My thoughts on Adamek vs Haye.

I don't think it's easy to say who is better between the two. I give Haye a better shot against the Klitschko's, especially Wlad because of one thing, power.

Haye does at least have a punchers chance. To me, that is the only chance either of these guys would have against either Klitschko, and it's clear Adamek doesn't have that, most definitely not against Vitali.

I believe Haye might have the power to hurt him if he lands and thus in theory his winning chances are higher. That side, I by no means think Haye will necessarily do better than Adamek against either, in fact I think he is more likely to get stopped than Adamek.

Regarding their careers, saying who has had the better career is not easy.

Haye was a unified cruiserweight champion knocking out both Mormeck and Maccarinnelli. Those were significant wins, even though in reality I don't think either was a great fighter, and I think Adamek could have beat them both too.

I disagree with Hulk that Adamek's resume at cruiser is better. He got a KO over O'Neil Bell but that was a weird fight. Bell seemed mentally ill at that time and just quit in the fight. No question Haye would have easily beaten him that night as well. The Bell that knocked out Mormeck however was a whole different animal and a challenge to both. But he was a weird hot and cold fighter and mentally not right. He was going to lose to whoever the night Adamek beat him imo. It was like McCall in the Lewis rematch, very strange.

As for edging Cunningham in a split decision is that a great win? Not if you're thinking of a man to beat Vitali it's certainly not.

Honestly I think Hayes wins at cruiser were more significant he was the unified champ knocking out two reigning world champs.

Adamek had one former champ quit the fight becuase he felt sick and dizzy and retired from the sport, and a close win over Cunningham who whilst a decent fighter isn't someone I think is world class in any way.

Johnathon Banks isn't a big win really either seeing as he had to battle to a draw against a 19-7-3 Jason Gavern last year.

At heavyweight again I have to favour Haye. Adameks resume Arreola aside is actually a bit embarrassing I think.

I'm sorry to say but Golota, Grant, Maddalone and Kevin McBride are joke fights. Grant and Golota are on a par with Audley Harrison, the other two well below even him, they would be very poor opponents for any of the other top heavyweights to face.

I don't rate Valuev, and think Ruiz and Hoylfield also beat him as well as Haye, but he was still a reigning world champ and well above the four guys mentioned above. Ruiz was probably equal to Arreola, Barrett and Harrison poor opposition but not Maddalone or McBride poor.

Neither has a resume to compare even to Eddie Chambers or Tony Thompson, Chambers with impressive wins over Sam Peter,Calvin Brock and Dimitrenko, Thompson having beaten Timor Ibragimov, Krusneqi and Chazz Witherspoon.

Really though none of the contenders have done much at all. The Klitschko's are head and shoulders above the rest in terms of resume's.

I think in a head to head Adamek vs Haye is a great matchup. Haye's power and speed vs Adameks toughness and workrate. I think it's a 50/50 fight against each other, I'd lean towards Haye if pushed but Adamek could definitely beat him.

I'm still not convinced that either of them is really as good as Chambers, Thompson, Povetkin, Juan Carlos Gomez or Solis however, but really that is personal opinion more than based on anything objective.

Certainly I would have Haye as number 3 in the world right now and Adamek, maybe 6 after Chambers and Povetkin.

I really don't see why he's considered a top 5 fighter decisioning the likes of Michael Grant and Kevin Mcbride. If anything taking those fights should have moved him down.

Arreola aside even Derek Chisora has a better resume with KO wins over Sam Sexton and Danny Williams