BoxRec

Anyone else read this? Finished it in a couple of sittings - compelling stuff and quite a revelation to me that so many journeymen are paid extra deliberately to lose (rather than choosing to do it just because they know that there are more paydays in it for them).

Not a surprise (although obviously counter-intuitive) to learn how many of the most prolific journeymen (i.e. those with the most losses) were excellent amateurs - it's a very difficult job they have. It's also surprising to see just how what level of opponent they're capable of beating when they don't go along with the "game". Max Maxwell's KO of Brian Rose is the real standout example but there are plenty of others - any remember Tony Booth decisioning Omar Sheika?

The fact that boxing needs journeymen notwithstanding, there has to be something that grates about small-hall boxing being set up in such a way that several of the most talented fighters at domestic level in each weight class are also the ones with the worst records. What's the solution? Is there one? Clearly it's the economics of the sport rather than the regulatory side that needs fixing. Or can we live with the system as it is now?

When ever a thread regarding this topic the late Michael Murray comes to mind. These kids are the backbone of boxing, these lads make champions. I just hope Michael is resting in peace great fella from boxing.

No disrespect to Murray intended at all but how does fighting a journeyman make a champion ? Serious question.

Black Sam Bellamy wrote:No disrespect to Murray intended at all but how does fighting a journeyman make a champion ? Serious question.

They teach them the tricks of the trade without hurting them. School them just enough without making them look bad. They basically introduce them to the toughness of the pro game.

Can that not be achieved in sparring ?

Stevieb8006 wrote:

Black Sam Bellamy wrote:No disrespect to Murray intended at all but how does fighting a journeyman make a champion ? Serious question.

They teach them the tricks of the trade without hurting them. School them just enough without making them look bad. They basically introduce them to the toughness of the pro game.

Totally agree. Any honest pro will tell you without the journeyman there is no boxing. They are the start of the journey for any world champion.

It's a great book. I read it recently too.

The way I see it there's two side of it. Yes it's, for me, essentially glorified sparring. Every man and their dog knows the young prospect who's 3-0 is going to beat the journeyman who's 4-96, be it points or a knockout.

There's a lot of learning going on in the ring, finding out and seeing different things and generally more and more experience of a 'live' fighting environment instead of in a gym. There's people watching. It's a small test, it's sharpness. Generally these journeyman can get through the four-rounders with ease. If a kid knocks a few out and moves to say 10-0, suddenly people are talking about the kid and the bigger ticket shows start to come.

It's a bit of an acid test being in with the journeymen. The prospect HAS to look good otherwise they don't have much of a career ahead of them. If they get beat it's almost completely game over unless there's some exceptional circumstance.

In those respects I think the journeyman provide a good service. The issues come when fighters who are clearly levels above and show that from early doors are still put in with them when they're beyond 10 fights. That's when I feel you need to start and knock the journeymen on the head and look to a better class of opponent. However, plenty are still put in with them in order to reach a 15, 20 or 25-0 record. By that stage they're learning nothing.

It can't be expected for a kid still learning to be put in against the best around when you don't know what they are yet. It's a similar line in football. You'll start the promising 17-year old in the League Cup against Rochdale or whoever, but not away at Barcelona in the Champions League. Unless as mentioned they've done something to prove they're levels above their years.

I think a tip of the cap to the journeymen for doing what they do well. Given for them it's all about pay and the love of the game. Titles, records matter little. I think the idea promoted towards the back end of the book with a "Prizefighter" night for the journeymen would be a nice 'feel good' watch. You could very much say they've earned it.

mimmy123 wrote:When ever a thread regarding this topic the late Michael Murray comes to mind. These kids are the backbone of boxing, these lads make champions. I just hope Michael is resting in peace great fella from boxing.

Also the Smith twins. A friend of mine fought both of them. Not read the book but might put it on my Xmas list for the missus. Probably worth mentioning a lot of these guys are usually fighting two/three weeks apart so sometimes can't afford to over commit in certain fights at risk of being KO'd and put on an automatic ban. Very frustrating to watch but understandable.

jaymitch81 wrote:

Stevieb8006 wrote:

Black Sam Bellamy wrote:No disrespect to Murray intended at all but how does fighting a journeyman make a champion ? Serious question.

They teach them the tricks of the trade without hurting them. School them just enough without making them look bad. They basically introduce them to the toughness of the pro game.

Totally agree. Any honest pro will tell you without the journeyman there is no boxing. They are the start of the journey for any world champion.

A future World Champion doesn't need to learn any tricks from a limited journeyman. One of boxings greatest myths for me.

Of course the journey men are needed, they are an important part of any future champs boxing education

The journeyman of today just aren't good enough.

Black Sam Bellamy wrote:The journeyman of today just aren't good enough.

Good enough for what? their job is to fcuk and fart the other fella about, frustrate them into daft mistakes and test their temperament, champs aren't born champs they need to be developed

Black Sam Bellamy wrote:
A future World Champion doesn't need to learn any tricks from a limited journeyman. One of boxings greatest myths for me.

Agree with this. Though I suspect with the rise of the alphabet jokes the journeymen help create those titlists as opposed to true world champions.

Looking at the current British/Irish world champions-
DeGale-Didn't face any of the notable journeymen (Nathan King was perhaps as close as he came to an out-and-out "professional loser" and at that point King was close to having a 50-50 record)
Lee-Didn't fight any (fought in the US early in his career so missed that "stage")
Liam Smith-Fought a few of them (went through Billy Smith, Matt Scriven, Dee Mitchell and one or two others)
Brook-Fought a lot of them early in his career (Buckley, Williamson, Earnie Smith-in a trilogy)
Terry Falanagan-A few of them (Spencer-Twice, Laight)
Selby-A few (Buckely, Al Hamidi, Greaves, Ancliff)
Frampton-No journeymen (a few with losing records but no out and out journeymen-Reid has maybe become one since?)
Quigg-A few (Walton, Razak, Allen, Allen)
McDonnell-A few early in his career (Read and Spencer in hsi first two bouts, Hanna and Ancliff)
Haskins-A few (Read, Thomas, Spencer)

Seems like they aren't "needed" (as shown by Degale, Lee and Frampton) but perhaps do help the others. On the other hand other countries don't use them like we do so maybe that's the biggest proof that they aren't needed to develop a future world champion and lot of that work in other countries is done in sparring or the amateurs.

The US, Mexico, Japan, Thailand, Germany and Russia seem to be able to develop good fighters easily enough without needing them to fight guys who don't try to win and don't have these journeymen fighters. The tricks they are taught come from the gym and then brought into the ring.

The idea of a "real fight environment" is a strange one too, the other countries do that by having their prospects in real fights. The likes of Berinchyk, Bivol, Inoue, Murata, Usyk, Lomachenko and Lipinets all had tests early and developed more because they were facing guys coming to win.

I fully understand the idea of using a journeyman to save a bout, and have no issues at all with that, but the idea that top prospects should be facing them is something that is lost on me.

it's the transition to the pro game that some top amateurs struggle with that keep the journeymen in work, we've seen plenty of Olympians struggle to adapt which is where the journeymen come in

I think we need to distinguish the difference between a professional journeyman and an import with a losing record simply brought over to be knocked down. A "journeyman" knows a craft. They know how to spoil, go for a walk, disappear, rough up... they know just how far to push a young prospect. A good journeyman wouldn't let a prospect have it all his own way. I agree in a way with the person who said today's journeymen aren't good enough, I'd argue they are a dieing breed that are being replaced with "Bodies".

I've always believed that a genuine journeyman is a fighter, that given time to prepare and the right investment, would be a threat.

We do not have, for example, journeyman jockeys, football players, rugby players, snooker players, cricketers, golfers etc etc etc etc etc. Just journeyman boxers. Says it all.

josco wrote:We do not have, for example, journeyman jockeys, football players, rugby players, snooker players, cricketers, golfers etc etc etc etc etc. Just journeyman boxers. Says it all.

But you could argue that the elite of those sports aren't immediately thrown in at the top end either. They have to learn their trade vs sub standard opposition. U don't see kids being having a kick about in the park and then walking into the Man U first eleven after being spotted. (Unless they are George best lol)

Stevieb8006 wrote:

josco wrote:We do not have, for example, journeyman jockeys, football players, rugby players, snooker players, cricketers, golfers etc etc etc etc etc. Just journeyman boxers. Says it all.

But you could argue that the elite of those sports aren't immediately thrown in at the top end either. They have to learn their trade vs sub standard opposition. U don't see kids being having a kick about in the park and then walking into the Man U first eleven after being spotted. (Unless they are George best lol)

By that same token wouldn't the elite from boxing have come through the amateur program as opposed to the junipr ranks at.Manchester United? The learning the trade is done in the amateur for the elite.

iamasadlittleboy wrote:

Stevieb8006 wrote:

josco wrote:We do not have, for example, journeyman jockeys, football players, rugby players, snooker players, cricketers, golfers etc etc etc etc etc. Just journeyman boxers. Says it all.

But you could argue that the elite of those sports aren't immediately thrown in at the top end either. They have to learn their trade vs sub standard opposition. U don't see kids being having a kick about in the park and then walking into the Man U first eleven after being spotted. (Unless they are George best lol)

By that same token wouldn't the elite from boxing have come through the amateur program as opposed to the junipr ranks at.Manchester United? The learning the trade is done in the amateur for the elite.

Yeah granted, but you still wouldn't throw a youth player into the starting line up of a crucial fixture. Surely Man U would break them in gently, friendlys and easy matches etc. saying that, I know fornicate all about footy lol

josco wrote:We do not have, for example, journeyman jockeys, football players, rugby players, snooker players, cricketers, golfers etc etc etc etc etc. Just journeyman boxers. Says it all.

Im not sure I agree with this. I would say Billy Sharp for example in terms of football is what I would class as a journeyman football playeer, but the name journeyman only really has a meaning in boxing as journeymen travel anywhere and everywhere. Saying it in that sense does put a football player like Billy Sharp in that league. I dont know anything about Rugby or Snooker so cant comment but in horse racing there will be 'fringe' jockies or jockies who cannot get a perminant stable and have to ride for whoever they can and just turn up at race courses hoping that a jockey is injured so he can get a replacement ride. Again in Golf there are many pro events and the guys who are now in their 30's 40's play in pro events such a the Euro Pro Tour and will almost get no where in terms of top PGA events, so travel all over the UK to try to get a slice of a £25k event with the winner making only £10k. I think 'journeymen' exsist in every sport in some form.

There are boxers like William Warburton who have a place. But for every Warburton you've got a handful of survivors like Andy Harris, or Antonio Horvatic who aren't giving prospects anything they couldn't get better in the gym. Not enough Warburtons and too many Horvatics in the sport IMO. The journeyman concept is totally devalued now.

champions still flourish in the UFC where there are no journeymen.

Think the main gripe with the journeyman is the shows that have, for example, 8 home fighters against 8 guys turning up with no intention or aspirations to win without getting knocked out. If they win they don't get work, if they get KOd they can't work for a month (is it still 30 days?). I've seen journeymen who run, journeymen who cover up into a shell, journeymen who hold, grab spoil... Do anything to waste seconds away and last 4 rounds. Doesn't make for great viewing.

mimmy123 wrote:

josco wrote:We do not have, for example, journeyman jockeys, football players, rugby players, snooker players, cricketers, golfers etc etc etc etc etc. Just journeyman boxers. Says it all.

Im not sure I agree with this. I would say Billy Sharp for example in terms of football is what I would class as a journeyman football playeer, but the name journeyman only really has a meaning in boxing as journeymen travel anywhere and everywhere. Saying it in that sense does put a football player like Billy Sharp in that league. I dont know anything about Rugby or Snooker so cant comment but in horse racing there will be 'fringe' jockies or jockies who cannot get a perminant stable and have to ride for whoever they can and just turn up at race courses hoping that a jockey is injured so he can get a replacement ride. Again in Golf there are many pro events and the guys who are now in their 30's 40's play in pro events such a the Euro Pro Tour and will almost get no where in terms of top PGA events, so travel all over the UK to try to get a slice of a £25k event with the winner making only £10k. I think 'journeymen' exsist in every sport in some form.

That's a bit harsh on the likes of Billy Sharp. Everytime he steps on the pitch he gives 100% to win, unlike journeymen boxers who, in many cases, show no ambition to win just to see final bell. If Billy Sharp's sole aim on the pitch was to lose the game but see the final whistle I'd agree. Journeyman in football has a completley different meaning.

Journeyman has a totally different meaning in football to boxing. A football journeyman will literally go on a journey. Play anywhere in the world, for anyone, just to get paid and maintain a professional career. They still want to win, and they're not moving about to teach young lads a trick or two. There's no teaching or learning element.

The equivalent in football would be as I mentioned. A young kid about 17 or so, who has a lot of talent, playing against a part time brickie in the FA Cup or whatever. Nowhere near as talented or skilled as the kid, but will be doing every dirty trick in the book at every opportunity to level the playing field as much as they can. The sort of stuff you don't get in a match against another pampered Academy side of lads the same age.

Someone on this thread made a superb point that people are missing the point and the difference between a journeyman in boxing and a body.

Plus of course, whilst the young boxer might learn more or the same in sparring, it counts for nothing in terms of record. You have to work your way into a position by beating the lowest level of opposition to get to the greatest, especially if coming into the pro ranks with little-to-no amateur experience.

Someone like Scott Quigg needed a few journeymen to learn about the game and himself. Someone like Lomachenko can be in higher quality fights already on account of a stellar amateur background.

Horses for courses. Journeymen have their uses. I agree however that there's a lack of quality ones now and too many human punchbags, which isn't what would be classed in my eyes as a journeyman.

There is a certain British journeyman (still active) who I hate to watch I understand the need not to get stopped or cut but it's sooo negative it's unreal ....at least try a little bit!