Samuel Peter believes in himself, and it's enough.

[The Troll]

I dont think he's that great. Just strong, raw.

he's minus 600 against Maskaev (you'd need to law down some serious cash to win a substantial amount at that, -60%.)

I think you get +450 the other way.

[Welter_Skelter]

LOL.. I was wondering what was the use for that contentious reply; he seems to just want to discredit Peter by any means. The way I see it, he knocked Wlad down 3 times when no one else has done that and is the first to beat Toney in years! Therefore, he has more than a "puncher's chance" and ideas to the contrary are simply over critical imho..

Corrie Sanders Knocked Wlad down 4 times..

[StackMo]

Try the reverse. Odds pay out less on a 'sure thing'.

[Welter_Skelter]

I said nothing about a guarantee. So your completely out of context reply makes no sense.

It must be because Peter is Black...

or maybe I was just building my previous thread.. which I though yours was responding to.. After all that is Usualy what happens on discussion boards

[beez721]

I like Sam and he's improved very dramatically last outting. That said Maskaev is no joke. However any amount of improvement in Sam moves him from scary to actually dangerous.

The clubbing Sam of old gave Klitscko serious pause and dropped him more than once. The current Sam with more tactical smarts and some technique = even worse day for Klitschko.

how do you figure that? number 1,,,,2 of the 3 knockdown calls were clearly bogus. number 2,,,wlad has shown steady improvement over his last several fights against good comp,,whereas peter has shown improvment over just his last fight over a clearly shot james toney. if odds have changed since there last meeting it would seem to go even more in wlads favor,,espescially considering there last fight ended with peter doing the funky judah. I think peter gets stopped in a rematch

[The Troll]

Try the reverse. Odds pay out less on a 'sure thing'.

sure enough to lay down enough money to make money at -600? That's my point.

[StackMo]

It must be because Peter is Black...

or maybe I was just building my previous thread.. which I though yours was responding to.. After all that is Usualy what happens on discussion boards

No merely giving credit where credit is due. You should try it one day.

[StackMo]

how do you figure that? number 1,,,,2 of the 3 knockdown calls were clearly bogus. number 2,,,wlad has shown steady improvement over his last several fights whereas peter has shown improvment over just his last fight over a clearly shot james toney. if odds have changed since there last meeting it would seem to go even more in wlads favor,,espescially considering there last fight ended with peter doing the funky judah. I think peter gets stopped in a rematch

3 knock downs in one fight....that's a lot of 'flukes'.

[Welter_Skelter]

3 knock downs in one fight....that's a lot of 'flukes'.

2 of them were BLATANT rabbitt punches.. The real Fluke was how they were scored Knockdowns and Not a warning and then point deduction..

Dont tell me to give credit.. when you are incapable of doing the same..

[StackMo]

I credit Klit with a win and he deserves it. You cannot credit improvement when it is so clearly obvious.