"Manly Art," by George Kimball

I just discovered this thread a day or two ago. Like the concept. Here's my review of "Manly Art (They Can Run but They Can't Hide)" Thanks for any comments.
_______________________

George Kimball’s Manly Art, (They can run, but they can’t hide) contains a collection of Mr. Kimball’s columns on boxing. If you want information that you might not have known about boxing and its personalities, this is the book for you. He knows his stuff, no doubt about it. He’s done this forever, he knows major figures in the fight game--fighters, promoters, hangers-on--, and he’s an “award winning sports journalist.”

So, why did I find this a tough book to get through? Sad to say, it’s as much about Kimball as it’s about boxing. He’s smarter than anyone else, knows more about boxing than anyone else, and knows who in the boxing world doesn’t deserve to live. He doesn’t say any of this outright, but the implications are strong in pretty much every column. Jose Sulaiman, decades-long president of the WBC, World Boxing Council, is one that Kimball thought the world would better off without. I don’t know that much about Sulaiman, but even if he’s a bad person, this type of comment seems inappropiate to me.

Kimball never met a long sentence he didn’t like, or like to write anyway. It isn’t uncommon for paragraphs in his columns to be a single sentence. Long sentences are fine. Sometimes. Short sentences are fine. Sometimes. Good writers use both. Kimball rambles on, and on, and on, and….well, you get the point.

There’s no index in this book, a minus, and no photographs, a big minus.

I’d recommend reading this book, despite the minuses, solely because the information is worth working for. But I’d also recommend checking it out of your local library rather than buying it. Maybe then, if you like it, buy it.

Any book by David Halbertstam about baseball is a lyrical homage to baseball, even if he had to expose a darker side of the sport. I’d hoped that Manly Art would be the same thing for boxing. Didn’t happen. ( )

There's something off in the review. Can't place my finger on it right now. I'll be back.

It's a good review, insightful and helpful. Reading through it there's nothing jumping out at me. But I see #2's point.

I have a few small corrections and some recommendations:

In the first sentence, you should capitalize the title (though I see on the actual cover it isn't). It just looks weird.

In the third sentence of the first paragraph, I'd recommend changing the sentence a little. The dashes and the comma just look strange. What about: ...in the fight game: fighters, promoters, hangers-on... and he’s an “award winning sports journalist.”

Second sentence of the second paragraph: This one is no biggie, but I would suggest changing the second usage of 'it's' to 'it is'. The first 'it's' feels appropriate, but the second doesn't. I don't have a better explanation than that, so it may just be me.

Fifth sentence of the second paragraph. I think you left out a word. I think it should be ...the world would be better off without.

I think the last three paragraphs have a clunky flow. Nothing there should be cut, but maybe reorganized somehow. The fourth paragraph feels like it is floating out there. And I think the fifth paragraph should be the final one. It seems to sum up your review, then there's one more paragraph. Don't cut the sixth paragraph, but maybe move it up?