BoxRec

anyone?

yeah ive heard he is mate.

thought he was retired with eye injury

BN reports so.
He wants Reese or Murray. Because he don't think their world beaters, unlike how he sees himself....
I guess he has clearly forgotten his last fight, when he crumbled at the first taste of decent power...?

tonyevs wrote:BN reports so.
He wants Reese or Murray. Because he don't think their world beaters, unlike how he sees himself....
I guess he has clearly forgotten his last fight, when he crumbled at the first taste of decent power...?

Crumbled at the first taste of decent power? What so did Prescott have no power? You know, the bloke who KO'd Khan in the 1st and who's record is littered with KO's?

Des1 wrote:

tonyevs wrote:BN reports so.
He wants Reese or Murray. Because he don't think their world beaters, unlike how he sees himself....
I guess he has clearly forgotten his last fight, when he crumbled at the first taste of decent power...?

Crumbled at the first taste of decent power? What so did Prescott have no power? You know, the bloke who KO'd Khan in the 1st and who's record is littered with KO's?

care to tell me when he got tagged by Prescott ... and isn`t it now accepted that Prescotts win over Khan was a tad flattering ... take a look at his results after his Khan win ..

And Mitchel looked very sorry for himself the moment he felt Katsidis strength .. the realisation he was in trouble .. he looked like a lost little school boy in there

tonyevs wrote:

Des1 wrote:

tonyevs wrote:BN reports so.
He wants Reese or Murray. Because he don't think their world beaters, unlike how he sees himself....
I guess he has clearly forgotten his last fight, when he crumbled at the first taste of decent power...?

Crumbled at the first taste of decent power? What so did Prescott have no power? You know, the bloke who KO'd Khan in the 1st and who's record is littered with KO's?

care to tell me when he got tagged by Prescott ... and isn`t it now accepted that Prescotts win over Khan was a tad flattering ... take a look at his results after his Khan win ..

And Mitchel looked very sorry for himself the moment he felt Katsidis strength .. the realisation he was in trouble .. he looked like a lost little school boy in there

Oh ok, tell me what fighter has possibly gone 12 rounds without being tagged once? Of course he got tagged. Also, I wasn't saying that Prescott is the greatest fighter, but you cannot deny that Prescott is a big puncher going by the percentage of wins he has inside the distance and fluke or not, the way he destroyed Khan showed that power. Also, Mitchell's loss was more to do with being a touch outclassed and under prepared, nothing to do with crumbling at the first taste of decent power as I'd say Johannson had decent power wouldn't you? And he grit his teeth and battled through to win that when he tasted his power. So I feel I have a valid point. Mitchell didn't crumble at the first taste of power. He got beat by the better man on the night but he didn't 'crumble' to power. I'd say to 'crumble ' would be at least KO'd. Correct me if Im wrong but wasn't Mitchell stopped on his feet....

Mitchell needs to ty and comeback by going down British then European route none of this inter title bollocks!

Des1 wrote:

tonyevs wrote:

Des1 wrote: Crumbled at the first taste of decent power? What so did Prescott have no power? You know, the bloke who KO'd Khan in the 1st and who's record is littered with KO's?

care to tell me when he got tagged by Prescott ... and isn`t it now accepted that Prescotts win over Khan was a tad flattering ... take a look at his results after his Khan win ..

And Mitchel looked very sorry for himself the moment he felt Katsidis strength .. the realisation he was in trouble .. he looked like a lost little school boy in there

Oh ok, tell me what fighter has possibly gone 12 rounds without being tagged once? Of course he got tagged. Also, I wasn't saying that Prescott is the greatest fighter, but you cannot deny that Prescott is a big puncher going by the percentage of wins he has inside the distance and fluke or not, the way he destroyed Khan showed that power. Also, Mitchell's loss was more to do with being a touch outclassed and under prepared, nothing to do with crumbling at the first taste of decent power as I'd say Johannson had decent power wouldn't you? And he grit his teeth and battled through to win that when he tasted his power. So I feel I have a valid point. Mitchell didn't crumble at the first taste of power. He got beat by the better man on the night but he didn't 'crumble' to power. I'd say to 'crumble ' would be at least KO'd. Correct me if Im wrong but wasn't Mitchell stopped on his feet....

to make a statement that he thinks he's a level above Murray & Reese, after he got mullered by Katsidis is almost Audley like...
Katsidis is probably best described as a gate keeper at the weight ... He was far too good for Mitchel though.

Des1 wrote:

tonyevs wrote:

Des1 wrote: Crumbled at the first taste of decent power? What so did Prescott have no power? You know, the bloke who KO'd Khan in the 1st and who's record is littered with KO's?

care to tell me when he got tagged by Prescott ... and isn`t it now accepted that Prescotts win over Khan was a tad flattering ... take a look at his results after his Khan win ..

And Mitchel looked very sorry for himself the moment he felt Katsidis strength .. the realisation he was in trouble .. he looked like a lost little school boy in there

Oh ok, tell me what fighter has possibly gone 12 rounds without being tagged once? Of course he got tagged. Also, I wasn't saying that Prescott is the greatest fighter, but you cannot deny that Prescott is a big puncher going by the percentage of wins he has inside the distance and fluke or not, the way he destroyed Khan showed that power. Also, Mitchell's loss was more to do with being a touch outclassed and under prepared, nothing to do with crumbling at the first taste of decent power as I'd say Johannson had decent power wouldn't you? And he grit his teeth and battled through to win that when he tasted his power. So I feel I have a valid point. Mitchell didn't crumble at the first taste of power. He got beat by the better man on the night but he didn't 'crumble' to power. I'd say to 'crumble ' would be at least KO'd. Correct me if Im wrong but wasn't Mitchell stopped on his feet....

calzaghe vs lacy

hopkins vs pavlik

Vitali Klitschko vs Kevin Johnson

Floyd mayweather vs Juan Manuel marquez

willie pep vs a few people

want more?

leforge wrote:Mitchell needs to ty and comeback by going down British then European route none of this inter title bollocks!

Worked for khan

I think Warren will try and go the interim route with him, because I really think Rees and Murray would beat him, I may be under-rating Mitchell but I believe he would lose to both of them. I would like to see him in with someone like Derry Matthews after his comeback fight!

alexpaterson wrote:I think Warren will try and go the interim route with him, because I really think Rees and Murray would beat him, I may be under-rating Mitchell but I believe he would lose to both of them. I would like to see him in with someone like Derry Matthews after his comeback fight!

I think Watson would beat him too! He needs to fight a domestic top 10 fight rather than some dodgy African of European which he will be fed!

Adamj1987 wrote:

Des1 wrote:

tonyevs wrote:
care to tell me when he got tagged by Prescott ... and isn`t it now accepted that Prescotts win over Khan was a tad flattering ... take a look at his results after his Khan win ..

And Mitchel looked very sorry for himself the moment he felt Katsidis strength .. the realisation he was in trouble .. he looked like a lost little school boy in there

Oh ok, tell me what fighter has possibly gone 12 rounds without being tagged once? Of course he got tagged. Also, I wasn't saying that Prescott is the greatest fighter, but you cannot deny that Prescott is a big puncher going by the percentage of wins he has inside the distance and fluke or not, the way he destroyed Khan showed that power. Also, Mitchell's loss was more to do with being a touch outclassed and under prepared, nothing to do with crumbling at the first taste of decent power as I'd say Johannson had decent power wouldn't you? And he grit his teeth and battled through to win that when he tasted his power. So I feel I have a valid point. Mitchell didn't crumble at the first taste of power. He got beat by the better man on the night but he didn't 'crumble' to power. I'd say to 'crumble ' would be at least KO'd. Correct me if Im wrong but wasn't Mitchell stopped on his feet....

calzaghe vs lacy

hopkins vs pavlik

Vitali Klitschko vs Kevin Johnson

Floyd mayweather vs Juan Manuel marquez

willie pep vs a few people

want more?

Very good exceptions of world class boxers even greats I'm sure Mitchell will be pleased that you compare his fight V Prescott with those outstanding boxers! But I'm sure those mentioned did at least 'taste a shot' having said that the fact is Mitchell did get tagged by Prescott, and he did taste his power just as he tasted Johannsons power so stating that Mitchell 'crumbled' at the first taste of power by someone is a wrong judgement. Mitchell got outclassed by a better boxer on the night, he didn't 'crumble' to the power. I've seen people crumble to power and the way Mitchell got beat was not 'crumbling' to power.

tonyevs wrote:

Des1 wrote:

tonyevs wrote:
care to tell me when he got tagged by Prescott ... and isn`t it now accepted that Prescotts win over Khan was a tad flattering ... take a look at his results after his Khan win ..

And Mitchel looked very sorry for himself the moment he felt Katsidis strength .. the realisation he was in trouble .. he looked like a lost little school boy in there

Oh ok, tell me what fighter has possibly gone 12 rounds without being tagged once? Of course he got tagged. Also, I wasn't saying that Prescott is the greatest fighter, but you cannot deny that Prescott is a big puncher going by the percentage of wins he has inside the distance and fluke or not, the way he destroyed Khan showed that power. Also, Mitchell's loss was more to do with being a touch outclassed and under prepared, nothing to do with crumbling at the first taste of decent power as I'd say Johannson had decent power wouldn't you? And he grit his teeth and battled through to win that when he tasted his power. So I feel I have a valid point. Mitchell didn't crumble at the first taste of power. He got beat by the better man on the night but he didn't 'crumble' to power. I'd say to 'crumble ' would be at least KO'd. Correct me if Im wrong but wasn't Mitchell stopped on his feet....

to make a statement that he thinks he's a level above Murray & Reese, after he got mullered by Katsidis is almost Audley like...
Katsidis is probably best described as a gate keeper at the weight ... He was far too good for Mitchel though.

But that isn't what we was talking about, I didn't say that Katsidis wasn't too good for Mitchell, I said that Michell was a touch outclassed that night but I disagreed with the fact that you said he 'crumbled' at the first taste of power. Whats wrong with him making a statment that he feels he's a level above Rees and Murray just because he got beat by Katsidis? You not suggesting that Murry and Rees are are at Katsidis's level are you??

I think he is taking issue with Mitchell stating he is a level above Murray and Rees rather than comparing them to Katsidis.I for one would take both Murray and Rees over Mitchell.Murray is an undefeated European champ and Rees a former WBA champ at the higher weight,both are arguably more qualified to box Katsidis who is not "elite" himself.I dont understand how Mitchell thinks he is above either.I think Murray would stop him,Johannesson should have stopped him down at Super-Feather but didnt have the engine,no danger of that from Murray or Rees,both strong Lightweights.

Mitchell's win over Walter Estrada is looking good now. Estrada ended the career of Nate Campbell over the weekend.

Life was never dull with Nate Campbell in a boxing ring. The Florida veteran announced his retirement yesterday after forging a legacy of thrills, spills and overachievement.
Campbell turned pro at an age when most fighters are planning a life after boxing. He was 27 but quickly made up for lost time as he rattled off 23 straight wins, 21 of them early, before dropping a tight 10-round decision to iron-jawed Cuban Joel Casamayor in a bruising super-featherweight encounter in 2003. Three fights later, Nate made the error of judgement for which he is best remembered. Dominating his fight with Robbie Peden, he dropped his hands and invited Peden to hit him, at which the Aussie unloaded a big left hook to spreadeagle the American. It looked all over for Campbell, particularly when Peden also hammered him in a quick rematch but he moved up to lightweight and scored a shock 10-round stoppage of the previously unbeaten Kid Diamond, only to blow it again when South Africa's Isaac Hlatshwayo took a 12-round decision over him in Florida. This was Campbell's boxing life back then - win a big one, lose a big one, forget about it, push on.
By 2008 he had managed a decent winning run and, now backed by big Don King, jumped at a world title shot against the unbeaten Juan Diaz in a Mexican bullring. Despite the King connection, Campbell was a gimmee for Diaz, a stepping stone, but they should have told Campbell, who busted up Diaz and pushed him back on the way to a unanimous decision. Campbell was world champion at the ripe old age of 36.
Sadly, he failed to push on from his stunning triumph. King failed to secure him any big fights and weightmaking eventually cost him the title and forced him up to light-welterweight, where luck was never on his side. He dropped a split decision at the weekend to useful Colombian southpaw Walter Estrada and it convinced him to call time on quite a remarkable career.
"I'm the last of a dying breed," said Campbell. "When was the last time a guy came from nowhere, with nothing, and became a world champion? It doesn't happen any more."

mickey1975 wrote:I think he is taking issue with Mitchell stating he is a level above Murray and Rees rather than comparing them to Katsidis.I for one would take both Murray and Rees over Mitchell.Murray is an undefeated European champ and Rees a former WBA champ at the higher weight,both are arguably more qualified to box Katsidis who is not "elite" himself.I dont understand how Mitchell thinks he is above either.I think Murray would stop him,Johannesson should have stopped him down at Super-Feather but didnt have the engine,no danger of that from Murray or Rees,both strong Lightweights.

So am I supposed to assume what he's talking about when he doesn't comment as such? Tonyevs said that Mitchell 'crumbled' at the first taste of power, hencing that how could Mitchell have the opinion that he is a level above them both being that 'he crumbled to Katsidis's power'? Always makes me smile when people jump on the bandwagon when someone is down, you say that Johannson should have stopped Mitchell at SuperFeather but he didn't have the engine to do so? ...thats a good excuse, anytime anyone suffers a loss they can say, oh I could have stopped him and won but I didn't have the engine! DD . Thats what the sports all about isn't it? After the skill it involves the endrurance and fitness (your engine).

Des1 wrote: I disagreed with the fact that you said he 'crumbled' at the first taste of power. Whats wrong with him making a statment that he feels he's a level above Rees and Murray just because he got beat by Katsidis? You not suggesting that Murry and Rees are are at Katsidis's level are you??

I really do believe he crumbled when he realized the power of Katsidis. He just looked sorry for himself and lost in there once he had been tagged. Couldn`t help but feel for Mitchel that night :(
His statememnt is what you would expect most guys to come out with, but it does have a very Audley taste about it doesn`t it..
Especially after the fight in question ... he really did crumble.
I would expect a Murray v Katsidis fight to be very 50/50 ... thats purely based on Murrays previous fights. But thats just me guessing.
It is however, no guess work that Mitchel was nowwhere near the level of Katsidis ... you see what I`m trying to say?

As for Rees? Katsidis would start a heavy favourite for sure ... but I don`t think anybody would expect to see Rees crumble as quickly as Mitchel did.

So for Mitchel to say he is a level above Rees and Murray
Sounds straight out of the Audley handbook..

mickey1975 wrote:I think he is taking issue with Mitchell stating he is a level above Murray and Rees rather than comparing them to Katsidis.I for one would take both Murray and Rees over Mitchell..

YES.

Des1 wrote:

mickey1975 wrote:I think he is taking issue with Mitchell stating he is a level above Murray and Rees rather than comparing them to Katsidis.I for one would take both Murray and Rees over Mitchell.Murray is an undefeated European champ and Rees a former WBA champ at the higher weight,both are arguably more qualified to box Katsidis who is not "elite" himself.I dont understand how Mitchell thinks he is above either.I think Murray would stop him,Johannesson should have stopped him down at Super-Feather but didnt have the engine,no danger of that from Murray or Rees,both strong Lightweights.

So am I supposed to assume what he's talking about when he doesn't comment as such? Tonyevs said that Mitchell 'crumbled' at the first taste of power, hencing that how could Mitchell have the opinion that he is a level above them both being that 'he crumbled to Katsidis's power'? Always makes me smile when people jump on the bandwagon when someone is down, you say that Johannson should have stopped Mitchell at SuperFeather but he didn't have the engine to do so? ...thats a good excuse, anytime anyone suffers a loss they can say, oh I could have stopped him and won but I didn't have the engine! DD . Thats what the sports all about isn't it? After the skill it involves the endrurance and fitness (your engine).

I thhink Johannesson threw the fight away,but as you say thats what the sports all about.But lets not forget Carl has been quite badly beaten up when he has stepped up,far worse than what Mitchell did to him.

murray and rees both beat mitchell for me

x2

Both very busy, good skills and decent power.....and durable. They both beat Mitchell for me.

surely he'll be eased back in before going in with a real test like Rees and Murray isn't going to go near Mitchell now as it's not worth his while -

i can only see that fight happening if Murray either holds a World Belt and Mitchell has fought his way up to mandatory or if Murray loses a World Title challenge and they're looking for a domestic crossroads fight that has some allure for the boxing public maybe for a European Belt or something