david haye or tomasz adamek?

First topic message reminder :

i can't help but notice the similaritys between haye and adamek, both are blown up cruisers campaining quite successfully in the heavyweight division. haye suffered a damaging defeat to wlad, and failing a massive upset adamek will probably suffer the same fate against vitali. both are previous crusierweight world champions, haye unifying the WBA, WBC and WBO belts against morcomek and enzo, and adamek defending the IBF against cunningham, banks and gunn. both have suffered a single loss, against carl thompson and chad dawson, and both have captured a world heavyweight title (IBF international belt against golota for adamek and WBA title against valuev for haye). their winning heavyweight records are about equal:-

haye: barrett, valuev, ruiz and harrison
adamek: golota, estrada, arroela, grant, maddalone and mcbride

this may well be academic if haye retires but i would consider haye/adamek number 3 in the world rankings behind the brothers (perhaps povetkin may have a shout as well though), and consider this a 50/50 fight. haye has the knockout power but adamek is tough and has the workrate, and think if haye wants to continue it is the logical step.

my question is who would you pick to win?

prettyboykev wrote:I'm not saying Adamek would beat Haye I'm saying he would have a chance unlike you who said he would stand no chance.

Cunningham beat Wlodarczyk and Huck.

I'm not talking up Adameks reecord just saying you are over stating what Haye has done.

Don't accuse me of taking anything away from a Klitchko brother I'm one of their biggest fans on this forum.

Dont rate the likes of Wlodarczyk and Huck to be honest...certainly not on Mormecks level.

I may sound like im talking up Haye's record im not im just defending him on here from posters who are disrespectful to Haye.

I meant other certain posters not you refuse to give Wlad credit...you misunderstood my comment.

I'm bound to agree with CL; you would think that anyone who has been so hopelessly wrong about something or someone in the past would at least listen to an alternative view.

Unfortunately for Wlad, he still doesn't have a career-defining victory in the heavyweight division. I'm not sure that it's possible with the paucity of quality on offer in the division, but in any case, beating Haye certainly doesn't define Klitschko's career in any way at all.

Colonial Lion wrote:The genius of pbf, you say Wlads style was all wrong for Haye but at the time were you not telling everyone Haye would have him out in 6 rounds with far too much speed and power?

I would make Haye a small favourite over Adamek but theyre records are comparable and trying to insinuate Ruiz and Valuev were world champions and anything other than ordinary doesnt realy strengthen your argument that Adamek has no chance against Haye.

Haye has more power than Adamek but Adamek has a decent chin and fights are not won on knock outs alone. Indeed much of the arguments in favour of Adamek having a decent chance of winning stem from the idea that Haye is overly reliant on looking for knockouts whereas Adamek is a more well rounded fighter over 12 rounds capable of boxing his way to a decision.

Thought Wladimir would mentally collapse again after getting tagged...Im also the leader of the prediction league but unlike others I gave Wlad his due after the fight.

Adamek is no Wladimir and dont think he is a more well rounded fighter...Im yet to see this "decent chin" at heavyweight from Adamek...I stand by Adamek has no chance against Haye.

Adamek doesn't have the reach or height to stop Haye from getting to him.

I do find it funny all the haters jumping on Haye's back because of the Wlad defeat. @ Cruiser Haye would stop Adamek within 6 rounds. @ Heavy, the extra poundage will benefit Adamek but he still get stopped between 8 - 12.

Adamek went life and death with Cunningham at cruiser.

And if you think Cunningham could beat Haye, Adamek dropped him about three times in that fight and he doesnt have explosive power that Haye has. I'd hate to think what Haye would have done with him if they had met.

captain carrantuohil wrote:I'm bound to agree with CL; you would think that anyone who has been so hopelessly wrong about something or someone in the past would at least listen to an alternative view.

Unfortunately for Wlad, he still doesn't have a career-defining victory in the heavyweight division. I'm not sure that it's possible with the paucity of quality on offer in the division, but in any case, beating Haye certainly doesn't define Klitschko's career in any way at all.

If i was going to listen to someone it certainly wouldn't be you...Haye is a career defining win for Wladimir, he beat a world class boxer in his prime...Wlad also has longetivity for his reign.

Soldier_Of_Fortune wrote:I do find it funny all the haters jumping on Haye's back because of the Wlad defeat. @ Cruiser Haye would stop Adamek within 6 rounds. @ Heavy, the extra poundage will benefit Adamek but he still get stopped between 8 - 12.

Adamek went life and death with Cunningham at cruiser.

And if you think Cunningham could beat Haye, Adamek dropped him about three times in that fight and he doesnt have explosive power that Haye has. I'd hate to think what Haye would have done with him if they had met.

Exactly Soldier you get someone like the Captain a poster who is arrogant because they read books etc and act like they know it all so they look down at you.

If you analysed it properly you would realise Adamek will struggle badly with Haye.

Learn to post with respect PBF or log off.

SoF, it's really not a matter of being a hater. I acknowledge Haye as the finest cruiserweight that this country has ever produced (faint praise, possibly) and a concussive hitter at that weight.

However, I think that he has not improved as a heavyweight, while Adamek has. Haye's power has not translated to the heavyweight division, in that the upper reaches of the division do not keel over when he connects. Adamek was never much of a power-hitter, even at cruiser (he did, after all, begin life at 175), so has to secure his wins differently. To agree with CL again, he is consequently a more rounded fighter than Haye, who increasingly relies on single shots, and right-handed single shots at that, to win his battles. I think that Haye has the boxing ability to outpoint Adamek, although he rarely uses it these days. I think it less likely that he stops a bloke who seems more durable as he fills out. I think it entirely plausible, and at the likely odds, a must bet, that Adamek outpoints Haye.

Let him go, Scott, the saliva of a guppy fish is unlikely to drown a shark.

The genius of PBF wrote:

Colonial Lion wrote:The genius of pbf, you say Wlads style was all wrong for Haye but at the time were you not telling everyone Haye would have him out in 6 rounds with far too much speed and power?

I would make Haye a small favourite over Adamek but theyre records are comparable and trying to insinuate Ruiz and Valuev were world champions and anything other than ordinary doesnt realy strengthen your argument that Adamek has no chance against Haye.

Haye has more power than Adamek but Adamek has a decent chin and fights are not won on knock outs alone. Indeed much of the arguments in favour of Adamek having a decent chance of winning stem from the idea that Haye is overly reliant on looking for knockouts whereas Adamek is a more well rounded fighter over 12 rounds capable of boxing his way to a decision.

Thought Wladimir would mentally collapse again after getting tagged...Im also the leader of the prediction league but unlike others I gave Wlad his due after the fight.

Adamek is no Wladimir and dont think he is a more well rounded fighter...Im yet to see this "decent chin" at heavyweight from Adamek...I stand by Adamek has no chance against Haye.

Adamek doesn't have the reach or height to stop Haye from getting to him.

My point is that its not rocket science how Wlad boxes or sets up his gameplan. So if you say now that his style is all wrong for Haye then surely this was a factor before the fight? Yet you never emphasised this or indeed the belief the fight rested on Wlads mental fragility. Instead most of your comments appeared to give Wlad next to no chance because Haye would be far too quick and nullify Wlads jab and would have far too much power. Surely if yo felt Wlads style was all wrong for Haye then this at least would be offered as a reason to at least give him a reasonable chance of victory?

Which leds me on to this match up where again you appear to be giving Hayes opponent almost no chance despite the fact the are reasons out there that suggest Adamek is a live contender. Haye has power yes, how much at heavyweight is debateable but Adamek has never been stopped and has proved a relatiely durable figher with a good engine. You have highlighted some of Hayes strengths but not acknowledged any of Adameks. You also havent considered any of Hayes weaknesses or vunerabilities. Hes not a great round winner. Large amounts of time spent on the back foot, reasonably low punch output and workrate, reliance on single big shots to hurt his opponent. Not particulalry effective at winning 12 round fights. These can all transpire to lose a fight against a higher work rate and more aggressive fighter like Adamek especially seeing as hes appeared pretty durable so far.

Like I say, I mke Haye a favourite in this but see no reason to be completely dismissive of Adamek or 100% confident in Haye.

Colonial Lion wrote:

The genius of PBF wrote:

Colonial Lion wrote:The genius of pbf, you say Wlads style was all wrong for Haye but at the time were you not telling everyone Haye would have him out in 6 rounds with far too much speed and power?

I would make Haye a small favourite over Adamek but theyre records are comparable and trying to insinuate Ruiz and Valuev were world champions and anything other than ordinary doesnt realy strengthen your argument that Adamek has no chance against Haye.

Haye has more power than Adamek but Adamek has a decent chin and fights are not won on knock outs alone. Indeed much of the arguments in favour of Adamek having a decent chance of winning stem from the idea that Haye is overly reliant on looking for knockouts whereas Adamek is a more well rounded fighter over 12 rounds capable of boxing his way to a decision.

Thought Wladimir would mentally collapse again after getting tagged...Im also the leader of the prediction league but unlike others I gave Wlad his due after the fight.

Adamek is no Wladimir and dont think he is a more well rounded fighter...Im yet to see this "decent chin" at heavyweight from Adamek...I stand by Adamek has no chance against Haye.

Adamek doesn't have the reach or height to stop Haye from getting to him.

My point is that its not rocket science how Wlad boxes or sets up his gameplan. So if you say now that his style is all wrong for Haye then surely this was a factor before the fight? Yet you never emphasised this or indeed the belief the fight rested on Wlads mental fragility. Instead most of your comments appeared to give Wlad next to no chance because Haye would be far too quick and nullify Wlads jab and would have far too much power. Surely if yo felt Wlads style was all wrong for Haye then this at least would be offered as a reason to at least give him a reasonable chance of victory?

Which leds me on to this match up where again you appear to be giving Hayes opponent almost no chance despite the fact the are reasons out there that suggest Adamek is a live contender. Haye has power yes, how much at heavyweight is debateable but Adamek has never been stopped and has proved a relatiely durable figher with a good engine. You have highlighted some of Hayes strengths but not acknowledged any of Adameks. You also havent considered any of Hayes weaknesses or vunerabilities. Hes not a great round winner. Large amounts of time spent on the back foot, reasonably low punch output and workrate, reliance on single big shots to hurt his opponent. Not particulalry effective at winning 12 round fights. These can all transpire to lose a fight against a higher work rate and more aggressive fighter like Adamek especially seeing as hes appeared pretty durable so far.

Like I say, I mke Haye a favourite in this but see no reason to be completely dismissive of Adamek or 100% confident in Haye.

Where did I say Wladimir had no chance even though I strongly believed Haye would win? Haye could not adapt to it like I thought I would, so what im top of the prediction league for a reason I know my boxing. Even though I knew style wise he was wrong for Haye I banked on his talent to get him through Wlad.

Adamek doesn't have the style or talent to beat Haye...Adamek is not a proven durable fighter at heavyweight he was out on his feet at times against a fat out of shaped Arreola and shaken up against Grant.

Scott take your own advice look at the some of the threads where you always make sniping comments.

The genius of PBF wrote:

Colonial Lion wrote:

The genius of PBF wrote:

Colonial Lion wrote:The genius of pbf, you say Wlads style was all wrong for Haye but at the time were you not telling everyone Haye would have him out in 6 rounds with far too much speed and power?

I would make Haye a small favourite over Adamek but theyre records are comparable and trying to insinuate Ruiz and Valuev were world champions and anything other than ordinary doesnt realy strengthen your argument that Adamek has no chance against Haye.

Haye has more power than Adamek but Adamek has a decent chin and fights are not won on knock outs alone. Indeed much of the arguments in favour of Adamek having a decent chance of winning stem from the idea that Haye is overly reliant on looking for knockouts whereas Adamek is a more well rounded fighter over 12 rounds capable of boxing his way to a decision.

Thought Wladimir would mentally collapse again after getting tagged...Im also the leader of the prediction league but unlike others I gave Wlad his due after the fight.

Adamek is no Wladimir and dont think he is a more well rounded fighter...Im yet to see this "decent chin" at heavyweight from Adamek...I stand by Adamek has no chance against Haye.

Adamek doesn't have the reach or height to stop Haye from getting to him.

My point is that its not rocket science how Wlad boxes or sets up his gameplan. So if you say now that his style is all wrong for Haye then surely this was a factor before the fight? Yet you never emphasised this or indeed the belief the fight rested on Wlads mental fragility. Instead most of your comments appeared to give Wlad next to no chance because Haye would be far too quick and nullify Wlads jab and would have far too much power. Surely if yo felt Wlads style was all wrong for Haye then this at least would be offered as a reason to at least give him a reasonable chance of victory?

Which leds me on to this match up where again you appear to be giving Hayes opponent almost no chance despite the fact the are reasons out there that suggest Adamek is a live contender. Haye has power yes, how much at heavyweight is debateable but Adamek has never been stopped and has proved a relatiely durable figher with a good engine. You have highlighted some of Hayes strengths but not acknowledged any of Adameks. You also havent considered any of Hayes weaknesses or vunerabilities. Hes not a great round winner. Large amounts of time spent on the back foot, reasonably low punch output and workrate, reliance on single big shots to hurt his opponent. Not particulalry effective at winning 12 round fights. These can all transpire to lose a fight against a higher work rate and more aggressive fighter like Adamek especially seeing as hes appeared pretty durable so far.

Like I say, I mke Haye a favourite in this but see no reason to be completely dismissive of Adamek or 100% confident in Haye.

Where did I say Wladimir had no chance even though I strongly believed Haye would win? Haye could not adapt to it like I thought I would, so what im top of the prediction league for a reason I know my boxing. Even though I knew style wise he was wrong for Haye I banked on his talent to get him through Wlad.

Adamek doesn't have the style or talent to beat Haye...Adamek is not a proven durable fighter at heavyweight he was out on his feet at times against a fat out of shaped Arreola and shaken up against Grant.

Scott take your own advice look at the some of the threads where you always make sniping comments.

How's Vegas this time of year?

Have any of yers seen the Adamek v Arreola fight? I thought Arreola was unlucky to get the nod (could have went either way) and he couldnt throw his right hand for about the last 4 rounds.

Cant remeber but was it a MD?

I saw it, SoF. It was a majority decision, as you say. Wide divergence in the scoring - one draw, one by two rounds, one by an absurd six. Thought the judge that gave it by two was closest, and also had the impression that Adamek threw more and landed more.

Wasn't aware that Arreola couldn't throw his right, I must admit.

Am sure he winced in pain in one of the rounds as it landed just to mix it up? I might be mistaken?!?

With all due rspect genius of pbf, I remember reading a good many of your comments on the predictions thread for the Haye/Klitschko fight and it was largely Haye would be too fast, too powerful, he would shock us all, Wlad wouldnt last 6, none of us realised how good Haye was or how hard he hit etc etc. There was very litte if any comments about Wlad being the stylistic nightmare for Haye that you are suggesting now.

Im not having a go, anyone can call a fight wrong and Im far from the exception. I appreciate you gave Wlad his dues after the fight but to be honest I think there is a element of you perhaps overrating Haye as a fighter as much as anything else. Certinly you appeared absolutely steadfast 100% convinced that he would take Wlad out by the mid rounds and the comments in relation to Haye shocking everyone by how good he is would indicate its more a case of perhaps you believing he was better than he actually was rather than all of us collectively underrating him.

You are right that Adamek is no Klitschko and has different styles and attribtes however like I say above I think you are seeing a much better Haye than the one Ive watched over the last few years who I must say hasnt impressed me nearly as much. Hes existed in two awful divisions and has cme acrss as limited in his own way to me to the extent I simply cant consider him a surefire easy winner over Adamek. I dont think anyone would have a problem with you installing Haye as the favourite but think insinuating Adamek hasnt got a hope of winning is being very generous to Haye.

eddyfightfan wrote:i can't help but notice the similaritys between haye and adamek

~ Why sir, what is that, both have all their hair and two fists each for hire?

The difference is that Mr. Adamek is a genuine championship fighter with substantial lineage who has actually improved has he has moved through 3 divisions.

Whereas Ms. Haye is a servant beholden to the whims of his little pinky toe which thankfully was in full support of Ms. Haye's speedy track effort against the creaking giant, Mr. Niko. Otherwise we may have never been treated to the all time spectacle of Ms. Haye vs Ms. Audley, three savage rounds of cat fur flying.

The annals of boxing are the richer, yes?

Just had a look at the post-fight comments from Arreola-Adamek, where Arreola admitted that Adamek had handed him a "motherf*****g whipping!"

Punch stats don't tell the whole story, but Adamek landed nearly 200, against a hundred and twenty-odd by Arreola, as well as twice as many 'power punches'. Most seem to have reckoned that two or three rounds difference was about right.

Perfessor Albertus Lion V wrote:

eddyfightfan wrote:i can't help but notice the similaritys between haye and adamek

~ Why sir, what is that, both have all their hair and two fists each for hire?

The difference is that Mr. Adamek is a genuine championship fighter with substantial lineage who has actually improved has he has moved through 3 divisions.

Whereas Ms. Haye is a servant beholden to the whims of his little pinky toe which thankfully was in full support of Ms. Haye's speedy track effort against the creaking giant, Mr. Niko. Otherwise we may have never been treated to the all time spectacle of Ms. Haye vs Ms. Audley, three savage rounds of cat fur flying.

The annals of boxing are the richer, yes?

no need for the sir, eddy would do fine. haye vs harrison paled in conparison to the spectacle that was adamek vs mcbride but you can't win them all i suppose....

I'd expect haye to beat Adamek 8 or 9 times out Of ten, Adamek is too easy to hit. I think Haye would be able to deter Adamek from throwing much because he'd be wary of the counter.

Neither stand much chance against a klitchko though, Haye probably has a bit better chance because he 'might' be able to do some damage. I'm fairly confident Vitalli could have given Adamek a free punch at the start of every round and it would still be te same result.