Adamek vs Grant - Round by Round

disagreed. in what department did adamek dominate? effective aggression and 'clean punches' slight edge to adamek who was lunging and having success at times especially with the first punch, but he was also in retreat mode for a large portion of the fight especially in many mid/late rounds. plus he was successfully countered a bunch of times and hit with the more damaging shots. you gotta give grant generalship cuz he stalked/chased him much of the fight and successfully cut him off many times. close fight imo

 

I watched the fight last night. Grant was horrible. Don't you agree?

 

Haye will not face a top, Euro-level challenger in his prime. He fought a past prime Valuev in a fight that he obviously lost. He has avoided Dimitrenko, Ustinov, Povetkin, Chagaev, and Ibragimov. But he happily fights Barrett and Ruiz, because they are subpar Americcan-level challengers.

 

Chad Dawson, Jason Estrada, Steve Cunningham, and Paul Briggs.

 

...But...Adamek hasn't really fought a good Heavyweight.

 

Exactly.

 

Most people say that they were surprised how good Grant looked in the fight with Adamek. What was that horrible in Grant in your opinion?

At 38 yo he looked really decent. He had a very good tactic from beginning. He started slowly, using his jab and taking Adamek shots, to counter with his big right hand. He was waiting for the proper moment and in the end of the 6th round he catched Adamek and hurt him. From that round he looked being more aggressive, but Adamek was too fast for him. When Grant tired in the later rounds, he slowed down again for 1-2 rounds, and accelarated in the 12th round and made a furious attack, trying to win the fight by knockout.

I think that this tactic was really good and surprising, while all expected Grant to rush on Adamek from beginning. If he had done this what people expected, he would have been tired in the middle rounds, and would have been an easy target for Adamek...

I dont know what you expected from Grant? He is a very limited fighter, if he hadnt been, he would have been a champion few years ago with his size and power. Knowing Grant's limitations, he fought a good fight, was in shape and had an OK stamina (considering his age and size)...

You say that you are a big Adamek fan and then you try to discredit his every win. I dount that you are an Adamek fan bart

 

I can only conclude that the people you have been speaking too didn't actually tune in. I did, and Michael Grant was a textbook example of a shot fighter. I've actually already explained, but Grant was often reaching for his shots and missing. I don't attribute this too Adamek's magician-like defense, I tend to think it's because Grant no longer has any snap in his punches, and his sense of timing is scewed. He struggled to throw a straight shot all fight, and when he tried to initiate the action he had no idea how to set himself. Grant was a horrible sight.

Michael Grant rarely threw a jab with conviction, and he was actually being out-jabbed by a fighter who was dramatically undersized. I don't want to step on any fighter. Michael fought valiantly, but physically he just doesn't have what it takes to operate a high level in this sport anymore. It had nothing to do with David Haye or Tomasz Adamek, these are observations.

I actually expected Michael Grant to still have the capacity to throw straight, accurate combination's. He doesn't. I also expected with his reach advantage that he'd overwork his left hand and try and win a lot of the rounds off the jab alone. This didn't happen, so I tend to think his game plan was horribly flawed. He should have threw his jab out there whenever he was in doubt, but a lot of the time he just posed.

I'm not discrediting Adamek's victories. I'm keeping them in proper context. Michael Grant and Andrew Golota were shot items at the time they fought The Psycho Killer, and Jason Estrada is nothing to write home about either. Steve Arreola, despite being horribly out of shape these days, is still a great scalp and I congratulated Adamek on the victory. I watched it, and was one of the people dismissing those who felt Arreola won more than three rounds. He was outclassed.

It may seem like I'm discrediting his every win because I find myself having to defend David Haye. Adamek's ardent supporters are quick to mock Haye for his level of competition, not realizing that their favorite fighter hasn't been fighting that great of opposition either. There should be some consistency, but all I see is agenda-driven nonsense.

 

Addie, name me please 3 or more opponents (not named Klitschko or Haye) who should Adamek fight in his next fight to make you satisfied when he beat either of them. The more you name the better :good

 

I'm satisfied. I don't have a history of criticizing fighters for their level of competition, I would just like to see a bit of ****ing consistency across the board. If Grant is good enough for Adamek, then Ruiz is good enough for David Haye.

 

Solis ( who wants to fight Adamek next.) Povetkin, Chagaev.