Adamek-Cunningham is a WAR!!!

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by NALLEGE, Dec 11, 2008.


  1. NALLEGE

    NALLEGE Loyal Member banned

    31,396
    3
    Aug 26, 2008
    Agreed:good
     
  2. Maxime

    Maxime Sweet Science Full Member

    8,957
    109
    Jul 19, 2004

    They can't have a rematch clause in the contract when it's a mandatory title defense.
     
  3. jaffay

    jaffay New Orleans Hornets Full Member

    3,980
    18
    Jun 24, 2007
    1 DRAW 10 - 10
    2 ADAMEK 10 -8
    3 DRAW 10-10
    4 DRAW 9-9
    5 ADAMEK 10-9
    6 ADAMEK 10-9
    7 ADAMEK 10-9
    8 ADAMEK 10-8
    9 DRAW 10-10
    10 CUNNINGHAM 10-9
    11 ADAMEK 10-9
    12 CUNNINGHAM 10-9

    Had it 117-111 for Adamek, and I can tell you that I was scoring aware of that USS is a champion and Adamek has to show alot to win a round.

    114-112 for Steve is a crime, even draw would be controversial

    Great fight, the best at cruiser, and one of the best overall in 2008
     
  4. lzolnier

    lzolnier Boxing Junkie Full Member

    11,524
    34
    Jan 20, 2007



    I thought Adamek was fighting at home.:soccerred
     
  5. NALLEGE

    NALLEGE Loyal Member banned

    31,396
    3
    Aug 26, 2008
    I'm sorry, but in championship fights, you can't score rounds draws. Nobody saw either fighter dominating.
     
  6. NALLEGE

    NALLEGE Loyal Member banned

    31,396
    3
    Aug 26, 2008
    Where on earth did you get this information at???:huh You are saying that if a champion loses, he can't get a rematch? Most champions include a rematch clause. Some are arrogant and do not include one.
     
  7. lzolnier

    lzolnier Boxing Junkie Full Member

    11,524
    34
    Jan 20, 2007
    If you accept the notion of scoring rounds as draw, this card looks good to me. Clearly the idea of a tie in rounds disfavors Cunningham because many of his rounds, were snatched from him by the KD's or last minute power shots.
     
  8. IntentionalButt

    IntentionalButt Guy wants to name his çock 'macho' that's ok by me

    401,531
    83,347
    Nov 30, 2006
    Enlighten me.
     
  9. jaffay

    jaffay New Orleans Hornets Full Member

    3,980
    18
    Jun 24, 2007
    giving draw rounds (4th when USS was on canvas went for Adamek) to Steve it's 115-111 Adamek:)
     
  10. lzolnier

    lzolnier Boxing Junkie Full Member

    11,524
    34
    Jan 20, 2007

    According to Adamek (and his beautiful English), this fight did not include a rematch clause because it was a mandatory defense. Also I know for a fact, Wlodarczyk gave Steve the rematch at his own discretion, as there was no rematch agreement between them.
     
  11. Kamil

    Kamil Guest

    I think they want Dawson as for a rematch
     
  12. lzolnier

    lzolnier Boxing Junkie Full Member

    11,524
    34
    Jan 20, 2007

    That's up to Dawson and Calzaghe. Maybe Diaconu as well. But you're probably right. Next year it will either be Dawson again or Cunningham again. Enjoy!
     
  13. NALLEGE

    NALLEGE Loyal Member banned

    31,396
    3
    Aug 26, 2008
    This is news to me. I have not heard of too many champions not including a rematch clause. It just doesn't make sense. Mandatory means nothing when it comes to whether a rematch clause is included.
     
  14. NALLEGE

    NALLEGE Loyal Member banned

    31,396
    3
    Aug 26, 2008
    Steve did seem to talk after the fight as if he hoped he would get one so maybe he didn't agree to one, didn't want one, or he thought he would win, and never requested one.
     
  15. lzolnier

    lzolnier Boxing Junkie Full Member

    11,524
    34
    Jan 20, 2007


    He shouldn't think that after the Wlodarczyk fights. He was really fortunate that Wlodarzyk came back to him right away, probably owing to the controversial decision and the dearth of other money fighters in this division. Adamek has a few more options than Diablo.


    BTW, we already know about the Buddy curse (of which Adamek knows plenty), can we now consider a Byrd curse?