For those not familiar with me, you should know that I’m not one of those boxing trivia nerds who waxes poetic about old boxing scribes or one of those guys who thinks that, because they once read an article in an old magazine about some booze-addled Irish boxer in the 30′s, they actually know something about the sport. I get no tingling feeling from clutching old Ring Almanacs nor do I secretly pine away to be a member of the boxing writer fraternity.
I have no warm, fuzzy feeling about the old school of boxing journalism or about token pieces of boxing nostalgia. Again, as I say over and over, my only loyalty is to the fighters and the fans. Pundits, experts, and half-baked shills from all generations don’t interest me at all.
And that brings us to Ring Magazine.
While the self-proclaimed “Bible of Boxing” certainly exists as part of boxing history, it has become laughably irrelevant and in desperate need of a quick mercy killing.
As tough as this may be to accept for some of those die-hard Ring lovers, the magazine fails on every level and is just sinking deeper and deeper into the hole they created for themselves by over-reaching and over-stroking their bloated egos.
As a news source, their four-month-old fight reports are about as useful as, well, a four-month-old fight report. Unless Ring Magazine’s target demographic is elderly mountain men who are afraid of computers, the company completely fails as a real news provider. And its website, filled with not-so-veiled infomercials for owner, Golden Boy, makes these “major” boxing sites that routinely fill their front pages with puff bio pieces about sponsors’ fighters, look absolutely legitimate in comparison.
