Anyone else think Doug Fischer is a right twat?

[S.G.]

This is for the English posters in this thread.....how is Boxing Monthly?

I've seen their rankings and don't really like them, but have never actually read any articles from it.

I seldom buy it anymore now I get my boxing fix daily and free on sites such as this but I think it's alright. Graham Houston is not without his own biases but he's generally cool and infinitely better than the likes of Dan Rafael. Can't remember any of the other writers off the top of my head I'm afraid; you'd probably find a few more regular readers if you asked in the Global Boxing section.

[Walt Liquor]

That he may be, but he is also Biased, which is pretty much the worst thing a journo can be.

his articles are not biased at all, in his MAILBAG, he allows personal feeling to be involved and that's why its such a popular read. damn ya'll are so shortsighted. I would love for you to present me a biased article he has written that was not in his mailbag...
he gives floyd all kinds of props as a fighter but he doesn't personally like him and i can understand why. in todays mailbag he said that floyd is a genius and he underrated strength and durability by the way. but let me guess, you only heard the parts where he said shane was going to win

[Shadows]

I seldom buy it anymore now I get my boxing fix daily and free on sites such as this but I think it's alright. Graham Houston is not without his own biases but he's generally cool and infinitely better than the likes of Dan Rafael. Can't remember any of the other writers off the top of my head I'm afraid; you'd probably find a few more regular readers if you asked in the Global Boxing section.

I like Graham, he seems to be good from what I've read. Not a big fan of Rafael.

[Sweet Jesus]

I would finish that dude in 3 minutes.

[warp1432]

I would finish that dude in 3 minutes.

So you've officially come out?

[The Hammer]

Honestly, the quality of writing in the Ring has been on an everest style descent for a while now, but Doug Fischer is the biggest single cause of it imo.

I mean when I read a boxing magazine I want to read unbiased, informative articles, but Fischer doesn't even try to hide his incredible levels of bias.

Honestly, i might stop buying the Ring soon, the magazine ius just pretty much a monthly circle jerk to pictures on Manny Pacquiao, it's pathetic.

I find Doug Fischer is usually okay, but he does write some silly stuff from time to time. He really believes Mosley will defeat Mayweather.

Michael Rosenthal has been very good this year, much improved.

Eric Raskin is always a twat.

[Scott9945]

I would finish that dude in 3 minutes.

Must be a hell of a blow job.

[The Hammer]

So what, do you think The Ring is a really good, informal, unbiased magazine?

Some of their p4p and divisional rankings are ridiculous. And some of their writers such as Dettloff and Raskin are absurdly biased against European fighters, including British boxers.

[Sweet Jesus]

So you've officially come out?

Must be a hell of a blow job.

[Heru]

no, but doug fischer is an excellent boxing writer and historian-je knows his stuff, he is not a fan of floyd, but will eat crow like he should if he's wrong (just like I will)

his articles are not biased at all, in his MAILBAG, he allows personal feeling to be involved and that's why its such a popular read. damn ya'll are so shortsighted. I would love for you to present me a biased article he has written that was not in his mailbag...
he gives floyd all kinds of props as a fighter but he doesn't personally like him and i can understand why. in todays mailbag he said that floyd is a genius and he underrated strength and durability by the way. but let me guess, you only heard the parts where he said shane was going to win

Good posts, his mailbags are entertaining and knowledgeable. I've been following them for years and they're part of the reason my interest in boxing has increased throughout the years.

He's one of the best and hardest working writers in the sport. His Mailbag, So Cal notebook, and articles are usually excellent. The mailbags are his personal opinion, I haven't always agreed with it, but I can respect it. You don't have to agree with someone's opinion for them to be quality.

Some of their p4p and divisional rankings are ridiculous. And some of their writers such as Dettloff and Raskin are absurdly biased against European fighters, including British boxers.

Can you be anymore predictable? There rankings have some mistakes, but they are among the best in boxing compared to all the other sites and publications with P4P and divisional rankings (Boxingscene's are pretty good).

I would gladly defend any rankings that you deem "ridiculous", which is an exaggeration in itself.