Michael Katz

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 24 May 2006, 09:47

Tickertape sites are fine if all you want is news, but the BBC website is often ill informed or behind the breaking news.

There's a lot of garbage writing out there, pure opinion pieces which peddle unsubstantiated rumours as fact, and where personal bias' effectively create stories out of nothing. That isn't journalism it's just bilge.

states · Post by **states** » 24 May 2006, 09:51

I think Eastside may well be the reigning kings of the 'bullshit opinion masquerading as journalism'. There's been some hilarious stuff on there over the years. Some decent stuff as well, but it just gets buried under an avalanche of 'Why Wlad Would Beat Ali & Louis. On The Same Night' type stuff.

lvlarc · Post by **lvlarc** » 24 May 2006, 10:08

I've only been to Eastside a few times myself but I'm sure the articles are typed up by 15 year olds, so much bullshit floating around plus their spelling and grammar is a joke, it's unbelievable!

I remember seeing an article on the frontpage of eastside claiming Joe only won the Lacy fight from constantly holding and hugging! Hillarious!!

Mensa07 · Post by **Mensa07** » 24 May 2006, 10:17

thesweetscience.com is the best site out there now imo, I also like the Hauser&others articles at secondsout.com. I'm still working through the excellent Pat Putnam articles at tss.com, just read the Willie Pastrano one today its a great read.

states · Post by **states** » 24 May 2006, 10:22

Because I was in need of a laugh, I've just been to Eastside. And this piece is a superb example of what I'm talking about:

http://www.eastsideboxing.com/news.php?p=7034&more=1

Apparently, Roy Jones can knock out Wlad, take decisions over Brewster and Peter, amongst others. But he'll only get a draw with Audley.

That shit is priceless.

lvlarc · Post by **lvlarc** » 24 May 2006, 10:29

WOW

There's far too many quotes in that too take the piss. I'm not even going to bother reading the comments

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 24 May 2006, 10:41

lvlarc_uk wrote:I've only been to Eastside a few times myself but I'm sure the articles are typed up by 15 year olds, so much bullshit floating around plus their spelling and grammar is a joke, it's unbelievable!

I remember seeing an article on the frontpage of eastside claiming Joe only won the Lacy fight from constantly holding and hugging! Hillarious!!

The trouble with Eastside, is they let pretty much ANYONE write for them, and they don't bother editing what's written at all. You might have 1 fantastic fight report, but it will be buried by the other 10 reports on the same fight written by people who know absolutely nothing about the sport.

It's a prolific site, but without proper editing the good writers get buried under an avalanche of shite.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 24 May 2006, 12:20

jamesmcdonnell wrote:Tickertape sites are fine if all you want is news, but the BBC website is often ill informed or behind the breaking news.

There's a lot of garbage writing out there, pure opinion pieces which peddle unsubstantiated rumours as fact, and where personal bias' effectively create stories out of nothing. That isn't journalism it's just bilge.

Yes, the BBC's does have errors (especially in the boxing) - although its such a great site overall... you cannot resist to click onto the boxing.

When it comes to detailed - I'm prepared to wait and read usually boxing monthly.... They have the time to do the big fight preview/review justice and the quality is usually guarenteed - with great pics.

But its fightnews if I cannot wait to see a result, plus some of the articles when you click for more details are pretty good anyway.

pound per pound · Post by **pound per pound** » 26 May 2006, 19:19

Terence wrote:I've always found him phenomenally boring, like most boxing writers, give or take the odd decent one. One thing I did appreciate about him is that he refrains from "getting real/down" and writing like a jive-talking pimp when discussing certain fighters.

Katz has skill as a writer. His problem is he player hates to the nth degree. This burns bridges with fans and the people in boxing. If Katz would just report and write objectively he would be a top dog.

The best boxing writers are dead. The sport hardly gets press these days. Writers make their living writing. DUH. This means the best sports writers avoid covering boxing.

What we are left with are a few passionate sports reporters who only cover boxing because they love it.

Eddie Goldman and Frank Loteziero are two of the best.

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 27 May 2006, 02:28

pound per pound wrote:
Terence wrote:I've always found him phenomenally boring, like most boxing writers, give or take the odd decent one. One thing I did appreciate about him is that he refrains from "getting real/down" and writing like a jive-talking pimp when discussing certain fighters.
Katz has skill as a writer. His problem is he player hates to the nth degree. This burns bridges with fans and the people in boxing. If Katz would just report and write objectively he would be a top dog.

The best boxing writers are dead. The sport hardly gets press these days. Writers make their living writing. DUH. This means the best sports writers avoid covering boxing.

What we are left with are a few passionate sports reporters who only cover boxing because they love it.

Eddie Goldman and Frank Loteziero are two of the best.

in his defense, he's a columnist, so he's entitled to put opinion in. i don't like him however. i actually think thesweetscience is overrated. one week, michael woods actually writes a fornicating article on Bob Arum not calling him back for an interview. very same week katz writes an article on how the fighters that refuse to talk to him - like carlos monzon and frankie randall - are basically nasty pieces of work or simply full of shit. what does anyone think about this shite?

nat gottlieb, charles farrel and greg smith are great writers. gottlieb's writing for us at tigerboxing.com

DavidPayne · Post by **DavidPayne** » 01 Jun 2006, 05:14

I'm not a huge fan of Katz' style, and too many references are closed shop to us Brits but you can't argue with longevity or the vigour with which he approaches different topics. Columnists are paid to have an opinion.

He's obviously a bit of a coup for TSS, where I also feature, but I think the site has stronger columnists.

The late great Pat Putnam is the star of the show, his work is a thing of beauty.

I believe few other sites can match the originality of style and thought that you get on TSS, call me biased I dont mind.

But whilst I respect Max, particularly Probst writing and Fischer's opinion, I think TSS is a step ahead of the rest in terms of quality and originality.

BoxTalk, DogHouse and the rest may drive big numbers to message boards and xerox news features but the TSS site is more thought provoking and original.

Just an opinion, and I have a vested interest as I've declared.

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 01 Jun 2006, 06:52

this is a good site, http://www.tigerboxing.com

DavidPayne · Post by **DavidPayne** » 01 Jun 2006, 07:18

Good luck with it - the Byrd things was good.

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 01 Jun 2006, 07:27

DavidPayne wrote:Good luck with it - the Byrd things was good.

problem is, we only seem to get updated 3x a week

Michael Katz

Katz

Re: Katz