Having just watched Adamek/Banks, i'm not so sure Hopkins can beat Adamek.

Cant disagree with that.

I just believe he is a bit smarter than given credit for.I have seen a flat footed power punching Adamek and i have also seen one who used less power more movement and constant combo punching.Question is which one will show up in a Hopkins fight.

 

I wonder what strategy Adameks corner will come up with for a potential Hopkins fight. Adamek is a schooled fighter, is very disciplined and listens to his corner carefully. Wonder what Gmitruk would have up his sleeve.

 

What I liked about Adamek v Banks was how Adamek immediately grabbed the middle of the ring. He got a psychological advantage over the bigger man right away, he had the more powerful man using up stamina boxing on the back foot, he took away the power of Banks.

When Adamek finally got going, the body shots, the right hands, it proved to be a sound strategy that paid off. He made a big puncher look oddly defensive.

 

A whopping majority seems to think this is a walk in the park for Hopkins.

I have it an absolute pick'em. And maybe the most interesting fight either man has ever fought.

 

I agree with every word and every sentence (well, not the comparison between Adamek and Kessler, but all the important bits) :good

 

Thats because Dawson has speed, Cunningham too. These guys have one of the fastest hands for big guys.

Go watch Adamek Briggs and tell me he is inactive. He is active when he needs to.

How active is Hopkins? 3/15 per round.

 

adamek is a damn good technical boxer. i was impressed with him against dawson, but more impressed with the way dawson handled him. i see hopkins putting on the same kind of performance, but having a little more trouble. im gonna go with hopkins by Split or UD (especially with nazeem in his corner).

 

There are are 2 factors in Adamek's favour the weight and Hopkins age. But style wise Adamek is well suited for the current version of BHop. Adamek is a very economical fighter who waits to to get set before commiting to his punches.

Hopkins with his movement and defensive skills may not present the openings he's used to getting and we may see Adamek being to made look much worse than he really is. I just don't think Adamek has the speed or style to beat Hopkins.

 

Thank you...Not often do I agree with you but here I do...If some of these guys would not thinking Euro fighter vs US fighter they would see that this fight is a SMART BUSINESS move on Hopkins part...Adamek is a guy that dont throw many punches and isnt an active fighter..That plays right into what Hopkins does best at this point...

 

You miss the point...show me a fighter besides Jones that outboxed Hopkins...In all his loses Hopkins was outworked...Adamek dont throw enough shots to outwork Hopkins...I saw the fight with Briggs, and adamek was so active for two reason...1)Briggs has NO defence 2)Briggs was right there for him to land on...Neither was the case in adameks recent fights so he was less active, and threw fewer shots.

 

Yeah that comparison is a bit off.

Kessler is a technician while Adamek is much more a brawler.

Kessler hardly ever gets hit not loses a round, while Adamek loses plenty rounds and gets hit plenty.

They are both Europeans, but that is about it. Both good boxers, but very different.

 

one think is ademek can not just rely on his one punch power to beat hopkins..he just attack the hopkin's body first to slow him down

 

Smart business my ass. For a guy that doesn't throw many punches, Adamek seems to do plenty of damage doesn't he? He hurt Paul Briggs twice in the rematch, decimated Ullrich with a right hand, made Bell quit on his stool in Poland, knocked Cunningham down 3 times, and decked Banks twice, the last KD being perfunctory of course as the Kronk fighter was already on ***** street from the first right hand.

Oh and wait, even in his lone defeat, a weight-starched Adamek somehow managed to knock Chad Dawson down. Not taking anything away from Dawson's win but there's a reason why Tomasz moved up to cruiser after that fight and it wasn't because of some ceiling that Dawson set at 175 and even if it was Adamek was not the loser due to toughness or will, he was just another victim of the axiom that has held true in boing before you and I were even born: styles make fights. Maybe Adamek is economical with his punches but when he opens up it's always in combination and there's always damage done. Paul Briggs had to retire as a result of the damage Adamek inflicted upon him. Nervous system damage. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black, I don't remember Bernard being a guy who throws a ton of punches.

Go ahead and put Hopkins on this pedestal. He's never fought an intelligent Eastern European fighter who can adapt and won't be sucked in to a waltz of negtivity. Don't think for one second that I doubt Hopkins as a fighter. I love the guy, he's one of my favorites. A true ring technician and a badass in every sense of the word but he's stepping out of his depth here. Adamek is a legit cruiserweight. Strong, durable, intelligent, and can take a punch like nobody's business. He's not coming up from light heavy or supermiddle. He's well entrenched as a cruiserweight, as legit a champion as any of the divisions can claim to have.

 

Adamek hits plenty hard to KO Hopkins. Yes. However, so does Pavlik.

Adamek is good and has a lot of heart and can beat almost anyone who is not faster than him. Hopkins however is faster and a much better technician.

A wonderful match-up for Hopkins and an aweful match-up for Adamek.