BoxRec

grannyman wrote:Back in day they didn't have the internet for information. All the 'news' in Boxing News is published way before their latest issue on the internet anyway. I actually prefer to pay for Boxing Monthly because I'd rather read proper articles about boxers/promotors/trainers rather than news that I've already seen online.

You hit on one good point. The one clear flaw I'd identify in BN (which for my money has improved under Tris' editorship) is giving up column inches to fight reports that are barely more than listings i.e. fighter x beat fighter y by unan points decision. Fighter x won the first four rounds, shared the fifth and regained control in the sixth. It's an anachronism that offers little by way of reader value.

This is exactly the type of info you can get from the net - the reason you'll purchase a print mag is to get insight and and exclusive information based on the unique accesss the BN journos can get. For my money there's still not enough of this e.g. in the wake of the 'headline' fight of the week in the UK, getting direct quotes post-bout from the participants and key members of their camps getting their thoughts and opinions, as well as 'experts' in the audience.

i really like it, well done to tris and the team its kept improving since claude left

Final round wrote:Instead of Mosley *yawn posing well oiled there should be a shot from the biggest fight of the weekend which I supposecould have been Segura battering Calderon or how about Murray getting brusied up by the Spaniard.
It's important to showcase the most well matched, awesome performance or surprising result rather than just having the usual suspects on the cover.

Disagree with that. As with all magazines/websites you have to appeal to as many people as possible in order to maximise sales.
For example if a music magazine had Cheryl Cole on it would shift a load more copies than having a picture of Shane McGowan on it!

pyenest77 wrote:

Final round wrote:Instead of Mosley *yawn posing well oiled there should be a shot from the biggest fight of the weekend which I supposecould have been Segura battering Calderon or how about Murray getting brusied up by the Spaniard.
It's important to showcase the most well matched, awesome performance or surprising result rather than just having the usual suspects on the cover.

Disagree with that. As with all magazines/websites you have to appeal to as many people as possible in order to maximise sales.
For example if a music magazine had Cheryl Cole on it would shift a load more copies than having a picture of Shane McGowan on it!

Err... we're kind of done and dusted on that point already

I'll have to buy a copy to see what its like, next time I'm buying Boxing Monthly. Haven't read Boxing News for years - Is Claude Abram still incharge?

Tris dixon adds a hell of a lot as both a writer and editor.....the thread starter is obviously living in the past.....bn may have been the "trade" paper of the 50s but these days websites like this one provide that service for results and records not a boxing newspaper......the fact is we live in an age where the written printed word is at more of a threat than ever.....the fact a 3 quid a week journal with so called "outdated" news can thrive in this day and age says a lot for its present editorship.....dixon wrote some terrific old pro down at heel articles to make his name....and now he has added that element to the mag as well as columns by calzaghe/woodhall and atlas which offer an exclusive opinion.....do away with scully though who cares what he thinks he is hardly a household name.

Well I strode out and bought myself a copy and I've enjoyed what I've read so far the Dixon column was good and the Bob Mee Obituary for Gil Clancy is excellent. the style and layout seems fine not sure what the fuss is all about.

DIRT SUGAR wrote:Wish I could comment but mine didn't come in the bloody post this morning!

Same here! :(

Its my Friday bathtime read, and my Mum still buys it for me.

Is that wrong for 39 year old bloke?

every year i say i'll buy it , but she won't let me. good old Mum eh!!

To be fair, I think papers like that needed to change. With the internet, a weekly paper was hardly going to be providing "news" any more. Discussions of shows are on forums within minutes- why wait days for a paper?

For sure, they can be good for previews etc, and features and stories. I'd buy it to read if needed to kill some time etc, but wouldn't go out of my way to get it.

whicker wrote:To be fair, I think papers like that needed to change. With the internet, a weekly paper was hardly going to be providing "news" any more. Discussions of shows are on forums within minutes- why wait days for a paper?

For sure, they can be good for previews etc, and features and stories. I'd buy it to read if needed to kill some time etc, but wouldn't go out of my way to get it.

thats what i meant about in an earlier post, they have started a 'star' rating for fights and Ademek v McBride gets 1 star , but a full page preview. The Star show from Japan gets less than a quarter page preview! so why is this?

mugabi wrote:Tris dixon adds a hell of a lot as both a writer and editor.....the thread starter is obviously living in the past.....bn may have been the "trade" paper of the 50s but these days websites like this one provide that service for results and records not a boxing newspaper......the fact is we live in an age where the written printed word is at more of a threat than ever.....the fact a 3 quid a week journal with so called "outdated" news can thrive in this day and age says a lot for its present editorship.....dixon wrote some terrific old pro down at heel articles to make his name....and now he has added that element to the mag as well as columns by calzaghe/woodhall and atlas which offer an exclusive opinion.....do away with scully though who cares what he thinks he is hardly a household name.

The problem with Scully is that every column he writes is about Roy Jones and how he sparred with him.

No complaints here, was tip top.

Old bones Ian wrote:Its my Friday bathtime read, and my Mum still buys it for me.

Is that wrong for 39 year old bloke?

every year i say i'll buy it , but she won't let me. good old Mum eh!!

And mine get if from the market, a couple of cold beers and a nice warm bath after work. (It sounds cranky but I really look forward to it mid week).

Would like to congratulate boxing news on what is a great redesign.

I was apprehensive at first but all magazines need to evolve and move with the times especially in this digital age.

The magazine seems slicker but filled with more bitesize type bits of info the type of lists and shorter articles which mean you put it down and pick it up again later to have another proper look through after having read the fight previews. I think it is important the historical aspect of relating current boxing events back to previous ones and how they compare is important in continuity of establishing how our current boxing scene relates to previous era's.

All in all good redesign i look forward to the continued evolution of boxing news

I like the changes. For me they've not made a bad change the whole time I've been buying it (20 years). I was never mad keen on the larger format but I hated the old bw one anyway so it was a change for the better.

wrimc wrote:Would like to congratulate boxing news on what is a great redesign.

I was apprehensive at first but all magazines need to evolve and move with the times especially in this digital age.

The magazine seems slicker but filled with more bitesize type bits of info the type of lists and shorter articles which mean you put it down and pick it up again later to have another proper look through after having read the fight previews. I think it is important the historical aspect of relating current boxing events back to previous ones and how they compare is important in continuity of establishing how our current boxing scene relates to previous era's.

All in all good redesign i look forward to the continued evolution of boxing news

I agree with this. I was surprised but pretty happy with the redesign. I quite like the little snippets here and there.

Sometimes the page can look a bit busy, but I think it looks modern - as long as the articles are well written, I like all the little bits of info.

Content's still as good, just a few more bells and whistles on the look. Not bad.

Have to say, it does make me feel rather old. Lots of visual whizz bang.

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:Have to say, it does make me feel rather old. Lots of visual whizz bang.

It kind of reminds me of a lads mag type format in a way and this isn't a derogatory comment.

Its the type of mag now that has a few quality reviews features and previews then the rest is full up with as much info as possible rumours news lists snippets and thats good because it means you dont read it all at once there is so much info in it it makes you want to decipher through it because you are interested. You can read what catches your eye at first glance then go back and find something new everytime.