Page 1 of 2

john Murray - doing things the old fashioned way

Posted: 03 May 2008, 05:17
by whiskey
http://www.livefight.com/news.php

JOHN MURRAY: DOING THINGS THE HARD, OLD FASHIONED WAY



In boxing, there are plenty of shortcuts. Especially for a young fighter tipped to go to the top. Manchester’s John Murray is a very bright prospect. But he’ll never be accused of taking the easy route – as so many of his peers are – not after his next fight. The 23-0 (12 KOs) pressure fighter has a tough assignment when he tackles fellow unbeaten John Fewkes on Saturday 10 May.

A ten-rounder for Murray’s English lightweight crown, it promises to be a hard, competitive battle. It could well be the fight of the night, on a show headlined by Carl Froch vs TBA (after Denis Inkin withdrew for a second time) and whoniour TTwitter’s WBC light welterweight title defence against Timothy Bradley.

Fewkes, 22, is no pushover, despite earning only two knockouts from 17 wins. Among those 17 victims are current Commonwealth welterweight champion Craig Watson and the once-beaten (at the time) Scott Haywood, as well as tough cookies Gary Reid and Tontcho Tontchev.

It’s an excellent matchup, perhaps too good for the title that’s on the line. Though there are bigger names and better titles out there, 23-year-old Murray is up for this bout knowing that victory will put him on the map in a weight class rich in talent.

“Lightweight is wide open,” observed Murray when I talked to him last month. “(WBO, WBA and IBF champion) Nate Campbell is coming to the end of his career. We’re only a few years away from the young contenders moving up. Domestically lightweight is a great division. With big super featherweights like Kevin Mitchell likely to move up, it can only get better.

“When you look back (six or seven years) at the light middleweights the good British fighters never ended up fighting each other. Takaloo, Anthony Farnell. Their careers sort of fizzled out,” with the big fights not happening when the public wanted them. “But there’s a great chance at lightweight for us all to get together and make our mark (in big fights).”

But a lot is being asked of Murray, who had been keen to get his hands on his respected but ageing Hennessy Sports stablemate Jonathon Thaxton. It’s a missed opportunity – following Thaxton’s one-sided defeat to EBU champion Yuri Romanov on 4 April – that has irked both trainer and fighter. Admitted John’s coach Joe Gallagher, “Yuri Romanov was exceptional. He has dynamite in his right hand. He knows the British circuit as well. What annoys John more than anything is that we had the style to do it (beat Thaxton), and Romanov ended up doing the job.”

Consider that Murray is facing a fleet-footed slickster in Fewkes, in what is expected to be a big ring, and the size of the task is apparent. An even bigger task, in lieu of Murray’s inactivity, which will total five months by the time he steps into the Nottingham Arena ring (the whole card was postponed from the original 29 March date after Denis Inkin withdrew for the first time against Froch). Fewkes has since fought a tune up. Murray hasn’t been able to.

“It’s a massive hindrance. The more active I’ve been, the better I’ve been in the ring. To keep my tools nice and sharp I need to be kept active. But I’ve had great sparring. The lack of ring fitness has been made up for in sparring,” admitted Murray.

And he’s had plenty of time to prepare for the bout – something he’s not often had – increased by the bout's rescheduling. Several months ago Gallagher informed me, “The only time John has received proper notice – more than a week – he looked great against Dean Hickman and Ignacio Mendoza.” The thorough preparation this time could lead to one of Murray’s best showings yet, provided he isn’t too rusty or stale.

Though Murray and Gallagher have adapted well to situations – taking short notice jobs against men whose bouts aren’t readily available to watch – there were some awkward moments in their last bout, against Miguel Angel Munguia in Las Vegas on 7 December (the night before Hatton-Mayweather).

Munguia’s jerky style took Murray a few rounds to get used to, and the Mexican’s rough tactics went unpunished (a common complaint for British fighters abroad, ala Hatton-Mayweather and the recent Calzaghe-Hopkins), the referee’s lack of control of the action allowing the bout to drag an ugly spectacle.

It wasn’t Murray’s sharpest performance by a long shot. But he dug in and pulled out an awkward victory. It was a win akin to Romanov’s off-form decision win over old spoiler Steffano Zoff. Romanov dismantled Thaxton in his very next contest, shattering the myth that ‘You’re only as good as your last fight.’ Murray is keen to do the same.

Indeed, John sees the Munguia bout as more of a motivator than a hindrance, “It (having off-nights) motivates you more to come back and to prove you’re as good as you are. I’ve shown I can grind out the win when things aren’t all going my way.”

Posted: 03 May 2008, 05:45
by Asterix
Nice article. I'm rooting for Murray against Fewkes, if only for the fact that he has a much better KO ratio.

Posted: 03 May 2008, 06:59
by Poncey
C'mon John. Let's put on a show for Emerz :box:

Posted: 03 May 2008, 07:01
by TerribleTerry
I love Fewkes' style of boxing: so relaxed and confident with some great technique.

Murray might just be a bit too strong and methodical for him, although I will be rooting for the ginger nut!

Posted: 03 May 2008, 07:29
by Max Molyneux
Think Fewkes Is a workrate kinda guy when he fought Tonchev, could see him outboxing and outworking Murray.

Posted: 03 May 2008, 07:43
by Scrap
I think Murrays People have dropped a right Bollock, we will see I havent seen Feewkes go through all the gears yet.

Posted: 03 May 2008, 10:38
by whiskey
I thought Fewkes looked less than stellar on the Gomez v Johanesson undercard.

Gary Reid took a few of the 8 rounds off him and i'd say Murray is a harder hitting pressure fighter than Reid.

Maybe it was an 'off night'

Either way i like both of them and it will make for a good fight.

Posted: 03 May 2008, 10:59
by terminator
is this the same John Murray that struggled against a mexican roadsweeper?

Posted: 03 May 2008, 13:10
by jameswilson
terminator wrote:is this the same John Murray that struggled against a mexican roadsweeper?
Are you the same Terminator who got crushed in a pneumatic press by Sarah Connor?

Posted: 03 May 2008, 13:43
by Autobarn
jackthehat wrote:Murray is a hype job thats been overprotected up until now and thats why hes overachieving. yeah this is a tough fight for him against Fewkes cus Fewkes is a good fighter who has faced good opposition. But Murray has had over 20 fights and this is his first real test, hes been pro since 2003 the guys been boxing mostly journeymen simple as that
I've not seen any hype, have you? OVERachieving? - not sure I get you there. He hasn't had the opportunities yet so how can he be overachieving?

Murray has beaten Mendoza, who hasn't been beaten since; Guebbas, who went on to retire Danny Hunt; and Hickman, who has stopped light middle hope Adnan Amar.

He has also battered many of the good British super feathers and lightweights in the gym already.

Posted: 03 May 2008, 13:48
by hitman_hatton1
jameswilson wrote:
terminator wrote:is this the same John Murray that struggled against a mexican roadsweeper?
Are you the same Terminator who got crushed in a pneumatic press by Sarah Connor?
:lol: :lol: :lol:

fewkes will frustrate murray for a little while.

but i see murray getting thru by the middle rds and taking over down the stretch.

Posted: 03 May 2008, 15:04
by Spud
I am really hoping I have got John Fewkes wrong - its just I cannot for the life of me see him beating John Murray.

In the case of Murray whilst its wrong of me I want to see him beaten - mainly because of his trainer - I have strong opinions about Gallagher - cannot stand the man and cannot stand the way he has so called managed/trained/advised Murray since he left Steve Wood.

Murray's career as far as I am concerned has dipped since he left Wood - up until then I thought he was coming along very nicely indeed - he was kept active and at times and that was the right times he was matched toughly - since in my opinion there has been periods as far as I am concerned inactivity mixed in with lack lustre performances - but with that said the lad is one hell of a talented boxer.

So many people keep on telling me I am wrong to have the opinion about John Fewkes - I just can't see him beyond the domestic scene - I would love to be wrong - to me he is an on top fighter and when he has to box defensively I personally see some flaws - Murray has had to box defensively on a number of occasions and I think this will stand him in good stead.

I hope I am wrong - I would love to see Gallagher p*ssed off because his boxer has lost - unfortunately I think I will have to wait another day as I see John Murray wearing down Fewkey and beating him by a later stoppage.

Posted: 03 May 2008, 15:41
by Autobarn
Spud, you never manage to hide whom you're currying favour with at any given time, can you?

Is it Joe Gallagher's fault that the Jonathon Thaxton fight wasn't delivered? Methinks not. After all he isn't the promoter is he, hint hint. He is a thorough bloke and covers things from every angle. Thaxton was the logical next step - British title - Sky TV tried to hype it up, but Jono was on this doomed quest to get to Khan then got splattered by Romanov. Hennessy's only world champ is Witter, and I'm thinking the Ingles have some influence at Hennessy - look at how Adnan Amar - a guy who didn't last the distance with Dean Hickman whom Murray bashed up late last year - has been hyped up. Maybe this is why we've been seeing Thaxton getting emphasised at - IMO - Murray's expense.

Who has the potential to go further, do you think, Thaxton or Murray?

Murray was given a Showtime date, didn't have his fight shifted to the York Hall lightweight themed show Thaxton v Romanov the week later while he was ready to fight, was put on the rescheduled Notts date, and then loses his Showtime coverage when Jr Witter is put on the card, and comes into the Fewkes bout with even more inactivity.

Hate to say it, as Hennessy is my fave UK promoter, but I think you need to look at how Murray's been promoted.

Posted: 03 May 2008, 15:58
by Spud
Autobarn wrote:Spud, you never manage to hide whom you're currying favour with at any given time, can you?

Is it Joe Gallagher's fault that the Jonathon Thaxton fight wasn't delivered? Methinks not. After all he isn't the promoter is he, hint hint. That was the logical next step - British title - Sky TV tried to hype it up, but Jono was on this doomed quest to get to Khan then got splattered by Romanov. Hennessy's only world champ is Witter, and I'm thinking the Ingles have some influence at Hennessy - look at how Adnan Amar - a guy who didn't last the distance with Dean Hickman whom Murray bashed up late last year - has been hyped up.

Murray was given a Showtime date, didn't have his fight shifted to the York Hall lightweight themed show Thaxton v Romanov, was put on the rescheduled Notts date, and then loses his Showtime coverage when Jr Witter is put on the card.

Hate to say it, as Hennessy is my fave UK promoter, but I think you need to look at how Murray's been promoted.
:o :o :o

Don't need to hide and won't hide mate!!!

Favoruite promoters are Fight Academy - If I am ever required to deliver the Tea for Fight Academy I will be there - at the expense of any other!!!

So that really f*cks out the window your accusation doesn't it??

Anyone who has visited this or any other board will tell you - I have always been on John Murray's case since the treatment of Steve Wood - and the subsequent BBBofC enquiry thereafter which vindicated Steve!!!

So before you accuse me of anything you need to go back a couple of years to find out why I cannot stand Gallagher.

With regards to your comments concerning Hennessy - he has done bloody well to survive during a lean period and is now biting back with vengence and I have to say is doing very well for himself - he is an excellent promoter without question - so that blows that accusation out of the window as well!!!

However - In the case of John Murray I honestly do not believe his career has carried on with the promise it did in the first couple of years or so!!!

Posted: 03 May 2008, 16:01
by thepocketrocket
Say what you like, Murray has stagnated in the last couple of years, thats not even up for debate

Posted: 03 May 2008, 16:01
by Autobarn
There is no accusation, Spud.

Posted: 03 May 2008, 16:02
by Spud
thepocketrocket wrote:Say what you like, Murray has stagnated in the last couple of years, thats not even up for debate
Absolutely - and I do not believe that would have been the case if Wood was still his manager!!!

Posted: 03 May 2008, 16:05
by Spud
Autobarn wrote:There is no accusation, Spud.
Not trying to curry favour with Steve Wood at all - I have always highly regarded him - when I worked for Frank Maloney, Mick Hennessy, or Fight Academy - Steve has never judged me whatsoever and has always treated me and my son brilliantly!!

So to be honest mate - I just don't know where you were going with the first line of your original post mate.

I have nothing to gain from Steve Wood, John Murray, John Fewkes or Joe Gallagher.

Posted: 03 May 2008, 16:07
by Autobarn
I think we won't see him go to the next level until an opponent of calibre is delivered. Next fight is of calibre, Fewkes, so let's hope things move forward if successful and let's hope things keep on moving on.

Lean times, yes, but it would seem like JM has felt the lean times more than some others in that stable. Don't get me wrong, Hennessy puts on the fights that are the most watchable, in this country. I know nothing of what went on between Murray and Wood, but there are issues of recent which suggests he has been underpromoted and it feels like he's been on the backburner since the mediocre showing vs Munguia. Now Murray is a young pro, a pressure fighter to boot, who needs keeping busy to perform.

Just consider - losing the ShoBox date to Witter, the inactivity vs a dangerous foe in Fewkes, the ring size suiting Fewkes, Fewkes given a tune up but did Murray have one?, the hard fight for no kind of title, not getting Thaxton who would've brought up inevitable Hatton comparisons...Is this good promoting?

Look at the last English title fight between 2 good prospects - Hunt and Meager both seemed to lose something after that opne, so early in their careers.

Not trying to rally anyone against Hennessy. Hennessy was one of the first to go against the grain and put on good fights for real titles. Never easy to go against the grain but he deserves props for doing so. And we need more promoters like him. However, some promoters are great with some fighters and not great with others. Look at what Arum's doing with Pavlik but look how he wasted the brilliant Marquez bros.

Posted: 04 May 2008, 09:59
by Autobarn
Scrap wrote:I think Murrays People have dropped a right Bollock, we will see I havent seen Feewkes go through all the gears yet.
Murray's People are basically Murray and Gallagher.

Every time I've talked to Murray he's specifically wanted Thaxton and been disappointed that the fight never materialised after Sky were interested in it. Instead his promoter Hennessy has put him into a harder fight, for a lesser title - more risk, less reward - to take on his English mandatory instead of moving forward. It's a British title level of a fight for an English title, with only 10 rds that suit the guy who may want to steal the fight on the move (Fewkes) not the grind 'em down pressure guy.

The times I have talked to Gallagher he has specifically not wanted Fewkes - in fact he put it to me as a "horrible fight" considering match of styles and the risk/reward ratio. Not because they're scared, not because they don't think they can win. But rather, because Fewkes has a style to trouble Murray, because it's a life or death fight so early on in Murray's career. Murray is getting no home fighter advantages that you see someone like Amir Khan getting. It's the sort of fight that Murray will get massive credit for winning, but may get absolutely slated for losing.

Posted: 05 May 2008, 11:51
by Carbo
Thought Murray looked the real deal shortly after turning pro, but his career has badly stagnated since then. Not quite sure what happened with Gallagher and Wood, but I know Steve does very well for his boxers and I seem to remember Gallagher coming across as a nasty piece of work when he was posting on forums. Mind you, he was getting agro with SPud, who has in the past brought that out of one or two people.

Who knows what would have happened if he hadn't have left Wood, maybe this is the best he's ever going to get. But I suspect if he doesn't make the jump up soon, he'll start losing interest and end up a journeyman.

English title after 20 fights when he showed so much promise early on must be a significant disappointment.

We all lay into Khan, but he's probably only 4 matches away from an alphabet strap.

Posted: 05 May 2008, 12:47
by tyson
Kevin Mitchell who was an Amateur star fought for his first meaningful belt the commonwealth title in his 22nd fight he too must be disappointed.

Posted: 05 May 2008, 13:02
by Carbo
tyson wrote:Kevin Mitchell who was an Amateur star fought for his first meaningful belt the commonwealth title in his 22nd fight he too must be disappointed.
Mitchell is the biggest hype job of the lot. I'll be shocked if he goes beyond Euopean level.

Posted: 05 May 2008, 14:32
by black panther
I think Fewkes-Murray will be fight of the night. I've been impressed with both but Murray seems to have gone backward after looking so good early in his career but I think thats also due to poor opposition and lay-offs. Fewkes really looks flashy at times - I was really impressed with the way he handled Tontchev. A real 50-50 fight - I was leaning towards Fewkes(who looks to be the naturally bigger guy) but Ive never had to see him grind out a win when the going gets tough - Ive seen Murray do this which makes me lean towards him...erm...nah eff it I reckon Fewkes on points! :lol:

Posted: 05 May 2008, 16:04
by Spud
Autobarn wrote:
Scrap wrote:I think Murrays People have dropped a right Bollock, we will see I havent seen Feewkes go through all the gears yet.
Murray's People are basically Murray and Gallagher.
You are wrong there - promoter Hennessy has a big say in what goes on and the matchmaker is John Ingle I believe.