Say Stewart in 1992 who fought Foreman vs the Sam Peter of 2005 who fought Wlad for the first time. These are the versions who I thought were the best of those two.
The best version of Sam Peter was the one from the 2nd James Toney fight ....that version KOs Stewart in 3 rounds
Good hard scrap. Stewart ends up on the floor but gets up to take him to a hard fought split decision.
Peter. brutal ko. Alex got hit by everyone. Never won a big fight and his defense won't get a win here either. question is if he goes out quick like Tyson or hangs around a bit like the Peterson fight.
Alex was brave and a good fighter, but lost to pretty much all the best men he fought. His punch wasn't quite big enough and he wasn't quite durable enough vs the best. I think he'd put another up good showing against Sam Peter as well, but suffers another gallant defeat to a stronger man and loses in, say, an 8th round stoppage.
If Stewart can run Foreman close , he can certainly do enough to beat Peter. It would look like the time Peter lost to Eddie Chambers - a fat cruiser with feather fists.
I like the best version of Stewart as well but Eddie Chambers while being a natural Cruiserweight was a hell of a good fighter. From a technical standpoint I was always impressed by his footwork and defensive ability. He just had the misfortune of being in the Klitschko era of giant heavyweights.
Chambers was ok but i doubt he would done well in any HW era. The best guys he beat were actually the big guys of that era - Dimitrenko , Guinn , Rossy. It was the normal sized guys he lost to - Adamek , Povetkin , Munchu .. Peter just wasn't very good which is why Chambers beat him pretty convincingly.
Good point. I just always liked his skillset and miss the days when heavyweights where well taught well and skilled. Not sure he would have been an ATG but I could see him being in some very competitive fights with some great fighters from years past.
