As IF Times

link Matthew DeBord: Tiger Woods Is So, So, So Much Bigger Than Golf

As if. So much ink has been spilled on the recently exposed adventures of Eldrick Woods that I’ve avoided adding any more to the pool of opinions out in Lake Tsk Tsk. This piece however, begs to be exposed as hyperbole of the worst kind:

“…But I will talk about golf. Specifically, the delusional notion, put forward by many pros, commentators, experts, and pundits, that the game is bigger than Tiger and will survive, recover, thrive. Um, no. The game is in no way bigger than Tiger. In fact, Tiger is so immensely, hugely, ginormously larger than mere golf that golf may never recover from this monumental fall from grace….”

Cue to stop laughing. A few clicks on google will show that there have been purported instances of golf since 1750 and some even claim as far back as 1450. Certainly, in the 1860’s in Scotland, Old Tom Morris (not to be confused with young Tom, differentiated by beard length ) was the Tiger of his time; minus the sponsors but arguably sartorially superior. Any real fan of golf will know the names of Vardon, Sarazen, Jones, Nelson and of course in recent times, the great Palmer and Nicklaus. Now I’m not saying this kid Tiger has no talent, but despite the Golf Channel’s MTVish spin on it, Tiger was not responsible for the popularity of golf, the related golf course development industry, the charity associations or the ongoing interest of addicted men (mostly) to the game. We cannot deny Tiger’s influence on purse sizes and no doubt, this will be affected in the short term, but golf was fine as a pursuit before Tiger made it “cool” and will continue to be so in the years to come. Middle aged men don’t care about cool. Has anyone noticed some of the pants they wear, some of which resemble eye tests and bring on nausea if stared at for too long?

The emergence of Tiger’s dominance of the game combined with the genius of Nike recognizing this talent at an early age has pushed the game of golf into the realm of everyman…and this was not the case before. If fact, this may not even be desirable. I think the author of the article really means that marketing ICON Tiger Woods is at jeopardy, not the game of golf. Using anecdotal evidence based on that dependable source, namely me, most golf shops and pro shops will tell you that traditional golf equipment suppliers still command the spending of real golfers. Nike has certainly made inroads into the equipment business, but most pros, given their own choice stick with Titleist, Callaway or Taylor Made, the established gear makers. The area where Nike cleans up with Tiger are shoes and apparel. This is the youth market that Nike really wants and Tiger’s popularity was key to their sales to this constituency. Ironically, Tiger’s attire on course was downright dull.

The author goes on to say:

“….I’ve seen Tiger Woods stride a golf course and strike golf balls several times, and it was a special thing. He did outshine the myriads though bright. A frightening yet seductive luminosity emanated from the guy….”

What is he? Chris Matthews describing the president?

Again, there can be no doubt as to Tiger’s golf accomplishments, because many have been truly memorable especially in the heat of competition. But during these times in which we live, where every move is replayed, analyzed and broadcast again and again with reverential description by all manner of media types has contributed as much to the legend as the deeds themselves. Old Tom probably only had his competitors, a few fans and a phalanx of sheep herders in which to pass on his golfing genius. Even then, after the last pint was finished at the pub afterwards, the stories were probably forgotten. There was no Golf Channel in those days to replay the feather ball gasping into the hole.

Tiger’s been great for the game of golf, but his bigger strength is as a promoter for products or whatever cause has been crafted for him. Tiger’s woes appear self inflicted and some sponsors bravely put on the “full support” facade. But this is business; someone else will come along to be star spokesmodel…probably soon. Greater than golf? Please.

Since I’m not sure if I will be inspired by another infuriating article before Christmas, I end this missive with a poem sent to me, author unknown, which captures Mr. Woods’ saga. It’s not just highbrow stuff here. With apologies to the traditionalists:

TIGER WOODS
> CHRISTMAS POEM
>
>
> ‘Twas the night of Thanksgiving and out of the house
> Tiger
> Woods came a flyin’, chased by his spouse.
>
> She wielded a nine iron and wasn’t too merry,
> Cause a
> bimbo’s phone number was in his Blackberry.
>
> He’d been cheatin’ on Elin, and the story progressed.
> Woman
> after woman stepped up and confessed.
>
> He’d
> been cheatin’ with Holly, and Jaimee, and Cori,
> With Joselyn, and
> Kalika. The world had the story.
>
> From the
> top of the Tour to the basement of blues,
> Tiger’s sad sordid tale was
> all over the news.
>
> With hostesses,
> waitresses, he had lots of sex,
> When not in their pants, he was sendin’
> them texts.
>
> Despite all his cryin’ and
> beggin’ and pleadin’,
> Tiger’s wife went investin’ in a new home in
> Sweden.
>
> And I heard her exclaim from her
> white Escalade,
> “If you’re gettin’ laid, then I’m gettin’ paid.”
>
>
> She’s not pouting, in fact, she is of jolly
> good cheer,
> Her pre-nup made Christmas come early this
> year.
>

link BBC News – Climate summit most chaotic show on earth – Miliband

Many years ago, in the distant years of my youth, I was a participant in a rugby match. After a particularly rough tackle, two of the opposition players took exception to our player and engaged him in a fight. After a couple of blows to our guy’s fists by the opposition noses, it was obvious that he was more than capable of handling himself despite being outnumbered. From close by, one of our cheerleaders pleaded, “somebody do something!” Our side was bemused by this exhortation because the altercation was clearly one sided and was over.

The aftermath of the great Copenhagen huddle reminded me of this little moment. The historic event which was billed as the ‘world finally getting serious about global warming’ culminated in the alarmists battling among themselves as to exactly how they were going to fix the weather; more precisely, who’s going to pay the bill. The few saner voices who attended weren’t even the lightning rods for debate, since really, there was no debate. They hardly had to raise their rhetorical fists in the fight.

When you observe the most vocal champion of the cause declare that Arctic ice will go the way of teenage virgins within 4 years but the scientist on whose research this is based says, ” well it’s really more than 10 years”, then you know the fight is over, at least for now. Even the most ardent believers of this cause will pause to consider the actual science involved rather than just absorb the rhetoric. I mean, it makes a difference; do you sell the beachfront villa in 2014 or 2020?

When you are able to keep a straight enough face enough to consider the arguments of the global weather crowd, you are able to comprehend the true absurdity of their claims. Without going into a fistfight over numbers, let’s say we accept some of the more popular extrapolations of this crowd.

The main premise is that increases in greenhouse gases, namely carbon dioxide ( the emmissions of most living things on earth ) will contribute to increases of mean temperatures of 2 to 4 degrees.

OMG!! The earth can’t withstand that!
Why not?
Well because the arctic ice will melt and low lying areas will be flooded.
Why don’t people move?
Because of massive displacement of people.
So?
Well, um, because, uh, well…and also if land floods, food growing areas will disappear leading to massive starvation.
Well if Arctic ice recedes and the world is warmer, wouldn’t that open up vast ares of land in Canada, Russia etc for inhabitants as well as the possibility of new areas of heretofore non arable land?
But what about the exploding population of people?
Statistically, the population growth via birth in most Western countries have been static or declining over the past few generations, excluding immigration. If you use the same extrapalatory criteria to western populations, they project only enough people to support 12 NHL teams in 60 years. Oh that’s right, ice iffy in 60 years.

In addition, advancements in food growing technology have made food growing and processing as efficient as it has EVER been in man’s history. There’s no reason to believe further advancements won’t continue. In addition, if history is any guide, as societies become more advanced their populations decrease.

So this discussion seems to have at its root, the issue of population growth in lesser developed countries. Well, we know how to solve that.