Seriously...wtf has happened to Chad Dawson?

Regardless of Chad's physical abilities (which I am sure are still intact)

He is emotional/mentally vacant in the ring, and has been since the Andre Ward fight (I think that loss took more out of him than anybody initially thought). And the one thing that has been proven time and time again in boxing/mma/kickboxing, if you don’t have the will/desire to fight, and the mental fire to push yourself through training, both physically and emotionally, you won’t be successful (even if you have world class abilities).

The sad thing is that EVERY up and coming light heavyweight, and their management, will be looking to get a fight with Chad for name value alone. And if he isn’t mentally into it, this is the type of situation (i.e. fighting ONLY for money) where a fighter can accumulate some serious damage (especially considering he is going to be fighting young, hungry fighters who want to make a name for themselves; and no better way to do that is beat the hell out of a previously dominate light heavyweight).

 

Karpency beat Dawson.
He was beating Fonfara in Chicago through like 7 or 8 rounds then they got tangeled up and Tommy fell. He claimed he got hurt thinking they would go to the scorecards instead they gave Fonfara a tko.
He fought Murat tough won probably five rounds and got worked by Cleverly but lasted the distance.

He's a decent journeyman would like to see him rematch Fonfara.

As for Chad time to hang them up.

 

Adamek was top 5-ish at the time, but he wasn't the #1 guy. You can't get that high off of beating one good mid-rated opponent (Briggs was around the 6-8 range himself, I believe). Ulrich was a nice follow-up. Still, there was Hopkins, Tarver, Erdei, Johnson, and Woods there, all of whom were more proven at the weight and had fought and beat a higher level of competition.

It was a great performance from Dawson, but the win itself increased in value more than it should've based off of what Adamek did when he moved up (CW was his best weight, IMO). That said, the Johnson loss did take some luster off of Chad, but not enough to stop him from getting a P4P ranking off of that and the Tarver win. Much of the reason for that came from Dawson's rep piggybacking off what Adamek would go on to accomplish and the old Tarver and Glen's name value.

 

So Adamek wasn't that good because he failed to fight B-Hop, Johnson and Tarver (and Clinton Woods!)

And Dawson's wins over Tarver and Johnson and B-Hop weren't that good because they were old.

And Dawson's win over Adamek wasn't that good because Adamek didn't beat B-Hop, Tarver, Johnson (and Woods!).

And Adamek was drained too.

Do I have that right? It's all rather circuitous.

 

No, you don't.

The Hopkins win was damn good and I give him credit for having the easiest night against Hopkins anyone did. Adamek, Johnson, and Tarver were good wins. They shouldn't have been enough to garner him a P4P ranking and the kind of H2H rep he had on here.

The Adamek win gets overrated because Adamek didn't have much substance at all to his 175 days as far as quality depth goes.

All in all, I maintain that Dawson was in the right place at the right time and had he come up 3-4 years later, he wouldn't have the kind of success he did. That doesn't mean all his wins are worthless. He, for awhile at least, was able to make the most of the opportunities in front of him. He beat some top 5-caliber rated guys and a top man in Hopkins, and I give him credit for that, even if the versions he faced weren't as formidable as their name value.

The rest of the division just caught up and surpassed him once fresh guys moved up (in some cases) and got an opportunity, which is what happens when an average champ reigns over an average division. Dude was ranked P4P before he fought Hopkins, and that was simply overrating him.