Boxing Video Blogs

[dbf]

Does anyone watch any of these guys? I prefer some to others, even Kugan Cassius gave it a go.

Just wondered what peoples opinions are of the following:

Wingy Boxing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkH0qHvb ... 7OpWfzstyA
Bayloric: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IS5SlI_hzw
Kugans: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkYZYJ6omHA
Secondsout: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oaY8YJCR5TA
Dwyer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7JDXXPXCuhs

There are countless others. But anyone watch any of these? Struggling to see who they appeal to.

[lefty]

Hatman is the best IMO. The most clued up out of the lot of them.

[dbf]

I've only seen a few of his - definitely insightful. Have to be pretty harcore to watch any of these.

[lefty]

I've only seen a few of his - definitely insightful. Have to be pretty harcore to watch any of these.

Wingy is enthusiastic but I dont think he particularily knows what he's talking about. Dwyer is pretty clued up and talks about the odds and so on and Ifilm produce good interviews. The rest I dont follow that closely I have to say. Hatman is the only one I really watch and even then it's pretty sporadically.

[Wake up call]

Or alternatively you could subscribe to a channel with actual fights and fighters on like this one - http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqwEMKxh3Xt0lNTs2qmP4MQ

[TheWigwam]

I've followed Wingy for ages, love his enthusiasm and zaniness, but on the other hand I'm 17 years old so might not be for the more mature members of the board lol
Dwyer is a bit dry but knows his stuff and is likable
We all know Kugan's game, good stuff
Bayloric has good interviews, Tyson Fury has done a few with him
Not seen much of of Secondsout or Hatman

[lefty]

I've followed Wingy for ages, love his enthusiasm and zaniness, but on the other hand I'm 17 years old so might not be for the more mature members of the board lol
Dwyer is a bit dry but knows his stuff and is likable
We all know Kugan's game, good stuff
Bayloric has good interviews, Tyson Fury has done a few with him
Not seen much of of Secondsout or Hatman

You should check out Hatman. I personally that he's the most clued up out of all of the "amateur" boxing analysts.

[whiskey]

Wingy does gaming videos mainly i thought.

[DMA1987]

Wingy does gaming videos mainly i thought.

He used to do loads of boxing ones as well as Gaming on a seperate channel. Sniffing the money probably, though I don't think it ever took off.

Wingys boxing videos always used to annoy me after a while. Used to watch a bloke called BoxPred occasionally, he was usually alright. Hatman was the boy though I don't recall him showing up in my feed for months.

As a gaming sidenote Gomez - do you watch KSI? Bloke is genuinely funny.

[dbf]

I like Wingy's style. Funny and he does know what he's talking about. At least he's not boring. Good thing about youtube, a little less restricted and these vloggers can speak their mind a bit more.

Some seem to have a budget. Stumbled across this - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-USbPWbAPPI - considering its free, its pretty well produced.

Think all of these vloggers are a good alternative to mainstream media. Obviously ifilm are leading the way in terms of volume of content but guys like wingy et al are doing a good job too.

[Dan Dares]

What happened to Apollo James Jackson? He was funny.

[lefty]

What happened to Apollo James Jackson? He was funny.

He's not all there in the head!

[lefty]

Wingy does gaming videos mainly i thought.

He used to do loads of boxing ones as well as Gaming on a seperate channel. Sniffing the money probably, though I don't think it ever took off.

Wingys boxing videos always used to annoy me after a while. Used to watch a bloke called BoxPred occasionally, he was usually alright. Hatman was the boy though I don't recall him showing up in my feed for months.

As a gaming sidenote Gomez - do you watch KSI? Bloke is genuinely funny.

http://www.youtube.com/user/HatmanStrikesBack

[lefty]

I saw a bit of a Wingy one and it was really poor. I don’t see what video blogs bring to the table and they’re just extended rants. You may as well just watch a fight or a decent interview. Kugan’s good at what he does, but doing a video blog is never going to work out for him.

Have you ever seen Hatman, Terry? The same concept as Wingy admittedly but seems more clued up on boxing generally I think.

[dbf]

I saw a bit of a Wingy one and it was really poor. I don’t see what video blogs bring to the table and they’re just extended rants. You may as well just watch a fight or a decent interview. Kugan’s good at what he does, but doing a video blog is never going to work out for him.

I'm interested to know who those guys appeal to. I think some of them are decent. Wingy is funny but also makes good points. Secondsout have some good stuff on theirs too.

Just to query you point about Kugan, and I'm not trying to start anything here, but your line 'good at what he does' is something I've heard from other journo's too. Is that code for "he's not a proper journalist". The majority of IFLTV's audience clearly aren't hard core fans, you only have to look at their comments to know that but I think its indicative of the time that a slightly more dumbed down and relaxed approach seems to be more popular than a lot of the straight lace stuff on tv and other boxing channels on youtube.

[slapbangwhallop]

I saw a bit of a Wingy one and it was really poor. I don’t see what video blogs bring to the table and they’re just extended rants. You may as well just watch a fight or a decent interview. Kugan’s good at what he does, but doing a video blog is never going to work out for him.

I'm interested to know who those guys appeal to. I think some of them are decent. Wingy is funny but also makes good points. Secondsout have some good stuff on theirs too.

Just to query you point about Kugan, and I'm not trying to start anything here, but your line 'good at what he does' is something I've heard from other journo's too. Is that code for "he's not a proper journalist". The majority of IFLTV's audience clearly aren't hard core fans, you only have to look at their comments to know that but I think its indicative of the time that a slightly more dumbed down and relaxed approach seems to be more popular than a lot of the straight lace stuff on tv and other boxing channels on youtube.

Nah, I mean he’s good in the interview format and he’s not suited to 30 minutes or so of solo video. I’ve seen a few bun fights on Twitter about what Kugan does or doesn’t do, and I’ve got no real perspective on it, but his boxing knowledge doesn’t stretch far enough to do the talking head style vids, very few can hold interest for that long. Their interview videos are mainly coverage, I agree with some of Bunce’s points, as they’re quite surface level. They also do some deeper stuff. It depends on who they’re talking to. That said, I’ve watched less than 10 of them in total (minus raw footage of weigh ins and press conferences) so am not in the best position to judge.

My own take is that some of the stuff directed towards Kugan, not from Bunce though, boils down to a case of the old green-eyed monster.

For me, really good analysis is best provided by in-depth interviews or well-researched written articles, I don’t think that videos go quite as deep.

In the time it takes to watch those other blog vids, I can watch a fight or two and read well over 20 articles in the thirty minute period, so why bother listening to some demented person I’ve never met blabbering into their webcam? They don’t do interviews. They don’t go to gyms. What qualifies their opinions as analysis?

I’d check out more of them if I felt they were raising my boxing IQ. They’re not so I don’t. I spend most of my time watching fights, documentaries, looking at ring records, and digging out newspaper and academic journal articles.

People also seem to split themselves into two camps over this type of thing. One side think that the iFL stuff is too banter driven and dumbed down, others say the more analytical stuff is stuffy and snooty. People just see things in black and white, pick a side and then just snipe away at the other side. We get the same thing in online writing, try to do something different, and word count busting, and you’re called a snob and whatnot, pump out fluff and you’re seen as a churnalist or fan writer. There’s never a happy medium in any aspect of boxing. iFL do a more polished version of what Channel M used to do, in my opinion.

When I first started, I was told that the readership can’t understand literary references or metaphors so to can them, which I refused to do. I was also told that modern readers can’t handle anything more than 800 words, and certainly not 2000, but I still found an audience who can deal with both. I mix things up, but I refused to accept that all boxing fans are too stupid to get references to other fields and can’t handle reading over 800 words. I still do my own thing, despite the advice, and the hit rates and feedback are enough to make me feel vindicated.

Sorry to branch out into online writing on a video thread. Those are just my two cents on it.

Oh, and I’m not a journalist. I’ve got a career that I enjoy and started this as a hobby. I’ve tried to join the British Boxing Writers Association, to no avail, but haven’t applied for a press card and refuse to try to submit stuff to local newspapers as it is taking work away from jobbing journalists who might carve a show up between a few publications to earn money. Some guys in my position have done the local thing, and some for good reason, but if you’re doing it just to show off a byline then you’re almost stealing from people like Andy Whittle.

I’m a completely independent dabbler who has never taken payment from anyone in the sport itself for what I do. I’ve been paid by publications for writing work and that’s it. I wouldn’t work in boxing as there’s no long-term upside to it for me.

Well put Tel, but in my humble opinion I’ve read better articles from you than pretty much every full time “boxing correspondent” at a daily paper. Would love it you did it full time but realise that financial and for the sake of your marriage and sanity its probably not feasible.

As for Wingy, not my cuppa, would rather chew my own nuts off than listen to his drivel.

Bayloric, gets good Team Fury info, but only because he is effective an extension of their PR team. Hard to listen to otherwise and posts on some seriously random topics especially when he is out in Grenada.

iFilm (it’s not just Kugan you know) – great work from both lads. I don’t think Kugan should do the Warren stuff and let Helder develop that side whilst he sticks to Matchroom.

Secondsout – l subscribe to their channel, must of the output is stale because iFilm have beaten them to the punch but I watch their fight content and they also have live shows on.

Hatman – don’t watch his channel so cant comment.

Apollo JJ – love this loon. 30 minute breakdowns of the plot of the Lion King, hour long evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses of King Kong vs Godzilla! Whats NOT to love. I could go on for hours about the lad. It’s worth sifting through the 20 minutes of repetitive dirge for those 2 minutes of gold though.

Boxing Ireland TV – ah here, not one of ye gave me a shout out!! Racial!!!!! 600 odd videos over a million views! Like I say, its racial. My output has dropped off the chart, less than one video a week for the last 3 months. Just haven’t the time anymore. It serves a niche market and is appreciated there and that is what the aim was in the first place so its all good.

[lefty]

I saw a bit of a Wingy one and it was really poor. I don’t see what video blogs bring to the table and they’re just extended rants. You may as well just watch a fight or a decent interview. Kugan’s good at what he does, but doing a video blog is never going to work out for him.

I'm interested to know who those guys appeal to. I think some of them are decent. Wingy is funny but also makes good points. Secondsout have some good stuff on theirs too.

Just to query you point about Kugan, and I'm not trying to start anything here, but your line 'good at what he does' is something I've heard from other journo's too. Is that code for "he's not a proper journalist". The majority of IFLTV's audience clearly aren't hard core fans, you only have to look at their comments to know that but I think its indicative of the time that a slightly more dumbed down and relaxed approach seems to be more popular than a lot of the straight lace stuff on tv and other boxing channels on youtube.

Nah, I mean he’s good in the interview format and he’s not suited to 30 minutes or so of solo video. I’ve seen a few bun fights on Twitter about what Kugan does or doesn’t do, and I’ve got no real perspective on it, but his boxing knowledge doesn’t stretch far enough to do the talking head style vids, very few can hold interest for that long. Their interview videos are mainly coverage, I agree with some of Bunce’s points, as they’re quite surface level. They also do some deeper stuff. It depends on who they’re talking to. That said, I’ve watched less than 10 of them in total (minus raw footage of weigh ins and press conferences) so am not in the best position to judge.

My own take is that some of the stuff directed towards Kugan, not from Bunce though, boils down to a case of the old green-eyed monster.

For me, really good analysis is best provided by in-depth interviews or well-researched written articles, I don’t think that videos go quite as deep.

In the time it takes to watch those other blog vids, I can watch a fight or two and read well over 20 articles in the thirty minute period, so why bother listening to some demented person I’ve never met blabbering into their webcam? They don’t do interviews. They don’t go to gyms. What qualifies their opinions as analysis?

I’d check out more of them if I felt they were raising my boxing IQ. They’re not so I don’t. I spend most of my time watching fights, documentaries, looking at ring records, and digging out newspaper and academic journal articles.

People also seem to split themselves into two camps over this type of thing. One side think that the iFL stuff is too banter driven and dumbed down, others say the more analytical stuff is stuffy and snooty. People just see things in black and white, pick a side and then just snipe away at the other side. We get the same thing in online writing, try to do something different, and word count busting, and you’re called a snob and whatnot, pump out fluff and you’re seen as a churnalist or fan writer. There’s never a happy medium in any aspect of boxing. iFL do a more polished version of what Channel M used to do, in my opinion.

When I first started, I was told that the readership can’t understand literary references or metaphors so to can them, which I refused to do. I was also told that modern readers can’t handle anything more than 800 words, and certainly not 2000, but I still found an audience who can deal with both. I mix things up, but I refused to accept that all boxing fans are too stupid to get references to other fields and can’t handle reading over 800 words. I still do my own thing, despite the advice, and the hit rates and feedback are enough to make me feel vindicated.

Sorry to branch out into online writing on a video thread. Those are just my two cents on it.

Oh, and I’m not a journalist. I’ve got a career that I enjoy and started this as a hobby. I’ve tried to join the British Boxing Writers Association, to no avail, but haven’t applied for a press card and refuse to try to submit stuff to local newspapers as it is taking work away from jobbing journalists who might carve a show up between a few publications to earn money. Some guys in my position have done the local thing, and some for good reason, but if you’re doing it just to show off a byline then you’re almost stealing from people like Andy Whittle.

I’m a completely independent dabbler who has never taken payment from anyone in the sport itself for what I do. I’ve been paid by publications for writing work and that’s it. I wouldn’t work in boxing as there’s no long-term upside to it for me.

Well put Tel, but in my humble opinion I’ve read better articles from you than pretty much every full time “boxing correspondent” at a daily paper. Would love it you did it full time but realise that financial and for the sake of your marriage and sanity its probably not feasible.

As for Wingy, not my cuppa, would rather chew my own nuts off than listen to his drivel.

Bayloric, gets good Team Fury info, but only because he is effective an extension of their PR team. Hard to listen to otherwise and posts on some seriously random topics especially when he is out in Grenada.

iFilm (it’s not just Kugan you know) – great work from both lads. I don’t think Kugan should do the Warren stuff and let Helder develop that side whilst he sticks to Matchroom.

Secondsout – l subscribe to their channel, must of the output is stale because iFilm have beaten them to the punch but I watch their fight content and they also have live shows on.

Hatman – don’t watch his channel so cant comment.

Apollo JJ – love this loon. 30 minute breakdowns of the plot of the Lion King, hour long evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses of King Kong vs Godzilla! Whats NOT to love. I could go on for hours about the lad. It’s worth sifting through the 20 minutes of repetitive dirge for those 2 minutes of gold though.

Boxing Ireland TV – ah here, not one of ye gave me a shout out!! Racial!!!!! 600 odd videos over a million views! Like I say, its racial. My output has dropped off the chart, less than one video a week for the last 3 months. Just haven’t the time anymore. It serves a niche market and is appreciated there and that is what the aim was in the first place so its all good.[/quote]


I genuinely think he's insane lol.

[black panther]

Hatman and Dwyer are the only boxing channels I listen too. Both very insightful and Hatman in particular is great at breaking down a fight from a technical standpoint, having boxed himself for many years. Also, you might not be aware but Dwyer is Andre Ward's lawyer.

[lefty]

Hatman and Dwyer are the only boxing channels I listen too. Both very insightful and Hatman in particular is great at breaking down a fight from a technical standpoint, having boxed himself for many years. Also, you might not be aware but Dwyer is Andre Ward's lawyer.

fornicating hell! You serious? If so that's mad.

[dbf]

I saw a bit of a Wingy one and it was really poor. I don’t see what video blogs bring to the table and they’re just extended rants. You may as well just watch a fight or a decent interview. Kugan’s good at what he does, but doing a video blog is never going to work out for him.

I'm interested to know who those guys appeal to. I think some of them are decent. Wingy is funny but also makes good points. Secondsout have some good stuff on theirs too.

Just to query you point about Kugan, and I'm not trying to start anything here, but your line 'good at what he does' is something I've heard from other journo's too. Is that code for "he's not a proper journalist". The majority of IFLTV's audience clearly aren't hard core fans, you only have to look at their comments to know that but I think its indicative of the time that a slightly more dumbed down and relaxed approach seems to be more popular than a lot of the straight lace stuff on tv and other boxing channels on youtube.

Nah, I mean he’s good in the interview format and he’s not suited to 30 minutes or so of solo video. I’ve seen a few bun fights on Twitter about what Kugan does or doesn’t do, and I’ve got no real perspective on it, but his boxing knowledge doesn’t stretch far enough to do the talking head style vids, very few can hold interest for that long. Their interview videos are mainly coverage, I agree with some of Bunce’s points, as they’re quite surface level. They also do some deeper stuff. It depends on who they’re talking to. That said, I’ve watched less than 10 of them in total (minus raw footage of weigh ins and press conferences) so am not in the best position to judge.

My own take is that some of the stuff directed towards Kugan, not from Bunce though, boils down to a case of the old green-eyed monster.

For me, really good analysis is best provided by in-depth interviews or well-researched written articles, I don’t think that videos go quite as deep.

In the time it takes to watch those other blog vids, I can watch a fight or two and read well over 20 articles in the thirty minute period, so why bother listening to some demented person I’ve never met blabbering into their webcam? They don’t do interviews. They don’t go to gyms. What qualifies their opinions as analysis?

I’d check out more of them if I felt they were raising my boxing IQ. They’re not so I don’t. I spend most of my time watching fights, documentaries, looking at ring records, and digging out newspaper and academic journal articles.

People also seem to split themselves into two camps over this type of thing. One side think that the iFL stuff is too banter driven and dumbed down, others say the more analytical stuff is stuffy and snooty. People just see things in black and white, pick a side and then just snipe away at the other side. We get the same thing in online writing, try to do something different, and word count busting, and you’re called a snob and whatnot, pump out fluff and you’re seen as a churnalist or fan writer. There’s never a happy medium in any aspect of boxing. iFL do a more polished version of what Channel M used to do, in my opinion.

When I first started, I was told that the readership can’t understand literary references or metaphors so to can them, which I refused to do. I was also told that modern readers can’t handle anything more than 800 words, and certainly not 2000, but I still found an audience who can deal with both. I mix things up, but I refused to accept that all boxing fans are too stupid to get references to other fields and can’t handle reading over 800 words. I still do my own thing, despite the advice, and the hit rates and feedback are enough to make me feel vindicated.

Sorry to branch out into online writing on a video thread. Those are just my two cents on it.

Oh, and I’m not a journalist. I’ve got a career that I enjoy and started this as a hobby. I’ve tried to join the British Boxing Writers Association, to no avail, but haven’t applied for a press card and refuse to try to submit stuff to local newspapers as it is taking work away from jobbing journalists who might carve a show up between a few publications to earn money. Some guys in my position have done the local thing, and some for good reason, but if you’re doing it just to show off a byline then you’re almost stealing from people like Andy Whittle.

I’m a completely independent dabbler who has never taken payment from anyone in the sport itself for what I do. I’ve been paid by publications for writing work and that’s it. I wouldn’t work in boxing as there’s no long-term upside to it for me.

Terry, thanks for taking the time to reply, and what an excellent reply it was. I agree with all your points there, except one. Some of the video bloggers have been to gyms, have done interviews, have worked in boxing - but they are the few.

I'm a big fan of your writing, and have followed your stuff for years, and the cross references are part of why I like your writing. I think we have similar musical tastes too, which always helps. Please tell me you are Deltron 3030 fan?

You make some very accurate points in your post, I wish I could articulate myself like that!

[lefty]

Atleast one of those lowly video bloggers *not the ones mentioned* has covered a fight for BS which Terry would of been involved in himself seeing as he's the UK editor.

[TheWigwam]

I've followed Wingy for ages, love his enthusiasm and zaniness, but on the other hand I'm 17 years old so might not be for the more mature members of the board lol
Dwyer is a bit dry but knows his stuff and is likable
We all know Kugan's game, good stuff
Bayloric has good interviews, Tyson Fury has done a few with him
Not seen much of of Secondsout or Hatman

You should check out Hatman. I personally that he's the most clued up out of all of the "amateur" boxing analysts.

Yeah cheers for the nod on him Columbo, watched a vid and enjoyed it, will start following his stuff now

[lefty]

Atleast one of those lowly video bloggers *not the ones mentioned* has covered a fight for BS which Terry would of been involved in himself seeing as he's the UK editor.

I don't know who that is. We had a new guy covering Froch-Groves for us recently as I didn't go. He did a good job and hopefully comes back for more.

Jessie Jackelope.

[lefty]

Atleast one of those lowly video bloggers *not the ones mentioned* has covered a fight for BS which Terry would of been involved in himself seeing as he's the UK editor.

I don't know who that is. We had a new guy covering Froch-Groves for us recently as I didn't go. He did a good job and hopefully comes back for more.

Jessie Jackelope.[/quote]

Yeah, Jesse's alright. She's got a similar mindset when it comes to the fights so I've checked a few of the vids out but prefer to swap Tweets.[/quote]


Na I agree. Regarding video bloggers though, I think it's a little unfair to classify them as not being insightful because they dont visit the gyms or so on. Clearly there's a fair few that are clueless but I think there's some good ones aswell. I'd say there's a fair number of guys that work for the tabloids as boxing writers/reporters who are just as clueless, if not more!

[The_Don1]

Every fan has an opinion about boxing, that's why we have these forums and air it on twitter, I just don't particularly want to see some fat bloke air it in front of his web cam.

Terry has done a nice job on this thread