Samuel Peter (Klitschko I fight) vs Daniel Dubois (AJ fight)

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by MaccaveliMacc, Jun 4, 2026.


  1. MaccaveliMacc

    MaccaveliMacc Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,546
    9,590
    Feb 27, 2024
    Absolute carnage of a fight. Who takes it?
     
  2. zadfrak

    zadfrak Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,704
    3,385
    Feb 17, 2008
    Peter.

    Sure don't like him winning many big bouts---but like triple D even less.

    Peter's chin keeps him in there and the dubois whiskers fail either early or late. But the best chin in this match is Sam Peter's and neither guy is much defensively. But I think one guy weathers a storm and the other guy does not.
     
  3. dinovelvet

    dinovelvet Antifanboi Full Member

    63,149
    26,621
    Jul 21, 2012
    Dubois pounds him into putty.

    He is simply too slow. If you can't beat the faster guy to the punch you cannot win.
    Joyce was slow but he was awkward and had an unstoppable work rate.

    Peters stamina was abysmal and his style is predictable. DD is relentless. His engine is impressive. Peter is grund down and stopped
     
  4. Man_Machine

    Man_Machine Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,954
    10,414
    Jun 9, 2010
    I think we can at least say that Dubois is better than Sam Peter. More than that, I'd suggest Dubois could really hurt him over the course of an absolute drubbing, making the stoppage a value-for-money bet.


    Dubois W TKO 10
     
  5. Cormac Mac Art

    Cormac Mac Art New Member banned Full Member

    39
    55
    May 23, 2026
    Dubois! Pff! Who Necks?!?
     
  6. Seamus

    Seamus Proud Kulak Full Member

    65,751
    52,835
    Feb 11, 2005
    At this time Peter was more durable and hit like a ton of bricks, this all before Wlad broke him into pieces. Dubois is hardly what we would label as elusive. Most times, in the heavyweight division, things are this uncomplicated.
     
    BCS8 likes this.
  7. Man_Machine

    Man_Machine Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,954
    10,414
    Jun 9, 2010
    And Peter was elusive?

    What I find uncomplicated when it comes to Peter is that he didn't beat a single top-10 guy in their prime.
     
  8. OddR

    OddR Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,961
    3,136
    Jan 8, 2025
    I would think DDD as well but we have seen him stopped and hurt many times so it could go the other way too.
     
  9. Seamus

    Seamus Proud Kulak Full Member

    65,751
    52,835
    Feb 11, 2005
    James Toney wasn't Top 10? Oleg wasn't? Both were in the Ring's Annual Top 10 and pretty high up there.
     
  10. Man_Machine

    Man_Machine Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,954
    10,414
    Jun 9, 2010
    Neither Toney nor Maskaev were in their prime or anywhere near it for that matter. Both of them were physical wrecks by the time Peter met them.
     
    JohnThomas1 likes this.
  11. BCS8

    BCS8 VIP Member

    65,994
    86,830
    Aug 21, 2012
    I can see reasons for either of them to win. Both of these guys could lose heart if things didn't go their way.
     
  12. Seamus

    Seamus Proud Kulak Full Member

    65,751
    52,835
    Feb 11, 2005
    Ranked is ranked.
     
    slash likes this.
  13. Man_Machine

    Man_Machine Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,954
    10,414
    Jun 9, 2010
    Ranked is not 'prime'.
     
  14. Greg Price99

    Greg Price99 Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,854
    11,800
    Dec 17, 2018
    Both extremely strong and heavy handed, neither skilled, Peter even less so, Peter had the better chin. I've no problem with either pick, but gun to my head and I'd go with the better chin as being the predominant determining factor in a Peter win.
     
    OddR likes this.
  15. Philosopher

    Philosopher Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,924
    3,057
    Aug 10, 2024
    I think Dan batters Sam. And not just because it has a pleasing ring to it. Dan batters Sam with his ramrod jab. Works like a charm, bam, bam, bam, I'm so confident I'd bet the farm...
     
    Man_Machine and dinovelvet like this.