Carl Froch or Tomasz Adamek..

[THE PHILOSOPHER]

Both fighters cut from the same cloth. Big fan of both. Who do u rate higher?

[ross]

Thats almost as easy as saying would Froch beat Dawson (at light heavy)? I think he would.

[oakleyno1]

Froch by a long way and thats based on the Adameks record at 175 and his sd win over cunningham at cruiser meaning he has never dominated a divison , although i havent seen the cunningham fight

[armin]

Froch by a long way and thats based on the Adameks record at 175 and his sd win over cunningham at cruiser meaning he has never dominated a divison , although i havent seen the cunningham fight

Froch hasn't dominated a division either...accomplishment wise I don't know, if they ever had met at light heavy I would have favored adamek.

[bzkfn]

Very random question. I'd have to go with Audley Harrison.

[gest12645]

currently, I'd say Froch. Taking their whole careers and judging them based on that, I'd slightly favor Adamek

[CFH]

I don't see any logic in rating Adamek higher than Froch.

[beenKOed]

I like 'em both but Adamek, definitely! He's fought bigger and more experienced fighters, and always--almost always--figures out a way to win.

[ross]

I like 'em both but Adamek, definitely! He's fought bigger and more experienced fighters, and always--almost always--figures out a way to win.

He lost to Dawson though and Froch wouldnt.

Pascal beat Dawson and Adamek couldnt.

I think some people are over rating Adamek because hes moved up and beaten some mediocre heavies but he just wasnt that great as a light heavy and id bet he gets found out for taking steroids too.

[gest12645]

Adamek had trouble making weight for the Dawson fight, so it could explain his weak performance. He was an excellent cruiser and should of stayed there. How do y'all see his fight vs Cunningham ( the rematch) ?

[Dia bando]

To be honest Adamek and Froch, are not the best in there division's to start with, and before some one
has a hissing fit, they ARE NOT. Both have been beaten, Froch is probable the better fighter they are both
very good , but Froch is the man you would have to say.

[Spicoli]

Not sure what we're judging on As a whole I go Froch today. He has stayed in one spot and has had less ifs..mights..and maybes. That said Adamek adapted and switched his game. If he continued to fight at heavy like Froch does at his weight he would be ko'd...a few times.

[beenKOed]

To be honest Adamek and Froch, are not the best in there division's to start with, and before some one
has a hissing fit, they ARE NOT. Both have been beaten, Froch is probable the better fighter they are both
very good , but Froch is the man you would have to say.

I agree with some points you've made but definitely not all. It's one of the few "what if" matchups I'd pay to see.

[ElTerribleMorales]

I like 'em both but Adamek, definitely! He's fought bigger and more experienced fighters, and always--almost always--figures out a way to win.

He lost to Dawson though and Froch wouldnt.

Pascal beat Dawson and Adamek couldnt.
I think some people are over rating Adamek because hes moved up and beaten some mediocre heavies but he just wasnt that great as a light heavy and id bet he gets found out for taking steroids too.

and? Pascal beat Dawson, Hopkins schooled Pascal twice, and then lost to Dawson, your logic of fighter A lost to fighter B so fighter A would lose to fighter C because he beat fighter B, is retarded

[ryanman]

On accomplishments it's Froch clearly. Surely?