Ummmmm.....I'm tempted to say John Murray just because he's not with Frank Warren. All Mitchell needs to do is move his head more and he'd be a very good prospect; seems to be able to take a punch, Carl Johannson had him in all sorts of trouble and he weathered the storm. To stop this happening with bigger punchers and better finishers all he needs to do if stop being silly. He can certainly dig as well, and he has fast hands. What's not to like? Now's his chance, Rocky Juarez and Humberto Soto are probably the two biggest names there at the moment in terms of challenges. I'd pick both of them to bet Mitchell, as would Barrios I suspect. But who knows, maybe Mitchell can tighten his defence up a bit and go on to improve more? Jorge Linares has just moved up as well, he has Oscar Larios on the resume but I don't rate him too highly. Still, I'd take him over Mitchell.
Very good question. At the moment i would vote for Mitchell because he has been able to adapt when need be. Murray whilst a good fighter looked very beatable prior to him dismantling Meager. Mitchell but with anyluck Murray has had a fire lit under him and he will only get better.
murray has a decent chance at winning the EBU belt and may be even an interim world title Mitchell OTOH will always remain a british level fighter his defence is reckless and his skillset isnt all that great a tidy boxer like willie limmond would easily outbox him
Mitchell will never crack World level IMO, he gets hit far too often at this level. He's obviously got a decent chin, but when he's fighting world class operators he'll be stopped easily.
I think they are both good fighters, however neither look like world beaters but i think they are still only 23 and as long as they dont get put into the ring with someone to good i.e amir khan v prescott then they should both get a world title shot within 18 months.
4 years ago this my favourite discussion, I loved rambling on about how much better Mitchell was than Murray. and for me it is still Mitchell. He's faster, his power is better, he's got a better chin, and while his defence is reckless he is still more a sturdy fighter than Murray, imo. At this point, coming off Murray-Meager; Murray's best performance. and Mitchell-Estrada; Mitchell's most reckless and defenceless 5 rounds. It's easy think that Murray is a more rounded and solid boxer (while obviously stylistically he is), but the guy is shaky as hell - he's like a very frail version of Cotto with no power. I think his chin will crack before Mitchell's when they step up.
i think mitchell will be in the more exciting fights. decent chin, great heart and workrate and can show skills when he wants to. i can see both fighting for world titles but coming up short.
I believe mitchell has a chance of winning a world title, due to the division not being the strongest, i feel he could beat nicky cook (although he said he wont fight him), and i feel he could beat half of the people in the top 10 of the division in a couple of years time. Plus he could land a pretty easy title shot against billy dib if he manages to beat luevano (highly unlikely). Obviously it will be a lot harder for murray if he stays in the lightweight division due to it being probably the most difficult division at the moment.
very good question actually. there records i would say are exactly the same. Murray has looked bad before but he was fighting tough mexicans, and Mitchell stepped up this year and did well. if you had to bet who would be world champ first, you gotta go with mitchell as he is already world ranked and has a promoter who can get world title fights, hennesey clearly cannot unless his fighters are mandatorys. also Murray is in a much tougher division, domesticly, european and globablly lightweight is a strong divisison. super feather domesticly is as strong as it is globally, as you would have to put arthur and cook in the current top 10 at the weight. murray is not even top 30 at l.w currently. actually i never rated lee meager, so murray looking good against him does not mean much to me. Mitchell is a much better prospect in my opinion.
I doubt either will make a genuine impact at world level. Both fighters can still improve but up against the top contenders I believe they will probably always come up short. Mitchel has the advantage of Warren and the WBO. If a fighter like Cook can become a world champ then so too can Mitchell. Murray will have to go the hard way in a very tough division, he could have a good career domestically and at Euro level beating guys like Malero, Thaxton, Khan and Arthur but the next step will be too far.
I think Murray has the better boxing brain but Mitchell the better physical talent (though he lacks power). Overall Mitchell is the better prospect for me, as he can hopefully learn to fight smarter, he's got the better natural tools to do the job. Lovely fluid puncher and good durability. Just needs to stop turning fights in which he can box his way to a win into trench warfare.
Murray. Neither will be world title level. However, Murray has the sort of style that can expose better quality fighters than himself if they have a really bad night similar to Rees-M'baye. He's relentless and has great work-rate.