Baryonyx walkeri VS Allosaurus fragilis

The largest Allosaurus specimen we have is 9.7 metres in length and around 3 tons in weight, whereas the immature Baryonyx specimen was 9.5 metres in length and 2.5-3 tons in weight, this is excluding any specimens that could not be considered A. fagilis. 
We simply cannot speculate how large an adult Baryonyx would be since we have no information on Baryonychine growth rate, and we need this to be able to calculate how far the specimen was from adulthood which would thus allow us to calculate a possible adult estimate. We should just use the immature specimen until accurate research is done on the matter. However you can safely assume that a Baryonyx of 3 tons or larger would have a very decent chance against the average Allosaurus.

The immature specimen doesn't have much of a size advantage and its weaponry would not work effectively against a carnosaur of such a similar height/size, I would favour the average Allosaurus there but it would still be a relatively close fight. The Spinosaurid has a far larger gape which would allow it to make more precision-based biting attacks which could potentially damage the Allosaurid quite a lot if the grip is strong wnough and the bite is inflicted accurately enough, plus its very large claws which would come in very useful if the Allosaurus gets in close enough proximity, revealing its vulnerable areas. This is also made more possible by the fact it was noticeably higher than the average Allosaurus specimen. However Allosaurus' bite is considerably more devastating, rows and rows of large serrated teeth along with a highly resistant skull makes it a force to be reckoned with at close parity.

Epanterias is known from hardly any material, what's its importance here? We are going into the field of speculation...

Yea, so a gape of 97cm would be way more than enough to bite its neck/other vulnerable areas and cause a decent amount of damage if inflicted accurately enough, more so than a bite gape of 75cm. 

I am not even the one that brought it up. Look in the OP.

Allosaurus lucasi would take this fairly easily btw. Considering it was more than 10+ metres and apparently a lot more bulky than your typical Allosaurus. I would still take A. fragilis over Baryonyx walkeri though.

You're the one who said it would have a wider gape...

I did not confirm it, what I said proves Baryonyx has a wider gape at 40°, but it doesn't prove it had a higher jaw angle. Moreover, merely looking at jaw anatomy does not render any precise effects, there are other deciding factors. Using trigonometry, for example, would give a more viable result:

Gape = jaw length/sin((180-gapeangle)/2)×sin(gapeangle)