Liston must clearly be chosen as the favorite here based on his proven performances against quality opposition, along with his notable skills on film. I don't however feel that this has to be an early round slaughtering as some are making it out to be. Sam Peter though crude, has a solid chin that has yet to fail him, along with a reasonable ( but not great ), amount of punching power, and the proven ability to go the distance. Additionally, he well may have been one of the largest and strongest opponents that Sonny ever met. I think Peter's slow moving and plotting style, along with poor defense would make him an easy target for Liston's missle of a jab. Sam would also eat a lot of hard right hands in this fight. At times however, Sonny would get over confident, thinking that Peter is finished, and go in for the kill only to be met with resisitance as Peter would hit him back with some heavy handed shots. In the end, I think Sonny takes him out somewhere between rounds 7-9. Make no mistake about it though, it would not be an easy match for Liston...
Really? I'll name ten worse ( heavy belt ) holders for you: Marvin Hart Jimmy Braddock Ernie Terell Jimmy Eillis Leon Spinks John Tate Mike Spinks Fransicso Damiani Herrbie Hide Henry Akinwande John Ruiz Sergi Lyachovich Shannon Briggs If you disagree with 2-3, no worries, I named 13. I'm sure I could name some more. I think Liston at his best would defeat Peter, but it would be a very interesting fight. Sonny had some issues when things did not go his way, and Peter would not go away easy.
Personally, I don't know how Michael Spinks makes that list and Peter doesn't.. Sure, he had very few fights at heavyweight and lost in 1 round to Tyson, but I think taking a win over a shot Holmes, beats the livin' **** out of having a win over an even more deteriorated Maskaev and Toney......And as for Ellis making the list, what in the hell kind of comp record does Peter have that would top wins over Floyd Patterson, Jerry Quarry, Oscar Bonavena, Leotis Martin, and George Chuvalo.. There's no way Peter has a better collection of wins than that...
So you kicked out two names of the 13 I listed. Personally I think Peter beats both Ellis and Spinks, and is a better heavyweight in the ring, which should not be confused with more skills than a blown up pound for pound type of fighter. Peter passed Mike Bentt, Bruce Seldon, and has likely passed Oleg Maskeav. I think he is even or ahead with Coetzee right now, with many years left in his career. Peter is better than at least 15 alphabet or world champions.
Didn't take the time to give most of the list any real thought, and with all due respect, it doesn't appear as though you did either. That is a matter of opinion, and rating fighters on the assumption of one beating the other in a fantasy matchup is horribly flawed way of assigning ratings...I prefer to go by credentials, and Peter's comp list does not warrant being rated above those guys.. What do you mean by this? Frankly, I think that for Ellis and Spinks to do what they did given that they weren't indigenous to the division speaks volumes. I can't see Peter being a better fighter either at heavyweight, nor on a pound for pound basis. What Spinks did at lightheavyweight, Peter could not do in a million years at heavyweight or any other division... And talk about blown up? How much excess weight is that fat ass lugging around with him? His conditioning is horrible for a fighter who supposedly trains under modern standards. Passing Bent and Seldon don't mean jack. Seldon was strategically steared into an alphabet position by Don King, so that he could be easy pickings for a returning Tyson. ( Seldon was cought on film laying down in that fight by the way, which only helps my case. ) He was no champion, and nor was an 11 fight Bent who briefly held the WBO. As for Coetzee and Maskaev. He may be close, but I don't see him as having passed them yet. Big "O" certainly has faced better comp by far than Peter has, as had Coetzee. 15 sounds a tad high to me. Frankly, I think the vast majority of the 80's alpha champs are ahead of him such as Weaver, Tubbs, Witherspoon, Berbick, Thomas, Tucker and a few others.
Marvin Hart - that guy has a win over Jack Johnson and was THE champ. That´s more than Peter will ever accomplish. Jimmy Braddock - Jimmy Braddock beat better fighters and was THE champ. That´s more than Peter will ever accomplish. Ernie Terell - beat better fighters, namely Williams, Folley, Foster, Machen, Chuvalo ... not even close Jimmy Eillis - beat better fighters, namely Bonavena, Quarry, arguable Patterson, Chuvalo Leon Spinks - I agree John Tate - about even Mike Spinks - no way, beating past prime Holmes and Cooney and beeing THE champ means more than Peter did or will do. Fransicso Damiani - I agree Herrbie Hide - I agree Henry Akinwande - I agree John Ruiz - Ruiz beat better fighters, was a top contender or a beltholder for a decade. 2-time beltholder. Peter isn´t even close. Sergi Lyachovich - I agree but it´s close. Shannon Briggs - Briggs wins over Lyachovich and Mercer are better than anything Peter did. But it´s close Oleg Maskaev - Could be argued but I think his two wins over Rahman are better than any win on Peter´s record. So, there are 5 from your list, perhaps 6. Peter is one of the 10 worst beltholders.
:good If Peter can string together a couple more wins though he passes a few on the list though such as Maskaev, Tate, perhaps Spinks.
It depends on the shape Peter's in. An in-shape Peter loses in the late rounds. An out-of-shape Peter, like the one that showed up against Toney I, Vitali, and Chambers, well we get the "THAT WHALE HAS BEEN HARPOONED!"
peter sickened me against vitali....awful awful showing.... to think he was wbc heavyweight champion...and to have no heart at all...nothing... bad bad champion