What makes a good race report?

[LYNX]

Every reader knows a bad race report when they read it - but what factors do you measure a good one by? Is it colour photographs of the cars and drivers linked with minimum words, an article that mentions the battle for the podium in detail, further information about the classes, results, accuracy, the big meetings, a known "name" writing it, the magazine's ethos, style of writer, editorial influence, length etc?

[minimangler]

Informative, interesting, good background, not too much technical stuff, and the full results separately.

[Ian Sowman]

It completely depends on the target audience - who do you have in mind?

[simon drabble]

HMRN reports are normally good as they have full results at the end and some colour on the race

[LYNX]

Originally Posted by Ian Sowman

It completely depends on the target audience - who do you have in mind?

I have no individual in mind, just interested in what the Historic Forum members think!

[Tim Falce]

There's a big difference between a report for a magazine and say a club web site, the audience would be different.

[LYNX]

Originally Posted by falcemob

There's a big difference between a report for a magazine and say a club web site, the audience would be different.

I agree, but what do YOU look for?

[Tim Falce]

Originally Posted by LYNX

I agree, but what do YOU look for?

My name

[DanWray]

Originally Posted by simon drabble

HMRN reports are normally good as they have full results at the end and some colour on the race

HMRN? - is that the Haematological Malignancy Research Network or Her Majesty's Royal Navy?

Interesting, i didn't know either were big followers of the historic motorsports scene

[LYNX]

Originally Posted by DanWray

HMRN? - is that the Haematological Malignancy Research Network or Her Majesty's Royal Navy?

Interesting, i didn't know either were big followers of the historic motorsports scene

For the record HMRN is Historic Motor Racing News, 14 years of publication by subscription.

[Ian Sowman]

What do I look for? Concise, well written copy with relevant and interesting information that cannot be deduced solely from examining the results sheet or lap chart, but above all, is written with the target audience in mind.

A sense of story - getting the right angle on the race - is important too.

The audience IS the key thing though. In the reports on FF1600.co.uk we tried to mention as many people as possible, but that is simply not appropriate for wider publication in a more general magazine, such as Autosport.

[Derwent Motorsp]

There are very few good race reports now. Motoring News is rubbish. You would think that they would give bigger reports to events that had big spectator numbers and then pro rata. The classic events, even Goodwood, don't get as much as the F3 that are attended by 3 men and a dog. BTCC get bigger reports than classic events that pull in more punters. No one sales are slipping.

[DAVID PATERSON]

Originally Posted by Ian Sowman

The audience IS the key thing though. In the reports on FF1600.co.uk we tried to mention as many people as possible, but that is simply not appropriate for wider publication in a more general magazine, such as Autosport.

That's true. If you're writing for a club magazine, it's almost imperative that you mention everyone, by name. If you're writing for the mass market, just report on the front runners, the big names and anything particularly significant or unusual.

[john ruston]

Being one of HMRN biggest fans( in many senses) I am disappointed at their present reporting standards.Both the Tour Auto and LMC coverage were non existing or in the case of LMC opinionated drivel without any fact.Seems to have gone downhill since Motorsport got involved and Carol moved.The less said about the new look Motorsport the better,no knowledge and very little sense.
There is not one publication that reports on Historic Racing with any degree of professionalism.This is not to say there is not the odd decent piece and I am sure the Oldtimers in HMRN will be superb!

The French have a Historic Motor Racing mag why not us

[simon drabble]

The problem is that in Carol's day it was run as a hobby lie her series. Today they are run as a business - passion replaced by adverts!

[LYNX]

Originally Posted by john ruston

Being one of HMRN biggest fans( in many senses) I am disappointed at their present reporting standards.Both the Tour Auto and LMC coverage were non existing or in the case of LMC opinionated drivel without any fact.Seems to have gone downhill since Motorsport got involved and Carol moved.The less said about the new look Motorsport the better,no knowledge and very little sense.
There is not one publication that reports on Historic Racing with any degree of professionalism.This is not to say there is not the odd decent piece and I am sure the Oldtimers in HMRN will be superb!

The French have a Historic Motor Racing mag why not us

Bit of a contradiction John. On one hand you are saying you used to be one of HMRN's biggest fans but do not like the present content. On the other, you ask why we don't a Historic Motor Racing mag like the French - so what is HMRN? AND what do you want!

[terence]

One of the reasons I cancelled HMRN was because,as has been said,the reporting went down to a minimum when Carrol gave it up,not much of a magazine now!

[simon drabble]

Originally Posted by LYNX

Bit of a contradiction John. On one hand you are saying you used to be one of HMRN's biggest fans but do not like the present content. On the other, you ask why we don't a Historic Motor Racing mag like the French - so what is HMRN? AND what do you want!

SHOCK HORROR - JR accused of being a wind up merchant ;o) I think he was basically saying that it has gone off the boil of late - being the biggest fan was merely a double entendre..

[LYNX]

Originally Posted by simon drabble

SHOCK HORROR - JR accused of being a wind up merchant ;o) I think he was basically saying that it has gone off the boil of late - being the biggest fan was merely a double entendre..

Well I took him seriously and was curious as to what he really wanted!

[simon drabble]

he does have a point though - it is not as readable as days of old. The problem was before it was a newsletter and quite intimate in its style but it is now half way between a magazine and newsletter and does fall between two stools. It is however the best outside the club magazines (like HSCC Newsletter)

[Ian Sowman]

Originally Posted by Derwent Motorsp

There are very few good race reports now. Motoring News is rubbish. You would think that they would give bigger reports to events that had big spectator numbers and then pro rata. The classic events, even Goodwood, don't get as much as the F3 that are attended by 3 men and a dog. BTCC get bigger reports than classic events that pull in more punters. No one sales are slipping.

But MN isn't really targeted at the historic fraternity to any great degree, so the emphasis is different.

[john ruston]

I was one of its biggest fans but like Motorsport it has gone ,the best one could say is off the boil.I have previously pushed it on this Forum but no longer.Certain things such as the Abbey problem and Driller Sheldon's letters are very good but in general the reporting of race meetings is not the same standard as the French Mag.

[John Turner]

This is all a bit worrying, John, when you consider that the latest edition of HMRN contains reports from David Addison, Paul Lawrence and Marcus Pye! If these guys don't know what they are talking about, there's no hope for the rest of us!

[LYNX]

Originally Posted by John Turner

This is all a bit worrying, John, when you consider that the latest edition of HMRN contains reports from David Addison, Paul Lawrence and Marcus Pye! If these guys don't know what they are talking about, there's no hope for the rest of us!

Maybe John Ruston knows what he wants and we're all different - but I must agree with you John Turner.

[John Turner]

Hey, Jill, it was an observation; I'm sitting on the fence (for the moment!!) like any good (or bad) mod!!