I believe ) the sixth round, that he was grateful didn't come sooner. Holmes was never down against Gerry or in trouble, but those shots were hurting him.... F-ck, those punches would've hurt anybody.

I don't think you can toss aside knockdowns like that. Those guys almost beat Larry Holmes, Gerry Cooney did not. Like he said, he felt the punches but he's been hit by bigger punchers. Cooney was a solid fringe contender.

I don't think you can toss aside knockdowns like that. Those guys almost beat Larry Holmes,

I'm not. Shavers admittedly had Holmes in real trouble. But Holmes wasn't down more than two seconds against Snipes. Got up, bobbled around a bit and regained control of that seventh round. In both cases, I don't think either men won more rounds than Cooney did.

See the knockdown against snipes at about 3:22 of round seven.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFHvcLIdm04

Like he said, he felt the punches but he's been hit by bigger punchers.

Well yeah, coming from someone who's been hit by Earnie Shavers and Mike Tyson among others. Not exactly a testimony that I'd use to discredit Cooney's power.

Cooney was a solid fringe contender.

I may be wrong, but I've always understood the term "fringe contender" as someone who is barely lingering on the fringes of the top 10. I don't think I could name 8-10 fighters from 1980-1982 who were better than Cooney or deserved to be ranked higher. The only obvious one would be Mike Weaver. But he had already fought Holmes and was holding a fragment title himself. You could surmise that there were other men who might have beaten him, but that's just speculation. No one else or at least virtually no one else could justify a higher rating.

I don't disagree that Gerry won more rounds. I gave him two and could see up to four. I disagree that he gave a harder fight than either guy that nearly stopped him. The Snipes fight would have been stopped today, 100%.

My definition of fringe contender is a guy who will beat fighters below him but has no chance of winning the title. As for justifying a higher rating, Gerry had no real wins of note in his entire career. So it wouldn't take much.

HomicideHenry wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:You had the wrong round for the knock down. There was never a single moment from the time it was announced to when the fight ended that it looked like Cooney had a chance to win. It was a game effort, but he was thoroughly out-classed.

The round he had Holmes rocked made me think he had a hell of a shot at doing so.

dempseyfire wrote:I haven't watched it in awhile but I think I gave him 4 rounds. Holmes took over in the second half but it was a pretty competitive fight; not the one-sided beatdown some revisionists make it out to be. Larry had to dig in that fight.

Too true. Quite possibly the hardest fight Larry had while as champion. For a guy who was inactive for over a year and had beaten relative stiffs, Cooney was deadly. I factored Cooney as being even, if not ahead, going into the 9th round--- point deductions or not. I'll always argue that power punches and making a fight of it, sometimes means more than a high volume amount of jabs.

Weaver, Williams and Witherspoon were all tougher fights for Holmes. And probably the Shavers fight as well since after the KD Larry was absolutely exhausted and doing all he could to keep Earnie off of him.

I disagree that he gave a harder fight than either guy that nearly stopped him.

Snipes and Shavers had Holmes in more trouble than Cooney for a brief period during their fights with him, while Cooney lasted longer than either man and probably won an additional round or two. I guess it depends on one's criteria for what a tougher fight is. In either case, I don't think you can credit any one of those three guys has having a "considerably" better night against Holmes than the other two.

The Snipes fight would have been stopped today, 100%.

After rising at about the count of three and immediately throwing punches back? If its the norm today for fights to be stopped that easily then Frank Cappuccino must've slept through Gatti vs Ward I, and Luis Pabon should have lost his job after Klitschko decked Povetkin for the fifth time in their fight.

My definition of fringe contender is a guy who will beat fighters below him but has no chance of winning the title.

I don't have a solid definition for what a fringe contender is so I won't preach my own as though it were gospel. But I'm pretty sure that a guy who's a consensus #1 contender and easily a top three man in the division isn't the best of examples.

As for justifying a higher rating, Gerry had no real wins of note in his entire career. So it wouldn't take much.

Norton, Lyle and Young were washed up when Cooney beat them. Norton and Lyle in particular were bordering shot at the time. And probably none of the 3 were top 10 material. But honestly I think you'd be hard pressed to find 15 guys in 1980 who were better than those men. You'd have an even harder time finding a handful of guys who did to those fighters what Cooney did. Trevor Berbick had a better win over John Tate, but also was sparked in one round by Mercado and drew with Caldwell taking some of the flare off that single best win. Tex Cobb lost to Norton who Cooney sparked in 54 seconds. Snipes got a gift decision over Coetzee in a fight that he should have lost, then lost to Holmes. Dokes had a draw with Ocasio and barely squeaked by Cobb. Page lost to Berbick on the night that Cooney lost to Holmes.. Weaver was the WBA champ and probably the ONLY guy in 1982 that I would have ranked over Cooney. My point is that regardless of what you think of Cooney's abilities or his opposition, there wasn't anyone else ( asside from Weaver) who did anything that stood out as being head over heels better..

I can't stand posts broken down like that. I'm not giving you a hard time, but in the future I won't bother with them. I know I'm an ass, but I'm an honest one.

I'm not getting into the semantics of Snipes & Shavers. I've already stated my case, they almost won and Gerry didn't. I call them both a harder night at the office when you have to get off the canvas.

Holmes stumbled across the ring after he got up. Ref's today stop almost every wobble upon rising.

Too each their own. I never considered Cooney a threat at the time and I still don't. Alphabet ratings mean very little to me.

Norton and Lyle were completely shot. Young was well past his prime. They were nothing more than names. His best win was Chaplin imo. I'd rank everyone you mentioned but Caldwell & Cobb over Cooney. He's just a fighter we will never agree on and one that never proved himself to the point where there is any argument that could sway me in any way.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:I can't stand posts broken down like that. I'm not giving you a hard time, but in the future I won't bother with them. I know I'm an ass, but I'm an honest one.

I'm not getting into the semantics of Snipes & Shavers. I've already stated my case, they almost won and Gerry didn't. I call them both a harder night at the office when you have to get off the canvas.

Holmes stumbled across the ring after he got up. Ref's today stop almost every wobble upon rising.

Too each their own. I never considered Cooney a threat at the time and I still don't. Alphabet ratings mean very little to me.

Norton and Lyle were completely shot. Young was well past his prime. They were nothing more than names. His best win was Chaplin imo. I'd rank everyone you mentioned but Caldwell & Cobb over Cooney. He's just a fighter we will never agree on and one that never proved himself to the point where there is any argument that could sway me in any way.

Okay then...