Printable View
Who would win out of this match up prime for prime?
Both are about equivalent in height and weight and physical conditioning, both being former cruiserweights who have moved up. Both great counter-punchers.
Holy more of a punch bag but loves to brawl and can recuperate from anything, Adamek a more technical European style but also not too shy to make a fight of it.
Neither is a big puncher at Heavyweight but both have great chins.
How does it unfold??
Holy makes him look like a bum and takes him out before the 7th round..
Total mismatch.. adamek at HW is weak dude.. he's a fringe contender at best
Holyfield was "more of a punch bag":vd: Biggest wind up thread ever, Holyfield eats him alive at any weight, Adamek couldn't even seriously hurt him with a one in a million punch.
Sign on as power puncher and give us your other opinion, it seems necessary for you to keep touch , you schizoid:D
I used to be a huge fan of adamek during his run at LHW and CW but ive been very disappointed seeing him turn so ordinary against the big boys..
He's clearly not cut out for the HW division and he probably knows it too.. he's just hoping to land a big money fight..
I would have loved to see him fight Haye at CW..
Maxpower you are trippin cuz a young Holy would make adamek his bitch
Are we really asking this question or have the mushrooms in my turkey stuffing induced a killer flashback trip???
Seriously, Holyfield should enter the ring with a shovel..and a guilty conscious. Puff puff pass bud..
The fact that Adamek has had any success at HW speaks volumes for his determination, he got his ass whipped by Chad Dawson at 175 ffs and was in some other wars there.
...and i thought i was the biggest moron around here!
Power puncher is a lot smarter than Max Power, in his defence.
Relax... I also think Holyfield wins but I do think he wins UD not KO.
Adamek isn't THAT bad, come on. He lost to Vitali Klitschko at HW... Who hasn't!
The punch bag bit might have been a little wind up sure but I didn't think the thread was THAT outrageous! LOL
Not even close prime for prime. Holyfield would dominate and stop him. Adamek is not bad by todays standards but Holyfield would've eaten him alive.
An old Lennox Lewis is one guy who hasn't;) Evander was in the same class in his prime. Adamek didn't come close to winning a round against Vitali, I don't think he deserved the nod against Cunningham in either of their fights and that's the best boxer he can ever claim to have beaten. I'm not sure it wouldn't be a competitive fight if this happened today with Holyfield training in aqua fit and tai chi classes at the seniors home.Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Power
Of course Holyfield is a legend :)
Well I agree Lennox Lewis would be able to KO Adamek like he KO'd Botha. But I also think Tomasz would have performed well against some guys who beat Holyfield, like John Ruiz, Michael Moorer or Chris Byrd.
Of course I can't see him besting Bowe or Tyson either though LOL that's obviously a stretch!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Power
I think you should do all the work @Max Power ...because what you're proposing is so stupid.
1- what were each of their respective "primes"?
2- who had they fought AND defeated in their respective "primes"?
3- have you ever watched a boxing match...ever?
Holyfield was OLD when he lost 2 of those fights, you didn't ask whether Adamek would've been able to perform well against that guy. If you had, I think he'd still lose clearly, as he would against any of those 3 others for that matter. Beating Holyfield on his best night wouldn't have been more likely than beating a post prison Tyson no matter who you are talking about, and Moorer and Bowe in the 90s were great HWs. This thread is basically your admitting that you think so highly of Vitali, that anyone who went some rounds with an old version of him could have beaten anyone who was around 10 years earlier:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Power
Holyfield had an amazing career (wish he'd retired a long time ago though). He could punch at Heavyweight alright. Ask Tyson, Bowe etc. etc. etc.
He may have been 14 1/2 st to 15 1/2 st but he was "carved out of granite" at that weight. He had hand speed, technique, great movement, power, chin, massive heart and a champion's mentality. Which is why he had the career he had. There were better fighters at the time "on their day" but overall I think he deserves to go down as one of the best ever.
There isn't the competition around today that could compare with the best fighters of the 90s in the HW division.
Well I do rate Holyfield one of the best of all time and in fact he is one of my favourite boxers but I also think a lot of you guys are painting too large a gap in talent between someone like Adamek and someone like Holyfield.
You think Adamek is not fit to be an opponent of Holyfield, obvious by your snide remarks. When in actual fact the fight would not resemble a "beat-down" at all.
Adamek doesn't rank anywhere near Holyfield either in terms of h2h or greatness in my book the same as yours but the actual gap in their talent is not so great that Tomasz would be a punch bag for him.
IMO adamek is one of the most over rated boxers of this current era when it comes to the weights above light heavyweight
problem is when comparing you have to consider holyfield enjoyed his best form when he was juicing
drugs asside at HW holyfield would batter him prime for prime
Yes it is, as was the gap in physicality and boxing skills. Adamek has never been a great HW ever, there is no "prime" version of him to even talk about here. He couldn't have hurt Holyfield with anything or outfought him for 5 seconds, and he's been in serious trouble against much lesser and smaller men. He did well against Arreola because Cris couldn't land repeatedly or follow up on anything, Evander would have found him easily and torn him apart. Nobody ever came close to beating Holyfield without the ability to hurt him unless you look at the old man. Byrd would have maybe always given him a run, but he was a much better boxer than Adamek, who fought nothing like that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Power
I understand what you're saying. There are plenty of people who don't really rank with Holyfield's class or level or achievements obviously but that doesn't mean they wouldn't cause him problems. E.g. Bert Cooper.Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Power
I've never got what people rate in Adamek. He's been very lucky with points decisions in his last few fights. And against a prime Holyfield he would stand no chance. They're not even close to being in the same league!
Prime for Prime? Evander would hammer the crap out of Adamek.
Adamek loses to Holyfield and Joe Frazier. The new modern heavyweights are poor at present and that is the reason why average heavyweights now seem better than they really are.
Thank god i thought Holyfeild was fighting again just a hypothetical match which is almost as fucking stupid to make. Holyfeild is the best cw of all time and top 10 atg Heavyweight most of his loses are after he was 40 and past his day Adamek is eh Holyfeild is a great and better at everything in boxing.
Yeah well I think if you buy into that crap Master that the modern HW's couldn't hold a candle to the old guys then you've swallowed the American media spin. Funny how not many outside the US, where American HW's are seriously challenged to keep up now, that opinion doesn't seem quite so prevalent.
There'll always be the "old time nutbags" in every sport but there is far too much tolerance for it in the boxing world.
Holyfield was a GREAT fighter, I have him #5! But you guys seem to forget that he LOST sometimes and was seriously challenged at others by much lesser fighters. You forget that he didn't even gain any respect as a champion until he lost a fight.
His HW record stands at 26-10 with a low KO ratio, as we all know it's not as bad as it looks because some of those losses were when he was old and he was never a big puncher. One question I'd like to pose to the idiot who said Adamek would be battered is this... "Who has Holyfield ever battered into submission at HW?" Nobody. He is a counter-puncher and an attrition brawler. So basically with such a stupid comment your claiming that Adamek would be the worst opponent of Holyfield's career! :rolleyes:
I think the point you're missing @Max Power is that Holyfield wasn't simply a heavyweight. He was a dominant world champion cruiserweight who moved up to fight the best competition at HW and beat most of them. He held either the WBA, IBF or WBC titles(sometimes all three) at CW or HW from 1986-2001! With the exception of 1989(because he moved up to HW) & 1995.
Lets look at who Holyfield beat at HW:
Buster Douglas
George Foreman
Larry Holmes
Riddick Bowe
Ray Mercer
Mike Tyson
Michael Moorer
John Ruiz
Now, @Max Power please pick the fighters from this list that you believe Adamek could beat. Also please make a list of Adamek's achievements that suggest that he has done anything similar to coming close to giving a rational person even a sliver of hope of him not being used like toilet paper by THE GREAT Evander Holyfield.
Ok let's see. Your original statement I don't fully agree with. Evander was a dominant champ at CW and a great one at HW but far from dominant. A dominant champ wins almost all his fights in his reign, Lennox Lewis, only 2ce lost by punchers chance. Tyson lost only to Buster Douglas in what was considered his reign and that was Buster's best performance and one of Tyson's worst (before he was completely shot), Lewis and Tyson were the dominant champs of the era. Holyfield lost to an array of mediocre contenders, that's not dominance and was clearly bested by Bowe (you can't be dominant if there's one fighter that's clearly better.) Being a "4-time HW champ" sounds great but it basically means you had to LOSE it 3 times!Quote:
I think the point you're missing @Max Power is that Holyfield wasn't simply a heavyweight. He was a dominant world champion cruiserweight who moved up to fight the best competition at HW and beat most of them. He held either the WBA, IBF or WBC titles(sometimes all three) at CW or HW from 1986-2001! With the exception of 1989(because he moved up to HW) & 1995.
Lets look at who Holyfield beat at HW:
Buster Douglas
George Foreman
Larry Holmes
Riddick Bowe
Ray Mercer
Mike Tyson
Michael Moorer
John Ruiz
Now, @Max Power please pick the fighters from this list that you believe Adamek could beat. Also please make a list of Adamek's achievements that suggest that he has done anything similar to coming close to giving a rational person even a sliver of hope of him not being used like toilet paper by THE GREAT Evander Holyfield.
As for your list...
Adamek could easily outpoint the Buster that Holy beat.
George Foreman is too slow to catch Adamek, another UD and Adamek is not chinny enough or stupid enough to get knocked out like Moorer.
Larry Holmes gets the nod from me by decision.
Riddick Bowe would beat him up like Vitali did but I think Adamek would survive for decision loss.
Ray Mercer of the Lewis fight would have Adamek KO but most versions of Ray were too poorly skilled to beat Adamek so most times this is an Adamek DEC.
Mike Tyson would knock Adamek out, Holyfield definitely performs better than Adamek here!
I think Adamek has even chances against Moorer.
I think Adamek beats Ruiz.
So all in all I see a guy who, being a smaller HW would be challenged by the powerful guys but certainly belongs in the league.
And as to your final quip...
Chambers, Cunningham, Guinn, McBride, Grant, Arreola, Golota, Banks. These are respectable win opponents!
And although battered by Vitali, how many of your list of Evander's opponents there could survive against Klitschko? Some certainly... But not many!
Quote:
Adamek loses to Holyfield and Joe Frazier. The new modern heavyweights are poor at present and that is the reason why average heavyweights now seem better than they really are.
You cannot rubbish a modern contender and THEN go on to bring up an ancient HW like Frazier who has so many skeletons in his closet and probably would not be able to even compete as a professional HW today. Try again!
@Max Power are you friends with Rob Ford?Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Power
There are three possible reason that you aren't able to agree with my "original statement" 1- you can't read 2- you already have your mind made up...but it could be 3- a combination of 1 & 2.Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Power
1- If you re-read my post you'll notice I never said Holyfield was a dominant HW(I've highlighted the "original statement" so you can easily read it.) I said he was a dominant CW that moved up to HW and fought the best competition and beat most of them. Where do you find fault in that?
2- You then start rambling about who was dominant at the time. You mention Lennox, a good example--one of the best. Then you mention Tyson as an example of a dominant fighter, ignoring the argument you made about needing to win most of one's fights in order to be considered dominant. Tyson lost fights at the end of his career to terrible opposition and you're willing to forgive Tyson's loses but you're not willing to do the same for Holyfield and his late career loses.
I never mentioned Holyfield being a 4 time champ. I don't even know why you brought it up. I did state that he was champion from 1986-2001(two years excluded) which is an incredible achievement!
Your list of respectable opponents is a joke. Do you even know the history of those fighters?
Guinn was 38 years old and had lost 3 of his last 4 fights!
McBride had lost 4 of his last 5 fights(including a recent loss to a guy with a record of 20-29!!!) McBride's biggest win was against Tyson but that's a Tyson fight you're willing to ignore, so we better ignore McBride's win against hm as well...
Grant had fought once in 2 years.
Golota could have been a great fighter but he was clearly mentally unstable. He was DQ'd for low blows two fights in a row and both times he was clearly winning both fights!
Banks was a CW at the time... We know what Evander did at CW-DOMINATED!
I'm getting tired... so i'm not gonna write about the rest... Needless to say Holyfield would have beat them all. All of them!
As for your question about which of Holyfield's victims survives Klitchko...? That was one fight Klitchko is arguably one of the greats there's no shame in losing to him. But i'll point out that Adamek didn't survive he got KTFO!!! If surviving to the 10th round before getting KO'd by Klitchko is Adamek's biggest achievement then that's pretty much the smoking gun on your silly argument.
Sorry I did not read it correctly, my bad.
Ok so when you look at the context, some of the opponents of Adamek were not exactly solid, esp when he fought them and ok perhaps merely fighting Vitali is no virtue of greatness.
Yes of course Holyfield had a tremendous career both at CW and at HW, he in fact did fight among the toughest run of opponents and most of his losses came later. Regarding Tyson though, I specifically highlighted his "reign" as being his 1980's 1st career. He was never a dominant champ after that at all so I have not dismissed his later losses. Holyfield however, never really had an established reign as he always got upsets even at earlier stages of his career. When exactly did Holyfield become "shot"? I can accept that Holy was past it post 2001 but before that, up to the Ruiz loss for certain you cannot make that excuse. Some people have a "prime" Holyfield only losing to Riddick Bowe the 1st time and there after becoming instantly shot and excusing all subsequent losses from there, total BS!
But in all you are right, there is not much to go on with for Adamek's case with any solid ground.
Why are we having this debate , Adamek is solid at best , Holyfield was great at cw.
No need to try again calling Joe non-professional says it all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Power
I did not say Joe was un-professional. I just implied he would not amount to TODAY what we would describe as a professional HW boxer.
If he kept his weight below the CW limit, sure I think he would be competitive but he demonstratably could not compete with modern superheavyweight punchers.
John Ruiz, Joe Frazier and Roy Jones Jr. could maybe find pockets of success at HW as they all did but they are far too weak to make any serious impact!
Putting John Ruiz and Roy Jones Jr in the same sentence as Joe Frazier as HW champions is wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Power
It was pretty evident that Ruiz wasn't having a serious impact on the division while he was active, let alone in a hypothetical 2013.
Holyfield is far and away the better fighter. IMO.
You're mad. You really think Adamek could hold his own in a ring with the likes of Foreman and Holmes?! You do realise when Adamek retires no one will remember him, let alone rate him?Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Power
The versions of Holmes and Foreman that Holy fought were more experienced than their younger versions and heftier but they were far slower. Against an opponent like Adamek, this would amount to a disadvantage compared to what is normally considered "prime" for them. Young Foreman for example would finish Adamek quick. Young Holmes would be the one to out whack Adamek all night. But the ones that fought Holy were not that fast against a skilled opponent like Adamek.Quote:
You're mad. You really think Adamek could hold his own in a ring with the likes of Foreman and Holmes?! You do realise when Adamek retires no one will remember him, let alone rate him?
Spoken like a true asshole that last bit. I have a feeling in Europe Tomasz will be remembered as a multiple world titlist he is. Only in the US where I assume you're from will you choose to ignore the present in favour of home bred heroes from ages ago.
He is from England, check his flag.Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Power
Not sure how anyone can dismiss the snap accurate jab of even the old Holmes vs Adamek who was arguably out jabbed badly by a Cunningham and bothered big time by a fly swatting one armed Chambers. Holmes and Foremans jabs were Hell, even for ol geezers.