Let's put together the Douglas performance that beat Tyson against the Cooney that lost to Holmes. A grieving 231 1/2 lbs, 29 year old Douglas vs a 225 1/2 lbs, 26 year old Cooney with a lethal left hook. Both determined to win. Who gets your vote?
Assuming you simply mean Prime Cooney... I'd pick Cooney by knockout. Also, I'd vehemently disagree on the "determined to win" part in regards to Cooney's performance against Holmes. By his own admission, he reached a point where he gave up on himself and was more concerned with the Rocky-mentality of going the distance with the champ, rather than trying to actually win.
I think I'd take Cooney also. The Tokoyo Douglas is overrated. He fought great that night, but it had FAR more to do with Tyson being untrained and sluggish than Douglas being anything special.
So a fitter, in shape Tyson would have kept Douglas down when he knocked him to the canvas in round 8?
I'm not sure it was based on Cooney giving up, he came to realise that in order for him to win he would need to go the distance and knew he didn't have the stamina to go the distance with Holmes. He had never been past 8 rounds before, plus the added pressure/expectancy of millions watching/wanting him to win against a great champion got to him. He fought bravely.
No, a top form Tyson wouldnt have needed to be bailed out in the 8th round. Very good performance by Douglas, but I'm sorry.... no matter how inspired he fought he wouldnt have beaten Mike if Mike was in the form of the Holmes/Biggs/Spinks fights.
I read somewhere that when Douglas was given the 10 count in that Tyson fight, King looked back at re-plays and believed Douglas was given a ''long count'' and was down for longer than 10 seconds.
Tyson on his game wouldn't have been in a position where he needed a come from behind 8th round KO, IMO. Douglas was excellent that night, but Tyson's lethargy let him get much braver than he was at the first bell.
It was a long count.... but I dont go too crazy over it. Wasnt the first long count in history, nor the longest... but yea, Douglas was down for about 10-12 seconds. Bottom line though... Mike only had himself to blame for that loss. He probably dealt with more hookers than sparring partners prior to that fight.
He was down for about 15-16 seconds actually. It was a vvvveeerrryyy lllooonnngg count. Also he actually got up at the refs count of 9 and a half. But like you i don't go crazy over it. Douglas was the better fighter that night and deserved the win.
Shake is my boy but the Tyson/Holmes thing is throwing me. As Jake alluded to, albeit indirectly, Cooney was probably in better shape the night he beat Norton than he was the night he lost to Holmes. How much of Douglas success was down to the fact he fought a guy who has eschewed much of his vaunted head-movement and defence, and had a mind full of distractions, and had been floored in sparring? It's a close fight, but if you want to make it more scientific then pit the Cooney who lost to Holmes against the Douglas who lost to Tucker. I actually cannot pick a winner- I think 13 rounds with a Prime Larry Holmes, when you are about to face someone who fights a bit like Holmes, is worth more than a KO over Tyson when you aren't about to fight someone like Tyson.
The cooney that put norton to the sword was in better condition + mentally too compared to the loss vs holmes imo.
Basically my reasoning for picking a DOUGLAS/tyson, COONEY/holmes thread is down to what those fights partly signified (a grieving douglas, a big underdog, a cooney aiming to prove himself) + the performances from each fight to sum up the occasion from both men.
It's so hard to figure Douglas out....he seemed disinterested, or partially focused, in his early career, displaying promise but a lack of real determination, then he beats Tyson, ends up in court over Don King, gets Waxed by Holyfield in 3 rounds sits out on his yacht drinking Long Island iced tea and eating donuts, balloons up to 400lbs and nearly dies as he slips into a diabetic coma. He comes back and beats a range of stiffs and then runs into Lou Savarese. With Douglas, there is an obvious pedigree but he spent such a short time {10 rounds, basically} at the top of his game, it's hard to know how good he was. We don't have a big enough reference point. We know Roy Jones Sr didnt want Roy Jr to fight him, citing it as being like a "Volkswagen Golf running into a big Mack truck, just too much mass" but I don't know how much use that is.
Agreed. Douglas OBVIOUSLY was talented, very talented even, but he literally put it on show for ONE fight. It's really hard to assess how good he actually was (or could have been)
Slice, what's your view on that Douglas that beat Tyson + the Tyson that lost to Douglas? Do you think a properly conditioned Tyson that night beats Douglas pretty convincingly?
I would probably side with Tyson but not with confidence. I don't think it's anywhere near as clear cut as some people are saying, that prime Tyson just turns up against that Douglas and takes his head off. It does disservice to just how dominant Douglas was that night, it's not like it was a give and take battle, outside of the 8th round (which was actually a clear Buster round up until the knockdown) it was ALL Douglas. Usually when a guy wins in such dominant fashion I would pick him without question to win on any other occasion, but Tyson was so off form that night this is an exception.
