1) Do other niche sports
>magazines go into as much detail about past
>results as T&FN does? Broad-interest sports
>magazines (like SI, ESPN, and The Sporting News)
>simply do not. In other words, is it the norm do
>devote so much space to things your readers
>already know fairly well (and to hype things that
>have already happened as "coming in our next
The "broad-interest" magazines you cite have a huge difference over T&FN: frequency. SI comes out weekly, the other two every two weeks. So in doing the same kind of comprehensive coverage that a monthly does their stuff is never more than a quarter or half as old.
T&FN is at a crossroads. When it started, it really was about news, because there were very few other places you could get the in-depth results coverage or commentary that it provided. As recently as 1995 it was still primarily in that business, but the direction had to move more towards commentary. Now that we're fully on-line with results, T&FN only serves a 'results' purpose as an archive of what we've already read on-line. T&FN may see eTN as a marketing tool, but in actuality that's where they are going to have to go to remain viable in the E-news Age. The paper version will exist for 20 more years, but move much more towards the 'upcoming attractions' reports, together with the in-depth athlete profiles. RW on-line is ahead of the curve with their daily news. I hope gh and co. see the writing on the wall and invest some time and energy (probably won't take a lot of $$$) to seek how to become a subscribable web source of info as well. If they can do what RW does for distance runners (some say joggers), their numbers will start going up again. Unfortunately, this is easier said than done. What do we want and what will we pay for it? Is there a survey of 'readership' forthcoming? I'm for whatever helps them survive and thrive.
Got my July issue when I arrived home tonight and thought I'd do an unrequested reader survey. I traditionally read it the day I receive it and used to spend between 60-90 minutes doing so. Tonight took 27 minutes and I have really developed an attitude of "lets get through it as fast as possible" attitude. Why would I read every word about the NCAA's when I knew what happened weeks ago? Ditto to "Track Shorts" (which I normally enjoy) because it was also old news. I only fully read the athlete bio's in the first 38 pages, just scanned the rest. Only other interest was the ads (use me as a testimonial if you like!). I've been thinking about not renewing my subscription for a few years now but I do simply to support T&F in general, despite other posts, $40 is nothing these days.
I liked the pictures of Jaworski, Wilson et al, but I'm not 8 years old, I'd like to be able to read articles on analysis, bio's, history etc. Right now T&FN is an obsolete resource for me and I'm a 30 year hard-core fan.
Here's a quiz...there's a typo in there. Who else spotted it?
It depends how you use the magazine. For me its very helpful to have the results shown. I use the magazine for reference, not just currently, but over a period of time. Having all the magazines (photocopies for some of the earlier years) over its 55 year life means that I can refer easily to any major event or meeting of the second half of the 20th century. Now I suspect that this is highly unusual for a T&FN reader, but I'll always make room for T&FN on my bookshelves (who needs Sartre or Shakespeare)
I think richardh expresses my views as well. I'm a fan of the sport, but also enjoy the history as well. The magazine allows for written documentation of the sport, and I can't count the times I have pulled out an old issue to enjoy. The internet is great, but nothing can replace the print and pictures of the magazine.
richardh, I have them all too ! And like you and El Supremo, they make a great resource tool with a fair measure of infrequency, plus sometimes it's just fun to pull out a buch from a random year and l=rread them.... did that last night with 1988.