BoxRec

jimmystone wrote: ↑06 May 2022, 14:44 Is it woke or is it an attempt to increase their business? I haven't bought a magazine in at least 20 years. My Mrs is subscribed to four. That's anecdotal, I know, but there is zero chance of me ever buying Boxing News, there is a better than zero chance of my Mrs buying it. Women are better spenders/more impulsive than men.

I get it on an app, £7.99 a month. All your Mrs's mags are probably on it a well as 1000's of others and newspapers from all over the world, every day. All backdated, too.

mickey1975 wrote: ↑06 May 2022, 14:55

jimmystone wrote: ↑06 May 2022, 14:44 Is it woke or is it an attempt to increase their business? I haven't bought a magazine in at least 20 years. My Mrs is subscribed to four. That's anecdotal, I know, but there is zero chance of me ever buying Boxing News, there is a better than zero chance of my Mrs buying it. Women are better spenders/more impulsive than men.

I get it on an app, £7.99 a month. All your Mrs's mags are probably on it a well as 1000's of others and newspapers from all over the world, every day. All backdated, too.

She has tried the apps but prefers getting the magazines through the post. Looks forward to it. I don't do much online, I look on here, catch up on my MMA, scan the news and do my tax, That's it really.

Edit: sorry, mate, do you mean you have one app for £7.99 that does the lot? If so, can you get it on a laptop or does it have to be on a phone. My eyes are crap nowadays and I don't use a smartphone? If so, that sounds like a good deal, send me a link please. Cheers.

Not everything the majority on this forum doesn't particularly enjoy needs to be identified as part of some woke conspiracy/agenda. Especially not the trade magazine using a slightly hyperbolic headline.

The fight was a big deal, with loads of media interest, it sold well and did good viewing numbers (by today's standards). None of which was due to "lefties" holding a knife to anyone's throat.

I don't particularly enjoy watching women's boxing - but that's just a personal preference and I accept that clearly a lot of other people do. Quite possibly younger and female, heaven forbid.

The world moves on and I've no wish to mutate into the boxing fan version of a proverbial early 80s dad, tutting over his paper at androgynous pop stars on Top of the Pops.

£7.99 the lot. I know it goes on kindles etc, not sure about a laptop. I got a 3 month free trial.

Oh, and I've subscribed to Boxing News for almost 30 years, and Matt Christie is as good an editor as I can recall (although I can't really remember much of Harry Mullan's work, which was by all accounts often brilliant).

Some of the articles during the last couple of years (particularly during lockdown when there were no shows to report on) have been fantastic.

I think Boxing News spoofed in their underpants with this cover.
The Shields Marshall fight will probably be more entertaining. If they must herald womans boxing, why not do it with a fight that has greater possibility if being entertaining?
Of the four belt unification fights this century, the Taylor Serrano fight has to be the least entertaining.
I thought Canelo Plant wasn't that great, but I would rather watch that twice than Taylor Serrano once.

Coco wrote: ↑06 May 2022, 14:08

Bigdogsnose wrote: ↑06 May 2022, 05:24 Wait till you get marshall v shields at newcastle arena 'second best fight of the century'

Dunno mate, isn't the power punching Shields the GOAT! Esp if Marshall wins it will be like Stracey v Palimino, Honeyghan v Curry, McGuigan v Pedroza

Be up there with all of them! 'The beat doon in the toon'....The GOAT! Ha! She talks some sh*te. Joking aside it is the only womens fight i'd be interested in. Marshall will splatter her.

I suppose if they want to make greater sales of their publication then putting women boxers on the cover could attract potential subscriptions

Crazy thing is, was it a good fight?

First 3 rounds were trash. 4th eh, Exciting 5th. Both seemed to rest 6th 7th 8th 9th. and then exciting last min of the 10th.

It was a good fight cause it was close, but i wouldent consider it an instant classic other than the 5th (i think) when serrano was battering taylor, and the end of the 10th when they just threw down.

Goes to show how a moment can change a narrative, if they hugged out the 10th this fight would of been remembered as mediocre.

First podcast episode I didn't get through. It was a bit much the fawning over it.
It's good to champion womens boxing and it's going in the right direction, but can see why it's a bit grating for some people.