Comments on: Video of the Day

By: anita

anita — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 18:27:05 +0000

I am so underwhelmed by this story. Another athlete cheated on his wife. Alert the media…

By: anita

anita — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 18:24:11 +0000

I am so underwhelmed by this story. Another sports person cheated on his wife. AND? Alert the media… men are dogs. HA!

By: Emms

Emms — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 07:06:25 +0000

I know I am a tad bit late with this comment, but you know how it goes: better late than never. I am sure I am not alone in my belief that this situation is more humorous than anything else. I must say that I love the fact that his wife’s instrument of reprimand is his instrument of his success. Even Sir Thomas Wyatt couldn’t have patented a better oxymoron. Cahoots for both creativity and execution.
After hearing about Tiger Woods I can’t lie, I was not surprise. Cheating is something that ordinary men who are on social assistance do all the time, much less a man with the amount of money that he has. Another thought that this situation provoked was the idea that if Tiger was basketball player, no one would care, but he is a golfer. We only paid attention to Kobe’s indiscretions (that’s what they call this slackness right?) when he was charged with rape and gave his wife a rock. Basket ball players do this all the time, and he was really sorry. After all, he gave her a rock that would warm even my black little heart. There are double standards in society and Tiger is just caught in the thick of things. As you said Dr. Hill, a few more swings of the club and it will all be resolved.
Also, although I agree that we shouldn’t feel sorry for any of these women, since sleeping with a married is never right. Yet again I must admit, if that was me, I too would be crying on CNN. Milking that rich cow for what it’s worth. At least get a semester or two of tuition out of it… I’m joking. I think…

Also Dr. Hill you should post something from your CNN debate today regarding Obama and the way he handled the terroist debate, so we can weigh in on something of substance (no offence…you are still awesome ) …I just have a few comments.

By: james

james — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 15:42:07 +0000

dc, i understand quite well how golf scoring works. regardless, the golfer plays “on” the course, not “against” the course. he plays against his opponents. par is really only a measurement tool, and a fairly objective one at that, usually based on distance. the notion of par came into existence long after dudes were already competing on golf courses.

let me ask you this: could we compete on a golf course without any knowledge of par? par is an interesting afterthought, and helps in handicapping, but is not crucial to the main idea of competition that golf is based upon, which is, of course, clubbing a small round object into a hole using the least amount of time and effort.

By: DCI74

DCI74 — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 02:06:22 +0000

No james I am not wrong and actually neither are you. Each golfer is playing against both the established par course score while also competing against other players if playing as part of a tandem or in a competition. That is why the commentators always describe a players score as “x” under par. However golf is technically not a team sport which is why I can play by myself and still keep score because the challenge is to finish all 18 holes with the least amount of strokes under par.

By: james

james — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 19:43:43 +0000

no, you’re wrong about golfers not competing against other players. without the other players, there is no competition, no reason to keep score, no way of developing handicaps and what not. granted, because golf courses and conditions vary from place to place, a golfer will have to make decisions about how to play certain holes, but for the most part, it’s still golf, and most players don’t usually walk around the course alone, unless they are only practicing. golfers don’t draw audiences in the absence of direct head-to-head and well-paid, well-respected sporting competition. blogging could only ever be an indirect competition, blogging is an art-and not a highly respected or remunerated–art. therefore, the practioners of golf and blogging are held to different and various standards.

what makes the ryder cup unique is it’s team aspect.

again, see hawthorne’s scarlett letter for america’s primary perspective on sin and privacy.

By: DCI74

DCI74 — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 19:15:59 +0000

Ok but a blogger without an audience is no different than they guy who talks to himself on the back of the subway car, so a blogger needs people to consistently visit their site in order to give legitimacy to their perspective or writing style the same way a golfer draws a physical audience to the course when they play and a viewing audience to the television. Golfers do not compete against each other, 95% of the time they are competing against the course. There are only a few tournaments where they are actually competing head to head with another golfer and those would be tournaments like the Ryder Cup and skins games but either way if people don’t buy tickets and no one watches then the advertisers don’t support which impacts the purses and future sponsorships. There will always be winning golfers but there’s no fame or fortune without the people who are needed by the sponsors. That is exactly why there’s the PGA Tour (major leagues) and the Nike Tour (minor leagues). It’s a fact that tournaments where Tiger doesn’t play has smaller purses and smaller viewing audiences. It’s also been proven that ratings go down for tournaments when Tiger falls out of contention by the 3rd or 4th day because many people tune in simply to see him play.

So how about the rule that involvement in a crime or an indecent act means an immediate loss of privacy? And who decides what act is considered indecent?

By: james

james — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 18:50:28 +0000

bloggers generally grow their audience through the sharing of written words, much of which are highly personal reactions to various topics. golfers generally develop audiences by winning lots of tournaments in head to head competitions. winning golfers get lots of fame and money. “winning bloggers” is an oxymoron.

By: DCI74

DCI74 — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 18:29:16 +0000

@ james please explain how golfers don’t cultivate an audience the way bloggers do. Also where is this rule that says when a person is involved in a crime or indecent act they lose all rights to privacy?

By: james

james — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 18:00:42 +0000

no, definitely no right to privacy when you are involved in crimes or indecent acts (see hawthorne’s scarlet letter). also, dc, your analogy of the popular blogger being held accountable by his audience does not really apply to tiger woods. golfers don’t cultivate an audience and fans the way bloggers do; therefore, they probably aren’t held to the same social standards. also, an athlete such as woods will be judged differently when you consider he has basically become an entire franchise/corporation.