BoxRec

Reading article on Gleason's and this week's interview with Nathan Cleverly today and think BN have unearthed a real gem. Really good interview, well written, asks tough questions, dare I say shades of the late Harry Mullan. And seems like a man loving what he does. Good stuff.

DIRT SUGAR wrote:Reading article on Gleason's and this week's interview with Nathan Cleverly today and think BN have unearthed a real gem. Really good interview, well written, asks tough questions, dare I say shades of the late Harry Mullan. And seems like a man loving what he does. Good stuff.

Cheers Danny

I think the articles in recent BN have been top notch, James Tillis etc.
I know BN gets a bit slated on here, i've been reading it for 25 years now (i never realised)
and its the best by miles.

I think it's a great magazine, bit biased as have freelanced there but really have always looked forward to reading it and think the new team are doing well.

DIRT SUGAR wrote:Reading article on Gleason's and this week's interview with Nathan Cleverly today and think BN have unearthed a real gem. Really good interview, well written, asks tough questions, dare I say shades of the late Harry Mullan. And seems like a man loving what he does. Good stuff.

Thats really nice of u thanks. I absolutely love what I do and our team are very talented but as much as I love praise, especially from forum fans because theyre so knowledgeable, I'm not yet fit to lace Harry's boots

Last weeks interview with Donnie Fleeman was very moving too.

I'm back in the UK for a week and so picked it up this morning and think it's the strongest it ever has been as an overall package. I also thought the Cleverley interview was top notch and a perfect case study of what can still be done better in print than online (for now!).
Danny, if I was to feed back one minor criticism it would be that I find it impossible to find the rationale behind covering an undercard in name only i.e. the round-up in the last few paragraphs saying fighter x beat fighter y - it serves no practical purpose as far as I can tell and just absorbs space that could best used in another manner.
For example, on the Molina/Lundy report it says: "New England's Dustin Reinhold (11st), 2-1 (2) stopped Allentown's Joel Nieves (10st 13lbs), 0-3, at 1-47 of the first round in a four."
To which, the somewhat inevitable response is 'how is this remotely of interest/relevance to me?". It either needs further context to justify it in term of background on one or both the fighters, and/or the action in the fight itself, otherwise it's surely just a waste of space.
To my mind, it's the complete opposite of the Cleverley article in that the net does this sort of thing far better than print - Boxrec being the perfect example. It's only going to be of interest to a few stat 'geeks' and they'll be online anyway.
I just get the impression it's a 'hangover' from the old days in that these undercard details are done simply because they always have been, rather than anyone on the team taking a step back and questioning their relevance to the reader. At the very least it's surely more practical to either have that detail in a 'box-out' at the end of the article or on a summary page at the back of the book, much like the fight listings page? This would give room to breathe for more quality content.

my copy has been delivered late 3 weeks in a row...sort it out flex

BN is the best out there, and I have read them all over the years, but since Tris Dixon took over they seem to have less articles like where are they now and body and soul has gone...and since fighting fit came out there are no fitness articles..and i cant afford both.

IMO Flexen's work has gone up several notches in the last 12 months.

Clev article was quality.

Early days of Dixon's editorship are very promising.

BN is very good, only a short head behind BM

Oh to be young and working at BN. Mullan said, in all the years he was there, he never ever felt like he was going to work, which sums it up. Mullan was a truly great writer but also one of the laziest, most disorganized men you could ever meet. That was part of his genius, the inevitable flaws.

Thanks for the feedback. As the 'magazine of record' we aim to include as many results as possible though I take your point and we will consider it. As regards the other comments, Where Are They Now still appears every month -Billy Hardy next week - Joe Rein simply stopped writing Body and Soul, to quote the Killers, For Reasons Unknown, which is a real shame and yes, all fitness content now goes in Fighting Fit. Even before FF we had very little fitness stuff in the weekly BN but our special supplements - Training, Nutrition and Technique - did really well and FF was born.

I've been reading for 20 years, but each week the photo of Tris Dixon really annoys me for some reason.

dbflex wrote:Thanks for the feedback. As the 'magazine of record' we aim to include as many results as possible.

I guess that's exactly my point Danny - what does 'magazine of record' actually mean to anyone in this era? You can't compete with a medium like Boxrec in terms of being 'of record' or as a reference tool, so why waste time trying and instead focus on what you can do better.
The worst reason ever given in any business for doing something is "because that's how we've always done it". By contrast, all the best operations, whether those are magazines or clothes shops, constantly re-evaluate what they are doing with the aim of delivering a better service.
I think BN seems to have used the transition to a new editor to do this to good effect in most areas - really like the guest columnists etc - but would be nice to see it continue to go from strength to strength.
On a related note, the one thing I'm curious about is why BN doesn't appear to make the most of the period between Friday night fights and going to press to do some stronger pieces on the aftermath of a fight? After all the mag has unique access and so a phone interview in the wake of a classic or controversial bout could make for great reading e.g. imagine speaking to both Macklin and Moore a couple of days after their barnstormer to find out their thoughts once they've had time to take in the enormity of what they'd been involved in, finding out how much it took out of them physically etc? Gold dust content, in my opinion.

Deserter wrote:

dbflex wrote:Thanks for the feedback. As the 'magazine of record' we aim to include as many results as possible.

I guess that's exactly my point Danny - what does 'magazine of record' actually mean to anyone in this era? You can't compete with a medium like Boxrec in terms of being 'of record' or as a reference tool, so why waste time trying and instead focus on what you can do better.
The worst reason ever given in any business for doing something is "because that's how we've always done it". By contrast, all the best operations, whether those are magazines or clothes shops, constantly re-evaluate what they are doing with the aim of delivering a better service.
I think BN seems to have used the transition to a new editor to do this to good effect in most areas - really like the guest columnists etc - but would be nice to see it continue to go from strength to strength.
On a related note, the one thing I'm curious about is why BN doesn't appear to make the most of the period between Friday night fights and going to press to do some stronger pieces on the aftermath of a fight? After all the mag has unique access and so a phone interview in the wake of a classic or controversial bout could make for great reading e.g. imagine speaking to both Macklin and Moore a couple of days after their barnstormer to find out their thoughts once they've had time to take in the enormity of what they'd been involved in, finding out how much it took out of them physically etc? Gold dust content, in my opinion.

You're right and we do this but it is generally included in the report itself. As for the results comments we'll give them some thought

orbtastic wrote:I've been reading for 20 years, but each week the photo of Tris Dixon really annoys me for some reason.

Pissing myself. We get the live version 5 days a week so imagine how we feel (just kidding boss)

dbflex wrote:

orbtastic wrote:I've been reading for 20 years, but each week the photo of Tris Dixon really annoys me for some reason.

Pissing myself. We get the live version 5 days a week so imagine how we feel (just kidding boss)

its just a bad pic..they got him to pose like Alan B'Stard in the New Statesmen...how about a different pic in tru boxer pose, with either the fist up, or the "number 1" finger salute?!

Tris is quite a striking chap from the little I've seen him, so it must be a dodgy pic. His treks to the States to interview the old light-heavyweight greats, including Yaqui Lopez and his bad back, made me wince a little. This guy paid his dues.

I've got to say I'm really enjoying Boxing News at the moment. I mentioned to Danny the other day how much I liked that Gleasons gym piece of his. The Tate story (not that Danny wrote it) was fascinating too. Bob Mee's the most knowledgable man I've ever met in boxing, so giving him a guest spot was a top idea. Also Teddy Atlas, might not be everyone's cup of tea but he does have amazing psycholigical insight into the game. The last couple of paragraphs of his Zab Judah analysis were spot on.

The first piece Haye did was awful, he turned every single comment about an upcoming fight back to himself.

ed robinson wrote:I've got to say I'm really enjoying Boxing News at the moment. I mentioned to Danny the other day how much I liked that Gleasons gym piece of his. The Tate story (not that Danny wrote it) was fascinating too. Bob Mee's the most knowledgable man I've ever met in boxing, so giving him a guest spot was a top idea. Also Teddy Atlas, might not be everyone's cup of tea but he does have amazing psycholigical insight into the game. The last couple of paragraphs of his Zab Judah analysis were spot on.

I wholeheartedly agree about the Bob Mee comment and having his input gives BN much more weight.
Saying that as a whole I am really liking BN at mo it seems to have a new vibrancy

The content in Boxing News has been top drawer for a while now.

I'll be surprised if the New York feature on Gleason's Gym is bettered all year.

A top magazine but I still prefer the newspaper format

Chris W 1982 wrote: A top magazine but I still prefer the newspaper format

Surely you dont mean that huge, unwieldy broadsheet sizing that they had going on a decade or so ago?!...

If so, you are on your own there mate!

TerribleTerry wrote:

Chris W 1982 wrote: A top magazine but I still prefer the newspaper format

Surely you dont mean that huge, unwieldy broadsheet sizing that they had going on a decade or so ago?!...

If so, you are on your own there mate!

That's the one. The one they were using before they went to the new A4 mag about 5 years ago.

I'm well aware I'm on my own mate

bennie wrote:Tris is quite a striking chap from the little I've seen him, so it must be a dodgy pic.

He's the best dressed ringside reporter that's for sure! Some people think he's the ref when he turns up in a suit.

Needs to ditch the Micra though. 8)

Poncey wrote:

bennie wrote:Tris is quite a striking chap from the little I've seen him, so it must be a dodgy pic.

He's the best dressed ringside reporter that's for sure! Some people think he's the ref when he turns up in a suit.

Needs to ditch the Micra though. 8)

That used to happen to Claude all the time, though strangely only when Ian John-Lewis was reffing!