burns v murray

boxingchat · Post by **boxingchat** » 29 Sep 2006, 10:46

It's an awful book and he must be wishing that FW's NOTW column doesn't respond to his comments throughout.

For me he comes across as a drunken slob as opposed to a world class athlete. He dissis other fighters which is poor and he disrespects the sport by his drinking antics. Has no regard for his well beinhg drinking so close after a fight. God help him if he ever has a problem and needs the Hospital. It's the only book I've ever read that makde me angry due to the constant crap written throughout. Poorly written by a fellow piss artist Niall Hickman.

Still make a great doorstop!

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 29 Sep 2006, 10:54

boxingchat wrote:It's an awful book and he must be wishing that FW's NOTW column doesn't respond to his comments throughout.

For me he comes across as a drunken slob as opposed to a world class athlete. He dissis other fighters which is poor and he disrespects the sport by his drinking antics. Has no regard for his well beinhg drinking so close after a fight. God help him if he ever has a problem and needs the Hospital. It's the only book I've ever read that makde me angry due to the constant crap written throughout. Poorly written by a fellow piss artist Niall Hickman.

Still make a great doorstop!

Well, in that case then Roberto Duran and JC Chavez, Carlos Monzon, John Conteh among other notables were all a disgrace to the sport as they were all also pissheads.

boxingchat · Post by **boxingchat** » 29 Sep 2006, 10:56

boxingchat · Post by **boxingchat** » 29 Sep 2006, 10:57

Not immediately after fights they weren't. Not on his scale. Are you saying it's okay James?

leforge · Post by **leforge** » 29 Sep 2006, 11:00

He on sky tonight I wonder what he say about Witter when asked about a fight. I dont know how a professional fighter can drink like he does, he not got long left at the top.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 29 Sep 2006, 11:05

I am neither condoning nor condemning what he does.

Given that Duran was weighing close to 200 lbs a few weeks after the first fight with Leonard, I think it's safe to assume that Duran was every bit as much of a drinker as Hatton.

Are we to assume you've been out on the town with Chavez after a fight or Carlos Monzon for that matter. I don't know how you could possibly qualify that statement.

I try and concern myself with what fighters do INSIDE of the ring, rather than what they do during their own personal private lives. To my knowledge Hatton has not been in trouble for slapping anyone, raping anyone, dangerous driving or anything else for that matter. He likes going out on the piss with his mates, and maybe has a bit of a drink problem, but I'm the last one to condemn that as I like getting pissed myself, as do many other people.

I have no idea whether you are who many on here claim you to be, but your constant invective about Hatton does get a bit tiresome.

That said, I'll read the book and judge for myself. I am sure that Hatton's train of events has a rather favourable slant, whose doesn't when they write an autobiography, ghost written or not?

I am sure if allegedly wrote a book (for example) it would lean heavily in favour of himself. It's human nature mate, we all like to think ourselves whiter than white and blameless if at all possible.

I don't doubt that Hatton and his dad turned down countless opponents though, It's quite clear from their recent actitvities that it is all about the money.

boxingchat · Post by **boxingchat** » 29 Sep 2006, 11:34

James, James, James, you are missing the point. I couldn't care less about his drinking habits or his social life and as for his shit shirt day's I cannot tell one from the other with his dress sense either. However, I do care about the image of the sport and about fighters in general and if Hatton (God forbid) or any fighter get's injured in the ring or suffers complications afterwards (Like poor Bradley Stone or Mark Goult, both who had not drunk incidentally) then I would hate to see a fighter left brain damaged or dead because he had got pissed after a fight with hius back-slapping pals and this prevented him getting the immedite attention he would need to save his life. That is my point. Drinking after a fight is agsint Board ruiles and highly dangerous and anyone who does it is endangering their lifes and the sport they represent. Furthermore, a fightyer who is quite obviously on the brink of alcoholism is blowing up to what looks like Light-Heavy has to crash his weight and again puts himself in danger whilst in the ring.

It's just downright irresponsible and just because great fighters do it/did it doesn't mean it's okay. If just one does it and loses his life or ends up brain damaged then they suffer, their family suffers and the sport takes the blame simple as that. HAtton is being unprofessional as arer the team around him for letting him do it and so openly as well.

As for your question about Chavez, yes I have and many others too.

Here endeth the lesson.

J · Post by J » 29 Sep 2006, 11:53

this is hilarious, Hatton is a disgrace to the sport cos he drinks and risks his own health after a fight?

Hmm think Id rather save me "lessons" for the rapist, crack head robbing type that grace our sport from time to time myself.

I assume this high and mighty attitude prevented you from condoning the Tyson promotion then that FW did?

Very honourable though your sentiments seem to be, I think they dissapear at the sight of a fast buck my friend, somewhat hypocricital dont ya think?

here endeth the lesson

boxingchat · Post by **boxingchat** » 29 Sep 2006, 12:02

Fast Buck, explain. As for Tyson, whilst I have to agree he is a low-life I happen to think he got stiched up by the Rape wrap.

My point is, yes Hatton can put his own life at risk as I do without my seat belt when I drive. But, whilst his choice is live life on the edge the Sport will have to pick up the pieces and defend itself once again if the worst happened. It will be the Sport's reputation that suffers not the breweries.

Phenomenal-Nutrition · Post by **Phenomenal-Nutrition** » 29 Sep 2006, 12:08

boxingchat wrote:James, James, James, you are missing the point. I couldn't care less about his drinking habits or his social life and as for his shit shirt day's I cannot tell one from the other with his dress sense either. However, I do care about the image of the sport and about fighters in general and if Hatton (God forbid) or any fighter get's injured in the ring or suffers complications afterwards (Like poor Bradley Stone or Mark Goult, both who had not drunk incidentally) then I would hate to see a fighter left brain damaged or dead because he had got pissed after a fight with hius back-slapping pals and this prevented him getting the immedite attention he would need to save his life. That is my point. Drinking after a fight is agsint Board ruiles and highly dangerous and anyone who does it is endangering their lifes and the sport they represent. Furthermore, a fightyer who is quite obviously on the brink of alcoholism is blowing up to what looks like Light-Heavy has to crash his weight and again puts himself in danger whilst in the ring.

It's just downright irresponsible and just because great fighters do it/did it doesn't mean it's okay. If just one does it and loses his life or ends up brain damaged then they suffer, their family suffers and the sport takes the blame simple as that. HAtton is being unprofessional as arer the team around him for letting him do it and so openly as well.

As for your question about Chavez, yes I have and many others too.

Here endeth the lesson.

BC your doing what is know as hating. Ricky Hatton is the 1 of the best conditioned fighters in the sport despite his drinking habbits, if he god forbid does get hurt in the ring (which is unlikely with a protected career) it will be down to his poor defensive abilities and fighting style.

Anyway I'd love to hear you debating the points he brought up and tell us some inside details - past and present. Thanks

J · Post by J » 29 Sep 2006, 12:08

PROMOTING TYSON EQUATES TO MAKING A FAST BUCK NO?

irrespective of the rape charges the cannibal should never have been allowed to box again after what he did to Holyfield.

Yet SN were happy to promote his visit and fight in the UK.

And that is upholding the spirit of sport that you amke out to care so much about

really you are talking the most charlie ollocks.

boxingchat · Post by **boxingchat** » 29 Sep 2006, 12:13

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:
boxingchat wrote:James, James, James, you are missing the point. I couldn't care less about his drinking habits or his social life and as for his shit shirt day's I cannot tell one from the other with his dress sense either. However, I do care about the image of the sport and about fighters in general and if Hatton (God forbid) or any fighter get's injured in the ring or suffers complications afterwards (Like poor Bradley Stone or Mark Goult, both who had not drunk incidentally) then I would hate to see a fighter left brain damaged or dead because he had got pissed after a fight with hius back-slapping pals and this prevented him getting the immedite attention he would need to save his life. That is my point. Drinking after a fight is agsint Board ruiles and highly dangerous and anyone who does it is endangering their lifes and the sport they represent. Furthermore, a fightyer who is quite obviously on the brink of alcoholism is blowing up to what looks like Light-Heavy has to crash his weight and again puts himself in danger whilst in the ring.

It's just downright irresponsible and just because great fighters do it/did it doesn't mean it's okay. If just one does it and loses his life or ends up brain damaged then they suffer, their family suffers and the sport takes the blame simple as that. HAtton is being unprofessional as arer the team around him for letting him do it and so openly as well.

As for your question about Chavez, yes I have and many others too.

Here endeth the lesson.
BC your doing what is know as hating. Ricky Hatton is the 1 of the best conditioned fighters in the sport despite his drinking habbits, if he god forbid does get hurt in the ring (which is unlikely with a protected career) it will be down to his poor defensive abilities and fighting style.

Anyway I'd love to hear you debating the points he brought up and tell us some inside details - past and present. Thanks

Sorry, can't reply to that I'm still laughing

Wrists · Post by **Wrists** » 29 Sep 2006, 12:15

Boxing Chat - You can't condemn someone like Hatton for having a few drinks yet stick up for Tyson (convicted rapist) it don't add up.

To then justify your comments with 'Tyson was stitched up' is absolutely hilarious

Listen mate - you obviously have a lot more inside info than most so you konw boxing but your diatrabe against anything now FW or SN is now very boring, very boring indeed.

When Hatton fought Kosta I bet you were strapping yourself off everyone else.

Your boring, yes I know my biting is playing into your hands but why can't you just argue points without huge bias!!

Yes yes yes I defend Calzaghe maybe a little too much but there is a difference between what I say and defending a convicted rapist yet slating a decent guy like Hatton!!!

Get a life

PS. How was the commission from the Tyson bill? Bet you spent that on getting pissed and a lap dance!

Regards

Wrists

lvlarc · Post by **lvlarc** » 29 Sep 2006, 12:16

When has Hatton dissed other fighters then?

Personally I think what they do to eachother in the ring is alot more concerning than a few words but still I'd like to know what he said.

Do you have a good thing to say about Hatton? I bet not...wonder why

boxingchat · Post by **boxingchat** » 29 Sep 2006, 12:16

J wrote:PROMOTING TYSON EQUATES TO MAKING A FAST BUCK NO?

irrespective of the rape charges the cannibal should never have been allowed to box again after what he did to Holyfield.

Yet SN were happy to promote his visit and fight in the UK.

And that is upholding the spirit of sport that you amke out to care so much about

really you are talking the most charlie ollocks.

Good Point but I've never been involved with MT or SN so your point somewhat falls on it's jacksie, does it not?

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 29 Sep 2006, 12:17

boxingchat wrote:James, James, James, you are missing the point. I couldn't care less about his drinking habits or his social life and as for his shit shirt day's I cannot tell one from the other with his dress sense either. However, I do care about the image of the sport and about fighters in general and if Hatton (God forbid) or any fighter get's injured in the ring or suffers complications afterwards (Like poor Bradley Stone or Mark Goult, both who had not drunk incidentally) then I would hate to see a fighter left brain damaged or dead because he had got pissed after a fight with hius back-slapping pals and this prevented him getting the immedite attention he would need to save his life. That is my point. Drinking after a fight is agsint Board ruiles and highly dangerous and anyone who does it is endangering their lifes and the sport they represent. Furthermore, a fightyer who is quite obviously on the brink of alcoholism is blowing up to what looks like Light-Heavy has to crash his weight and again puts himself in danger whilst in the ring.

It's just downright irresponsible and just because great fighters do it/did it doesn't mean it's okay. If just one does it and loses his life or ends up brain damaged then they suffer, their family suffers and the sport takes the blame simple as that. HAtton is being unprofessional as arer the team around him for letting him do it and so openly as well.

As for your question about Chavez, yes I have and many others too.

Here endeth the lesson.

Well maybe you have been out on the piss with Chavez, but seeing as you choose to remain anonymous it's hard for me to comment further.

I find it hard to believe that your stance has more to do with the sport than it does with the fact that Ricky Hatton chose to abandon sports network and fight under the banner of another promoter.

Of course, I cannot prove or disprove that your attitude spurs from some affiliation with Sports Network, as I don't know who you are.

From those I know in America who have met and worked with Chavez, by all accounts he was a full blown alchoholic, but then where's the surprise in that, boxing is absolutely full of drug addicts and alchoholics, as are other walks of life. Professional athletes generally are not quite the clean living saints we are led to believe would be the case.

I find little reprehensible in Hatton's actions, he's primarily taking risks with his own life, and if it is indeed against the board's rules (which I doubt, it would surely be no more than a reccomendation given they cannot govern what a fighter does AFTER a fight, but only during and in the run up before it) then perhaps you are going to be the whistle blower to save the sport from the potential risk of Hatton dropping dead after one of his piss ups?

Wrists · Post by **Wrists** » 29 Sep 2006, 12:17

Boxingchat - not any other eloquent way to put this

You talk shite

end of

boxingchat · Post by **boxingchat** » 29 Sep 2006, 12:20

Wrists wrote:Boxing Chat - You can't condemn someone like Hatton for having a few drinks yet stick up for Tyson (convicted rapist) it don't add up.

To then justify your comments with 'Tyson was stitched up' is absolutely hilarious

Listen mate - you obviously have a lot more inside info than most so you konw boxing but your diatrabe against anything now FW or SN is now very boring, very boring indeed.

When Hatton fought Kosta I bet you were strapping yourself off everyone else.

Your boring, yes I know my biting is playing into your hands but why can't you just argue points without huge bias!!

Yes yes yes I defend Calzaghe maybe a little too much but there is a difference between what I say and defending a convicted rapist yet slating a decent guy like Hatton!!!

Get a life

PS. How was the commission from the Tyson bill? Bet you spent that on getting pissed and a lap dance!

Regards

Wrists

I haven't got a clue what you are on about. Have you been drinking too much Coke or eating cheese? Defended Tyson, When? Commission, What, I wish?

Condeming Hatton for drinking, I bet you'd have bought George Best a Beer you.

Also, have you ever seen a Boxer after a serious head injury? Brain on show, tubes coming out of everywhere, his head three times it's normal size, his family crying and a fornicating preist waiting outside to give him the last rites?

Thought not. So don't talk shite you fool.

J · Post by J » 29 Sep 2006, 12:21

boxingchat wrote:
J wrote:PROMOTING TYSON EQUATES TO MAKING A FAST BUCK NO?

irrespective of the rape charges the cannibal should never have been allowed to box again after what he did to Holyfield.

Yet SN were happy to promote his visit and fight in the UK.

And that is upholding the spirit of sport that you amke out to care so much about

really you are talking the most charlie ollocks.

Good Point but I've never been involved with MT or SN so your point somewhat falls on it's jacksie, does it not?

not when by your general demeanour is that you are some big shot with inside info on such organisations it doesnt no.

now we jknow are you justa pleb like the rest of us I assume you will drop the lofty know it all tone ?

here endeth the lesson Mr pompous!

Wrists · Post by **Wrists** » 29 Sep 2006, 12:27

Boxing Chat - you switch arguments like its going out of fashion!!

Since when does Ricky's drinking habits = boxers in intensive car

You need to be very careful with the shit your talking

And yes I have seen someone (my father) lying in a hospital bed with tubes coming out from everywhere so don't even go though yer fornicating tosser!!

Your getting on everyones wick so fornicating do one!!

PS. apologies to everyone else the twat touched a raw nerve

Regards

Wrists

Wrists · Post by **Wrists** » 29 Sep 2006, 12:29

PS. 'Tyson was stitched up'

sounds like a defence to me

emma · Post by **emma** » 29 Sep 2006, 13:06

BoxingChat is fw

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 29 Sep 2006, 17:45

boxingchat wrote:
stujones wrote:
boxingchat wrote:Good debate, yes, but as far a resolution I don't think there is one. When a fighter pulls out it is a bummer all round but usually, the show is up and running and the Promter has already invested a significant amount of money, has contracted with other fighters and has stumped up for venue, hotel, flights etc in advance.

Cancelling shows is not great for TV, the sport in general or the fighters who are themselves training and incurring ex's all the time.

Cancelling or postponing is certainly not the easy option in any way, moreso for bigger shows.

It's not all win, win, win for promoters I can assure you hence the dwindling amount of Promoters still in the game. Fighters cause most of the problems but the Promoters are the easy target.

And before anyone mentions insurance, ring for a quote!
Good response, I can see the sense in what your saying.

What was your answer to my suggestion re Nelson/Murray (i.e. put them fights on a smaller bill, which could be easily cancelled).

I'm sure you are aware that for a lot of the hardcore fans it was these two fights specifically were the main reason for going. Even though Calzaghe is the official main event, he was seen largely as a bonus attraction to the hardcore. As you said (and I agree), it is hard to cancel big shows especially for official undercard fights. So why not put them (as these have been two inactive fighters) on a seperate card that would be easier to cancel?

Just a thought, I do understand the predicament - its a bummer all round.

Nelson is/was a world champion and as such would not want to fight on a smaller show for the sort of purses those type of shows could suffer. Fighters have demands and Nelson is no different and rightly so. Promoters have contracts with Boxers that provide Guaranteed purses and therefore this is a non-starter.

As for Murray, this fight was won via a purse offer and Murray was not allowed to fight for 28 days beofre the submitted date under the strict terms of a purse offer. He chose to fight 29 days before and fought over ten round for a lightweight title, although he weighed in slightly over Super-Feather (Nothing wrong with that but a gamble nonethe less and the Baord should protect Promoters by making it a 45 day limit IMO) He now say's he can't make the weight so in this instance Warren has been let down by Murray and his team. However, if Murray doesn't feel strong at 130 then we have to respect that decision and move on rather than have a risky and dangerous situation with a drained fighter. For me, I think he was wary of Burns beating him and this prompted his decision. whether that was a good move or a bad move remains to be seen.

Be assured, Promoters want to make the big and interesting fights it's the fighters who often don't want them (Regardless of what they say in public, trust me) Do you think a Promoter would rather run small and insignificant events or large and high-profile ones?

Just read Hatton's book and the crap he is spewing on this particular subject is unbelievable. He chose every one of his opponents and turned down many good fights and fighters and preferred the easy jobs all day long.

As his father once said Ricky could fill the MEN fighting Mickey mouse why take risks, such is his respect for the punters money! He criticises Holbaek and Vilches and slags their ability yet he and his dad chose them personally out of a shortlist. The Book is bile.

Fair enough, yeah I do agree on Murray. I have told people (i.e. those who know Murray on this forum) that the reason why I don't rank him as a Super Feather in my little rankings, is because he has never fought there. Time and time again, I got - he can make it easy. Now, he practically PROVES that he can make it - he's now electing to fight at Lightweight. It does seem odd, and doesn't really add up.

However, now I don't know Johnny and his demands- all I know is that he hasn't fought in the UK since the Jones fight.... and MOST of his previous UK title defences were not on massive bills and he was the main event. Infact, I'm struggling to think of a time he wasn't the main event in the UK as a champion..... He wasn't officially the main event on this card, so why the change?

grim reaper · Post by **grim reaper** » 01 Oct 2006, 11:39

Fair enough, yeah I do agree on Murray. I have told people (i.e. those who know Murray on this forum) that the reason why I don't rank him as a Super Feather in my little rankings, is because he has never fought there. Time and time again, I got - he can make it easy. Now, he practically PROVES that he can make it - he's now electing to fight at Lightweight. It does seem odd, and doesn't really add up.

It seems he can make the weight but by doing so he leaves something behind and cannot perform to his best. Where as most of his fights have been nearer to the lightweight limit. Its ok making weight but another performing at it and this seems the case here.

burns v murray

glass houses and stones!!

Re: glass houses and stones!!