1935 Max "Bronze Age" Baer VS 2005 Sam "Caveman" Peter

Max Baer was a bum

Peter by brutal KO

 

The list had size and little else ... the fact is that Peter gets a bum wrap here simply because he did not become the better , second coming version of David Tua that he was originally promoted as .. in addition, he clearly lost his drive ( if not his hunger ) early on ... in reality , in his brief prime Peter was enormously strong, explosive and hard hitting , far more so than anyone the front running Baer ever fought ... the Peter than fought Wlad the first time or that won the title from Maskaev was a pretty dangerous guy ..

I don't know who I pick as it is a could go either way sort of this but to me , by no means is Baer any sort of lock ..

 

Peter was never any good. His best punching accomplishment was knocking over an old, glass-jawed Jeremy Williams with a blindside shot.

 

Peter won both fights against Toney because the judges said he did. Of course you can dispute the decision as much as you like, but then that puts you on extremely shaky ground in trying to defend Galento who, under any competent referee, would have been flat out disqualified against Nova.

I don't deny that the first Peter fight could have gone either way, but the bottom line is that you simply can't defend Galento's win over Nova unless you're also willing to accept the official decision in the first Peter fight, else you end up looking like a hypocrite.

As for Toney's condition, was he past prime and fighting outside his natural weightclass? Sure. That's a far cry from being shot though, isn't it? Nothing in Toney's prior performances at heavyweight indicates that he was anywhere near the sorry state you're trying to paint him in, and your insistence on comparing him to Ali in the Holmes/Berbick fights is ludicrous and frankly insulting.

And please stop trying to call Toney a blown up super middleweight. Like a lot of fighters he outgrew his division as he grew older. He was not a natural heavy, but he was no longer a natural SMW at that point either. Nowhere near.

Fighters can only fairly be judged by the standards of their era, but when you're comparing fighters from different eras such considerations have to be thrown out the window if any meaningful debate is to take place. You can't just speculate on what so-and-so would be like with an extra twenty pounds of muscle or an extra three inches of height, nor can you just 'upgrade' a fighter's opponents to match the size/weight of a later era with no consideration for the effects such changes would have. And I'm sorry but a LHW is a LHW whatever the era.

Since we're not talking H2H with Peter and Galento I guess it comes down to resumes, and I'm very unconvinced that Galento even achieved more in his time than Peter did in his. Aside from Nova, which I already addressed, which legitimate heavyweight contenders did Galento beat? Al Ettore? Nathan Mann? What did these men achieve in their eras that was any better than Maskaev (Rahman twice, SS Sam, WBC champ), Toney (Holyfield, Ruiz, Oquendo, Guinn) or even McCline (Grant, Whittacker, Briggs, Boswell)?

Peter's not going to win resume of the decade, but he carved out a more respectable place for himself in this current era than Galento did in his.

 

Peter's one of those fighters who suffered from the Lacy effect, too much hype early on then ridicule and retrospective downgrading afterwards. I was never particularly impressed by Peter when he was being billed as this monster-punching heavyweight machine pre 2005, but he was never a bum, nor was he as crude and skillless as he was made out to be, as displayed in the second Toney fight (his best performance IMO).

Style-wise, neither fighter fought someone like the other, though perhaps Maskaev comes closer to Baer than anyone Baer fought who resembled Peter. In Louis's era someone like Tami Mauriello was probably the closest you'd get to Peter, though he was far more jittery on his feet and lacked the solid base that Peter fought from.

 

Peters does the Ali shuffle
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKO5W0l_0gs[/ame]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=liwDVF69Cis[/ame]
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptNAlNEB7Kw[/ame]

 

Didn´t read, mady my point already. You don´t agree. Fine, makes you wrong. :good

 

This. And some rabbit punches to Wlad.

Overrated as a puncher even, as I've already said.

 

Max was past prime vs. Louis... prime vs. prime Max could win a decision. Baer overrated? I say no!

Peter was much bigger and stronger? Power? They both had good power, Peter had good power in almost every punch he thru and he knocked guys out with pressure and power. Baer had a nice overhand right but he didn't set it up with very many power shots.

I think it goes the distance, I think Baer visits the canvas, but I also think Baer could win a close hard fought decision.

 

Peter didn't have 'good power' in 'almost every punch he threw' IMO. Mainly because his application was abysmal.

 

Absolutely! you're making your case well, I agree with a lot of it.

Is Peter on a similar level to Galento? Most probably.

Max Baer? Peter would get battered.

 

Maxie wins in five.