Samuel Peter vs Deontay Wilder

Depends on the versions.

I think Wilder's right hand down the pipe is better than anything Peter has.

I think Peter's chin is significantly better than Wilder's.

If Wilder could keep it at range I'd favour him but he has the footwork of a lame duck.

This might be one of those slobberknocker fights like Chisora / Wilder where either man could win.

 

You know what............if Wilder fights the same exact fight he did against Bermane Stiverne in their first fight I would actually go with Wilder. We literally only saw that Wilder one time in 50 fights though. Peter was so wild and sloppy for the most part and we now know that Wilder for all the **** people give him, he can take a helluva beating before he goes down. And Wlad also hurt prime, undefeated Peter in their fight. I think if windmills are gonna be flying on both sides, Wilder clips him

 

At his best, I would go with Peter. By KO. However, if he shows up out of shape like he did against Vitali, he could lose.

 

If Peter shows up in his prime condition like against Wlad in 2005, it's a 50/50 fight with Peter being a slight favorite.

If Peter shows up out of shape like against Vitali, he loses.

 

I’d make Wilder the favourite.

Wilder knew how to find the win at his best, he had heart, courage and always maintained self belief no matter how the fight was going.

I believe he’d find the punches to take Peter out. Peter would be there for Wilder to hit, and as he becomes even more stationary, Wilder would line something devastating up.

 

It would be a war if we're talking about Peter at his best (2003-2005). But given that he was one of the worst defensive heavyweight title holders of all-time, I think Wilder times him well enough with fast right hand bombs to take him out eventually. Although I could easily see Peter clubbing Wilder in the side or back of the head, making his legs go weak, and finishing the job.

 

Wilder's only good punch being a straight right can be a hinderance, but here, it is an advantage, because Peter didn't know how to throw a straight punch at all.

 

Peter by decapitation.

 

Prime Peter absolutely slaughters Wilder. He had a hell of a jaw until two fights with Wlad and one with Vitali wrecked it.

 

The weird thing about assessing how likely Wilder could get a stoppage over Peter is that Peter is largely getting his tank rep from Wlad landing so many repeated right hands on Peter when he was actually in decent shape and that both men have had weird showings where they clearly had more orthodox skills than they normally wanted to bother using. It's just not their temperament. Wilder seems much more fragile physically, being very lean and having been bambi-legged more, but he's also an example of a mind giving you a better chin than your body. He's the opposite of AJ, who is built tankier than his mind tells him he is. Peter can definitely stop Wilder in terms of being a tanky cannon but he's just crummy at landing the legal shots that get you a good knockout over a guy who isn't looking for the first out.

Whatever anyone says about Wilder, he isn't that guy and whatever anyone says about Peter not really proving that big a puncher-Emanuel Steward I believe said he thought he might hit harder than Wlad, a little bit. It's a weird fight. It's the longer, loopier shots that would worry me. I don't rate Stiverne as being much different a league than Peter but Stiverne, as I remember, is a mid-range guy who is good at only that range and Wilder's length, even considering how little he capitalizes on it, was enough. Whereas Peter did catch Wlad at the end of his wilder shots, catching them pretty long, I seem to recall, when Wlad is THE guy for boxing at range. This type of flailing that could happen from both men, flailing, round-housing, across the room punching, from a tall guy and a shorter guy, the action has potential to be one of the craziest fights. I favor Wilder by decision, followed by Peter by knockout as most likely two scenarios. The very, very best Peter against a random Wilder has a good chance at a decision. Average for average, Wilder has more likely ways to win. He's faster, will probably be busier, and is also hitting like a truck. It's so strange to guess what would actually show up on the night. I like that Wilder is never fat but just because he's been gyming hard doesn't mean he'll box to his best. Or that he'd have to. I think he's earned favorite status here.

This is too fair to even be on a forum.

 

Peter at his best would put a beating on Wilder and stop him

 

A prime Sam Peters vs a prime Deontay Wilder would play out similar to the Luis Ortiz fight. Apart from the fact that Peters wouldn’t gas and would finish the job when he was able to hurt Wilder.

I think Sam Peter by KO in 8 rounds.

 

Peter was slow and easy to hit. He had power but in an often crude and ugly way. He could be a bit more organised and he was strong.
I think the key is probably speed here and thats in Wilder's favor if your plodding forward Wilder will find a shot at some point - then can your chin hold it. Im saying no in this case and Peter isn't fast or slick enough to get banged out at somepoint.

 

Wilder would beat him easily in a mismatch. See the fights against Stiverne, Arreola (ran through McCline, who gave Peter a life and death) and even when shot against Chisora, who prime for prime was likely better than Peter based on three mutual opponents (Vitali, Helenius, Pulev).

This thread goes to show how overrated previous eras are. Peter gave Wlad a life and death but what else? Puritty stopped Wlad, Sanders did him in a round, Brewster overpowered him, Williamson had him gassed and panicking, saved by the ref. This was just before he fought Peter. Puritty and co. aren't head to head Gods just because Wlad lost.