BoxRec

Casio wrote:Won 14, Lost 8. Joke of a match up.

http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_ ... &cat=boxer

Its not significantly better or worse than original opponent, Stephen Ormond. Its a marking time fight for a guy who's been very inactive and is being lined up for a fight with Ricky Burns. Take it for what it is and not what you think it should be.

Might knock some rust off but nothing more, he certainly won't learn anything.

I do think its a waste of time fight but it gets him back in the ring i suppose

As ive said on twitter FW will play the card that he went the distance with a world champion Devon Alexander...(in D.A 3rd fight) this shouldnt be top of any bill...

Awful fight but what you come to expect from Allegedly

a warm up means this sort of fight cant see the problem kevin will get a few rounds in ready for burn s

tear up wrote:a warm up means this sort of fight cant see the problem kevin will get a few rounds in ready for burn s

But top of a bill,no way

nicky cook should've had a warm before burns

Casio wrote:

tear up wrote:a warm up means this sort of fight cant see the problem kevin will get a few rounds in ready for burn s

But who has said this is a warm up for Burns?? I haven't seen anything to that respect.....

If it was then fair enough but theres no guarentee that Burns is going to beat Moses IMO so Mitchell should be matched much harder than this at this stage of his career.

thats actually a good point

Casio wrote:

earsjohn wrote:

Casio wrote:Won 14, Lost 8. Joke of a match up.

http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_ ... &cat=boxer

Its not significantly better or worse than original opponent, Stephen Ormond. Its a marking time fight for a guy who's been very inactive and is being lined up for a fight with Ricky Burns. Take it for what it is and not what you think it should be.

His last outing was against undefeated John Murray, i just dont understand the massive step backwards. He's only been out of the ring for 6 months, hardly going to be suffering from ring rust.

Given the complications surrounding his "personal issues", the alleged problems at FWP (see James DeGale), the teething problems yet to be overcome by allegedly there probably isn't a great appetite or financial safety net to put Mitchell in with a more live opponent. This is a friday night card at the York Hall. If the fight wasn't made, there would be no replacement, so there would be no boxing. I'm all for hard, competitive fights as much as possible, but I want to see Mitchell fight, so I can see why this is happening.

As for Burns, it's been mentioned by Warren, Burns and Mitchell and given the Warren modus operandi, it's an entirely sensible fight to be made.

Kevin Mitchell is an excellent box fighter who could probably do anyone 2nd or 3rd level in his sleep.

I'd like to see him fight Rees or Burns after this.

Casio wrote:

Camcas wrote:Awful fight but what you come to expect from Allegedly

I'm just suprised people are defending it!!

Me too can't understand what this fight brings to table

Casio wrote:Won 14, Lost 8. Joke of a match up.

http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_ ... &cat=boxer

Look at two of the judges scores in his last fight - 85/100. Jesus, he must have either been put on his arse a few times or he's a dirty bastard who can't box. Probably a bit of both. Anyone seen a worse score than that over ten?

i would of thought that derry matthews would of been a better fight for kevin both being british an all

Darcy Delaney wrote:i would of thought that derry matthews would of been a better fight for kevin both being british an all

His nose wont recover in time.

earsjohn wrote:

Casio wrote:

earsjohn wrote: Its not significantly better or worse than original opponent, Stephen Ormond. Its a marking time fight for a guy who's been very inactive and is being lined up for a fight with Ricky Burns. Take it for what it is and not what you think it should be.

His last outing was against undefeated John Murray, i just dont understand the massive step backwards. He's only been out of the ring for 6 months, hardly going to be suffering from ring rust.

Given the complications surrounding his "personal issues", the alleged problems at FWP (see James DeGale), the teething problems yet to be overcome by allegedly there probably isn't a great appetite or financial safety net to put Mitchell in with a more live opponent. This is a friday night card at the York Hall. If the fight wasn't made, there would be no replacement, so there would be no boxing. I'm all for hard, competitive fights as much as possible, but I want to see Mitchell fight, so I can see why this is happening.

As for Burns, it's been mentioned by Warren, Burns and Mitchell and given the Warren modus operandi, it's an entirely sensible fight to be made.

Agree with the above. It's a low-key, keep busy fight and gives some prospects the chance to keep busy on the undercard. Nothing special, nothing criminal. I'm actually glad to see a 10 round, non-title bout topping a card for once (like the olden days :) ).

Mitchell is coming of a 50/50 fight which was a tough fight. Does a fighter need to be in tough fights all the time? Yes Mitchell may be a level above and obvious as can be that he's likely to win but Lora isn't a mug and wont be just showing up to lay down. I'm all for 50/50 fights but lets face it, this sport is a buisness aswell and show me where a top level fighter has had a 50/50 fight everytime

Casio wrote:

tear up wrote:a warm up means this sort of fight cant see the problem kevin will get a few rounds in ready for burn s

But who has said this is a warm up for Burns?? I haven't seen anything to that respect.....

If it was then fair enough but theres no guarentee that Burns is going to beat Moses IMO so Mitchell should be matched much harder than this at this stage of his career.

we all know what allegedly is gearin towards mitchell v burns and its a crackin match and yes they both gotta come through there s fights first

Dan Dares wrote: Look at two of the judges scores in his last fight - 85/100. Jesus, he must have either been put on his arse a few times or he's a dirty bastard who can't box. Probably a bit of both. Anyone seen a worse score than that over ten?

You're right; that's, what, five knockdowns? Or five points taken off. Bloody hell.

However, I'll just be glad to see Kev back in the ring. If he was having fights against this level of opponent every six weeks, it might help to keep his nose clean.

Nice one BN top match up

He's not so bad. Some decent wins and draws on the road.

I would say, though, that putting Jason Nesbitt in with Bradley Saunders, a world championships medalist and Olympian, is a horrible match

Casio wrote:

Camcas wrote:Awful fight but what you come to expect from Allegedly

I'm just suprised people are defending it!!

Ditto. Lots of excuses as to why it is happening, when the crux of the matter is a) The money is not there for anyone better b) It's another 90-10% match up c) Looking at matching Mitchell up with Burns and hope lots of us buy into it. Good business? Of course.

Still an appalling match up.

daddy-rhino wrote:Nice one BN top match up

Shit fight!

gobbles wrote:He's not so bad. Some decent wins and draws on the road.

I would say, though, that putting Jason Nesbitt in with Bradley Saunders, a world championships medalist and Olympian, is a horrible match

This bill is shocking.

bengulnaci1 wrote:

Casio wrote:

Camcas wrote:Awful fight but what you come to expect from Allegedly

I'm just suprised people are defending it!!

Ditto. Lots of excuses as to why it is happening, when the crux of the matter is a) The money is not there for anyone better b) It's another 90-10% match up c) Looking at matching Mitchell up with Burns and hope lots of us buy into it. Good business? Of course.

Still an appalling match up.

fornicating poor this is! Warren is mugging off hardcore fans the likes of me that are paying my tenner to watch shit like this it would be better if this was on undercard to burns but as main tv fight it's a joke!