| Tiger/Memorial [message #1035088] |
Sat, 27 May 2006 14:22 |
|
Just saw that Tiger is skipping the Memorial. Most people are lucky if
they get 3 days off to bury their loved one. Most can't really afford
that. Seems to me that Tiger has lost his drive, no pun intended, for
the game. His dads death provides the oppurtunity to lay off the game.
His burn out is no surprise.
|
|
|
| Re: Tiger/Memorial [message #1035090 ] |
Sat, 27 May 2006 14:36 |
|
bigoldcat2 [at] yahoo.com wrote:
> His burn out is no surprise.
yawn....
|
|
|
| Re: Tiger/Memorial [message #1035122 ] |
Sat, 27 May 2006 17:52 |
|
<bigoldcat2 [at] yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1148732523.783899.102020 [at] j73g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> His burn out is no surprise.
Oh for crissakes. The morons always seem to come out of the wordwork at the
most predictable times...
|
|
|
| Re: Tiger/Memorial [message #1035129 ] |
Sat, 27 May 2006 18:29 |
|
Apparently, it is a fairly common happening when your work is closely tied
to the family. DL III said it was awhile before he could pickup a club
without thinking of his father. A friend inherited his father's business and
finally turned his dad's office into a storage area so he wasn't constantly
reminded.
<bigoldcat2 [at] yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1148732523.783899.102020 [at] j73g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Just saw that Tiger is skipping the Memorial. Most people are lucky if
> they get 3 days off to bury their loved one. Most can't really afford
> that. Seems to me that Tiger has lost his drive, no pun intended, for
> the game. His dads death provides the oppurtunity to lay off the game.
> His burn out is no surprise.
>
|
|
|
| Re: Tiger/Memorial [message #1035137 ] |
Sat, 27 May 2006 20:33 |
|
jeffc wrote:
> <bigoldcat2 [at] yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1148732523.783899.102020 [at] j73g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > His burn out is no surprise.
>
> Oh for crissakes. The morons always seem to come out of the wordwork at the
> most predictable times...
I don't see why my posting an opinion warrants your name calling. We
shall see soon enough.
|
|
|
| Re: Tiger/Memorial [message #1035139 ] |
Sat, 27 May 2006 20:42 |
|
<bigoldcat2 [at] yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1148754797.343449.223670 [at] i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> jeffc wrote:
>> <bigoldcat2 [at] yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1148732523.783899.102020 [at] j73g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> > His burn out is no surprise.
>>
>> Oh for crissakes. The morons always seem to come out of the wordwork at
>> the
>> most predictable times...
>
> I don't see why my posting an opinion warrants your name calling. We
> shall see soon enough.
Rereading your post, maybe I misunderstood somewhat. I thought you were
judging him based on his decision to play or not play based on a personal
family matter. Even so, I consider it a personal matter. I don't see the
public fascination with celebrity figures' personal lives. They say
Brangelina's baby photo will be worth $5 million. I think it's pathetic.
|
|
|
| Re: Tiger/Memorial [message #1035140 ] |
Sat, 27 May 2006 21:00 |
|
<bigoldcat2 [at] yahoo.com> wrote ...
>
> Just saw that Tiger is skipping the Memorial. Most people are lucky if
> they get 3 days off to bury their loved one.
Most people who work for somebody else don't have the same luxury as those
who are self-employed.
Tiger can set his own schedule, and he doesn't need you to approve it.
> Most can't really afford that.
Tiger can.
> Seems to me that Tiger has lost his drive, no pun intended, for
> the game.
And you base this on...what?
Have you spoken to him?
Has he made ANY public statements to indicate (or even hint) that he's lost
his drive?
No.
Your opinion is based on nothing more than your own perspective, which is
about as far removed from the pertinent facts as they could possibly be.
> His dads death provides the oppurtunity to lay off the game.
So he's taking some time off. Big deal. He always takes time off between
majors. That he's taking a little extra time off between The Masters and
the US Open should come as no surprise after he lost his father. But he
usually only plays one or two tournaments between the Masters and US Open
anyway.
There have been several instances in the past when he hasn't played AT ALL
between majors.
> His burn out is no surprise.
You are jumping to the conclusion that he's burned out. His record last
year and this year would not bear that out. So again, I pose the question:
Upon what are you basing your conclusion (in this case, that he's burned
out)?
Answer: On your own limited perspective, which is about as far removed from
the facts as they could possibly be.
You know what they say about opinions.
Randy
|
|
|
| Re: Tiger/Memorial [message #1035143 ] |
Sat, 27 May 2006 21:34 |
|
"R&B" wrote:
> <bigoldcat2 [at] yahoo.com> wrote ...
>
>>Just saw that Tiger is skipping the Memorial.
SNIP
>
>>Seems to me that Tiger has lost his drive, no pun intended, for
>>the game.
>
SNIP
>
> Your opinion is based on nothing more than your own perspective, which is
> about as far removed from the pertinent facts as they could possibly be.
>
SNIP
>
>>His burn out is no surprise.
>
>
>
> You are jumping to the conclusion that he's burned out. His record last
> year and this year would not bear that out. So again, I pose the question:
> Upon what are you basing your conclusion (in this case, that he's burned
> out)?
>
> Answer: On your own limited perspective, which is about as far removed from
> the facts as they could possibly be.
>
> You know what they say about opinions.
>
> Randy
I agree Randy. In fact it is likely that, in my own biased opinion,
Woods will turn his father's passing into a positive performance driver.
Joe
|
|
|
| Re: Tiger/Memorial [message #1035150 ] |
Sat, 27 May 2006 22:58 |
|
"R&B" wrote:
> <bigoldcat2 [at] yahoo.com> wrote ...
> >
> > Just saw that Tiger is skipping the Memorial. Most people are lucky if
> > they get 3 days off to bury their loved one.
>
>
> Most people who work for somebody else don't have the same luxury as those
> who are self-employed.
>
> Tiger can set his own schedule, and he doesn't need you to approve it.
>
>
> > Most can't really afford that.
>
>
> Tiger can.
>
>
> > Seems to me that Tiger has lost his drive, no pun intended, for
> > the game.
>
>
> And you base this on...what?
>
> Have you spoken to him?
>
> Has he made ANY public statements to indicate (or even hint) that he's lost
> his drive?
>
> No.
>
> Your opinion is based on nothing more than your own perspective, which is
> about as far removed from the pertinent facts as they could possibly be.
>
>
> > His dads death provides the oppurtunity to lay off the game.
>
>
> So he's taking some time off. Big deal. He always takes time off between
> majors. That he's taking a little extra time off between The Masters and
> the US Open should come as no surprise after he lost his father. But he
> usually only plays one or two tournaments between the Masters and US Open
> anyway.
>
> There have been several instances in the past when he hasn't played AT ALL
> between majors.
>
>
> > His burn out is no surprise.
>
>
> You are jumping to the conclusion that he's burned out. His record last
> year and this year would not bear that out. So again, I pose the question:
> Upon what are you basing your conclusion (in this case, that he's burned
> out)?
>
> Answer: On your own limited perspective, which is about as far removed from
> the facts as they could possibly be.
>
> You know what they say about opinions.
>
> Randy
I know that if you express an opinion in rsg, no matter how harmless,
it will be attacked along with the poster. I've always thought that our
opinions were just that,"opinions". I was simply making an observation.
Why don't you, Randy, stick to your problems with Pattee and Hammer? I
generally agree with most of your posts, but, here you're sorta full of
shit.
|
|
|
| Re: Tiger/Memorial [message #1035171 ] |
Sun, 28 May 2006 01:06 |
|
On 27 May 2006 05:22:04 -0700, bigoldcat2 [at] yahoo.com wrote:
>Just saw that Tiger is skipping the Memorial. Most people are lucky if
>they get 3 days off to bury their loved one. Most can't really afford
>that. Seems to me that Tiger has lost his drive, no pun intended, for
>the game. His dads death provides the oppurtunity to lay off the game.
>His burn out is no surprise.
It may have nothing to do with golf. Tiger isn't just a golfer; he
also is the center of a business and charity network that will be
worth a billion dollars before too long. Earl was one of the very few
people that Tiger could trust unconditionally, and Tiger was happy to
let him run things (obviously with a lot of delegation for the last
year or two). Of course he had an army of lawyers and MBAs to do the
nuts and bolts, but he always had Earl to talk to before making a
final decision on some venture. Now the only people qualified to
advise him are in it for the money, not for love of Tiger. It's a
whole new world for him, and it will take him a long time to get his
bearings.
|
|
|
| Re: Tiger/Memorial [message #1035183 ] |
Sun, 28 May 2006 03:46 |
|
<bigoldcat2 [at] yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1148763533.722914.314010 [at] j55g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> "R&B" wrote:
>> <bigoldcat2 [at] yahoo.com> wrote ...
>> >
>> > Just saw that Tiger is skipping the Memorial. Most people are lucky if
>> > they get 3 days off to bury their loved one.
>>
>>
>> Most people who work for somebody else don't have the same luxury as
>> those
>> who are self-employed.
>>
>> Tiger can set his own schedule, and he doesn't need you to approve it.
>>
>>
>> > Most can't really afford that.
>>
>>
>> Tiger can.
>>
>>
>> > Seems to me that Tiger has lost his drive, no pun intended, for
>> > the game.
>>
>>
>> And you base this on...what?
>>
>> Have you spoken to him?
>>
>> Has he made ANY public statements to indicate (or even hint) that he's
>> lost
>> his drive?
>>
>> No.
>>
>> Your opinion is based on nothing more than your own perspective, which is
>> about as far removed from the pertinent facts as they could possibly be.
>>
>>
>> > His dads death provides the oppurtunity to lay off the game.
>>
>>
>> So he's taking some time off. Big deal. He always takes time off
>> between
>> majors. That he's taking a little extra time off between The Masters and
>> the US Open should come as no surprise after he lost his father. But he
>> usually only plays one or two tournaments between the Masters and US Open
>> anyway.
>>
>> There have been several instances in the past when he hasn't played AT
>> ALL
>> between majors.
>>
>>
>> > His burn out is no surprise.
>>
>>
>> You are jumping to the conclusion that he's burned out. His record last
>> year and this year would not bear that out. So again, I pose the
>> question:
>> Upon what are you basing your conclusion (in this case, that he's burned
>> out)?
>>
>> Answer: On your own limited perspective, which is about as far removed
>> from
>> the facts as they could possibly be.
>>
>> You know what they say about opinions.
>>
>> Randy
>
> I know that if you express an opinion in rsg, no matter how harmless,
> it will be attacked along with the poster. I've always thought that our
> opinions were just that,"opinions". I was simply making an observation.
> Why don't you, Randy, stick to your problems with Pattee and Hammer? I
> generally agree with most of your posts, but, here you're sorta full of
> shit.
A. I didn't attack you. I merely pointed out that your opinions are based
on a very limited perspective, a fact that you did not refute here.
Further, I implied that it is reasonable to believe that little credence
need be given to an opinion based upon such a limited perspective,
especially when facts that have not been presented might very well refute
the opinion offered. Again, you didn't refute that here. Instead, you
merely attempted to dismiss my views with an off-handed suggestion that I
"stick to [my] problems with Pattee and Hammer."
1. I have no problem with Pattee. He has a problem with me. That's
HIS problem, not mine. Certainly it doesn't warrant a response from me. I
haven't told him what to do, yet he insists on trying to tell me what to do.
That's usually at the heart of most flame wars -- someone telling others how
to behave. With him, I simply won't bite.
2. I have no problem with Hammer. I have documented his actions of
the past that prompt me to hold him in contempt. But mostly I get I guilty
pleasure from needling him and pointing out what a loon he is. You may view
that as a problem, but frankly, it's not a problem for me at all. In fact,
it's rather enjoyable.
B. Opinions expressed in RSG (or any other public forum of this kind) are
subject to rebuttal from others. It's the law of the jungle. If you don't
want your opinions refuted, then you shouldn't post them. Or, perhaps it
would be better stated this way: If you're going to post opinions in
Usenet, then have enough balls to know that you're likely going to find that
others may (will) refute them. Look, you have your opinion, and I respect
your right to express it. I do not, however, happen to see things relating
to Tiger's so-called "burn out" the same as you do, and I most certainly
don't believe that Tiger's taking time off after his father died as
indication of anything more than the fact that he's taking some extra time
off after his father died. You say I'm "sorta full of shit." That's a
pretty heady argument. Must have taken you hours to come up with that. In
any case, I presume your lofty assertion about what I'm full of means you
don't respect my right to express my opinion the same as I respect your
right to express yours. Is that the jist here? Or have I missed something?
C. Thank you for agreeing with me most of the time. Why wouldn't you? I'm
almost always right. Except when I'm not.
Randy
|
|
|
| Re: Tiger/Memorial [message #1035186 ] |
Sun, 28 May 2006 03:42 |
|
<bigoldcat2 [at] yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1148763533.722914.314010 [at] j55g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> I know that if you express an opinion in rsg, no matter how harmless,
> it will be attacked along with the poster. I've always thought that our
> opinions were just that,"opinions".
Not so. There are opinions, then there are insensitive, tasteless,
pointless, inappropriate comments related to issues that aren't any of our
business. Obviously, yours appeared to be the latter to most of us.
|
|
|
| Re: Tiger/Memorial [message #1035189 ] |
Sun, 28 May 2006 04:19 |
|
I think Tiger has done really well in the handling of his business /
personable affairs.
And if he feels the need for time-off, I again think he is very
deserving of it.
>mho
>v=83e
>drive 10% less, help create a gasoline glut
|
|
|
| Re: Tiger/Memorial [message #1035190 ] |
Sun, 28 May 2006 05:36 |
|
He is set for life. His heirs are set for generations to come.
He doesn't ever have to play again if his grief is that profound. I
buried both of my parents within a six month period in 1992. My life
and my career both went on.
Ken
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
bigoldcat2 [at] yahoo.com wrote:
> Just saw that Tiger is skipping the Memorial. Most people are lucky if
> they get 3 days off to bury their loved one. Most can't really afford
> that. Seems to me that Tiger has lost his drive, no pun intended, for
> the game. His dads death provides the oppurtunity to lay off the game.
> His burn out is no surprise.
|
|
|
| Re: Tiger/Memorial [message #1035199 ] |
Sun, 28 May 2006 07:18 |
|
> bigoldcat2 [at] yahoo.com wrote:
>> Just saw that Tiger is skipping the Memorial. Most people are lucky if
>> they get 3 days off to bury their loved one. Most can't really afford
>> that. Seems to me that Tiger has lost his drive, no pun intended, for
>> the game. His dads death provides the oppurtunity to lay off the game.
>> His burn out is no surprise.
Tiger has been practicing this weekend at Wingfoot for the upcoming US Open.
He took in a Yankees game Saturday night.
|
|
|
| Re: Tiger/Memorial [message #1035224 ] |
Sun, 28 May 2006 17:30 |
|
Aren't you just wonderful.......
--
<kenpittsjr [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1148787361.087430.317460 [at] i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> He is set for life. His heirs are set for generations to come.
>
> He doesn't ever have to play again if his grief is that profound. I
> buried both of my parents within a six month period in 1992. My life
> and my career both went on.
>
> Ken
>
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> bigoldcat2 [at] yahoo.com wrote:
>> Just saw that Tiger is skipping the Memorial. Most people are lucky if
>> they get 3 days off to bury their loved one. Most can't really afford
>> that. Seems to me that Tiger has lost his drive, no pun intended, for
>> the game. His dads death provides the oppurtunity to lay off the game.
>> His burn out is no surprise.
>
|
|
|
| Re: Tiger/Memorial [message #1035228 ] |
Sun, 28 May 2006 19:42 |
|
"Aren't you just wonderful......."
No, I'm just like everyone else in the world. We all lose family
members and our lives continue. Tiger is no more nor less special that
any of the rest of us who have lost parents.
Is Tiger's grief any worse than that of Darren Clarke? I can tell you
what losing a loved one to cancer is like (my father). It is a slow,
protracted, horrible experience with ever increasing doses of morphine
sulfate. When death finally came for my father, he was never conscious
at any point for weeks and weeks. It was like he was already gone, but
still alive in the physical realm. It was a relief for the entire
family. If he was aware, I'm certain it was for me.
Ken
|
|
|
| Re: Tiger/Memorial [message #1035233 ] |
Sun, 28 May 2006 20:01 |
|
Tiger's loss of his father is not the normal situation for many of us since
his father and his career as a professional golfer were so tightly tied
together. I know a friend who ran his dad's business and work was not an
escape place to help soften his loss.
<kenpittsjr [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1148838134.414013.3900 [at] j55g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> "Aren't you just wonderful......."
>
> No, I'm just like everyone else in the world. We all lose family
> members and our lives continue. Tiger is no more nor less special that
> any of the rest of us who have lost parents.
>
> Is Tiger's grief any worse than that of Darren Clarke? I can tell you
> what losing a loved one to cancer is like (my father). It is a slow,
> protracted, horrible experience with ever increasing doses of morphine
> sulfate. When death finally came for my father, he was never conscious
> at any point for weeks and weeks. It was like he was already gone, but
> still alive in the physical realm. It was a relief for the entire
> family. If he was aware, I'm certain it was for me.
>
> Ken
>
|
|
|
| Re: Tiger/Memorial [message #1035234 ] |
Sun, 28 May 2006 20:10 |
|
"Tiger's loss of his father is not the normal situation for many of
us........"
The media have all overblown the significance of the loss as they have
every other aspect of Tiger and Tiger-dom. You may disagree.
Tiger's sense of loss on the death of Earl Woods is now more severe
than mine on the death of Kenneth Pitts Sr.
YMMV
Ken
|
|
|
| Re: Tiger/Memorial [message #1035236 ] |
Sun, 28 May 2006 20:32 |
|
Belittling Tiger's grief over his dad once more establishes your credentials
as RSG Asshole of the Decade.
For all we know you were pissed because you got cut out of the will.
<kenpittsjr [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1148839808.026600.261380 [at] y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> "Tiger's loss of his father is not the normal situation for many of
> us........"
>
> The media have all overblown the significance of the loss as they have
> every other aspect of Tiger and Tiger-dom. You may disagree.
>
> Tiger's sense of loss on the death of Earl Woods is now more severe
> than mine on the death of Kenneth Pitts Sr.
>
> YMMV
>
> Ken
>
|
|
|
| Re: Tiger/Memorial [message #1035239 ] |
Sun, 28 May 2006 20:46 |
|
Who says I belittled anything?
My sister and I shared and shared alike, as if it was any of your
business, whoever you are.
I would bet when Charlie Nicklaus passed away, there was not a segment
on the golf broadcast that week dedicated to him. He was certainly as
much of an influence on Jack's career as Earl was on Tiger's. What if
the Nicklaus family had not been members at Scioto CC. Jack may have
ended up running the family pharmacy.
Who are you anyway?
Ken
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
sfb wrote:
> Belittling Tiger's grief over his dad once more establishes your credentials
> as RSG Asshole of the Decade.
>
> For all we know you were pissed because you got cut out of the will.
>
> <kenpittsjr [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1148839808.026600.261380 [at] y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> > "Tiger's loss of his father is not the normal situation for many of
> > us........"
> >
> > The media have all overblown the significance of the loss as they have
> > every other aspect of Tiger and Tiger-dom. You may disagree.
> >
> > Tiger's sense of loss on the death of Earl Woods is now more severe
> > than mine on the death of Kenneth Pitts Sr.
> >
> > YMMV
> >
> > Ken
> >
|
|
|
| Re: Tiger/Memorial [message #1035242 ] |
Sun, 28 May 2006 21:06 |
|
Somebody who knows that each of us handles life's misfortunate differently.
To say that Tiger should or could have handled his grief as well as you did
is belittling(to cause (a person or thing) to seem little or less.)
Jack Nicklaus is not a poster boy on handling grief as he didn't even go to
his own other's funeral.
<kenpittsjr [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1148842000.356974.115960 [at] j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Who says I belittled anything?
>
> My sister and I shared and shared alike, as if it was any of your
> business, whoever you are.
>
> I would bet when Charlie Nicklaus passed away, there was not a segment
> on the golf broadcast that week dedicated to him. He was certainly as
> much of an influence on Jack's career as Earl was on Tiger's. What if
> the Nicklaus family had not been members at Scioto CC. Jack may have
> ended up running the family pharmacy.
>
> Who are you anyway?
>
> Ken
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>
> sfb wrote:
>> Belittling Tiger's grief over his dad once more establishes your
>> credentials
>> as RSG Asshole of the Decade.
>>
>> For all we know you were pissed because you got cut out of the will.
>>
>> <kenpittsjr [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1148839808.026600.261380 [at] y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>> > "Tiger's loss of his father is not the normal situation for many of
>> > us........"
>> >
>> > The media have all overblown the significance of the loss as they have
>> > every other aspect of Tiger and Tiger-dom. You may disagree.
>> >
>> > Tiger's sense of loss on the death of Earl Woods is now more severe
>> > than mine on the death of Kenneth Pitts Sr.
>> >
>> > YMMV
>> >
>> > Ken
>> >
>
|
|
|
| Re: Tiger/Memorial [message #1035244 ] |
Sun, 28 May 2006 21:22 |
|
sfb -
As usual, I am being misrepresented. I didn't say anything about how
Tiger is handling anything. My point is the media would have us believe
that Tiger is the only one to ever lose a parent.
"Jack Nicklaus is not a poster boy on handling grief as he didn't even
go to his own other's funeral."
Where did you dig that one up? I can tell you that such an event is not
any fun at all. I gave thought to skipping and staying home with my
dad. He was already unable to go. The thing that made me go is that I
would probably still be fighting with my sister over it.
Tell me this. Is the loss of Earl Woods any more tragic than Jack's
loss of a grandchild in a hot tub accident? I say no. Earl Woods lived
a full life and lived long enough to see his son reach the highest
level of the sport that they both loved.
http://stormloader.com/users/crossroads/claptonpage.html
How about this? Read "Tears in Heaven". An absolute disaster for
someone that I consider to be just about the greatest to ever pick up a
guitar.
Tiger should take off as long as he likes. But he and the media can
spare me all the dedications to Earl. Once is enough. I think he
covered that when he won the Masters last year.
Amazing how people use any opinion I have as a reason to attack me.
Ken
|
|
|
| Re: Tiger/Memorial [message #1035246 ] |
Sun, 28 May 2006 21:27 |
|
"For all we know you were pissed because you got cut out of the will."
What are you doing WRT my loss? I say you are just as big an asshole as
I have ever been.
Ken
|
|
|
| Re: Tiger/Memorial [message #1035249 ] |
Sun, 28 May 2006 22:06 |
|
In article <1148839808.026600.261380 [at] y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
kenpittsjr [at] gmail.com wrote:
> "Tiger's loss of his father is not the normal situation for many of
> us........"
>
> The media have all overblown the significance of the loss as they have
> every other aspect of Tiger and Tiger-dom. You may disagree.
>
> Tiger's sense of loss on the death of Earl Woods is now more severe
> than mine on the death of Kenneth Pitts Sr.
No, but will you not admit that since his father was the one who taught
him golf, it might be just a tad more difficult for Tiger to go to the
course where he is bound to be *reminded* of his father?
|
|
|
| Re: Tiger/Memorial [message #1035253 ] |
Sun, 28 May 2006 22:15 |
|
Is any of this any of our damn business?
I didn't think so.
--
Chris Bellomy
C-List Charter Member
http://clist.org/
|
|
|
| Re: Tiger/Memorial [message #1035254 ] |
Sun, 28 May 2006 22:26 |
|
Jack won the Open Championship at St Andrews having just lost his
father Charlie. If Charlie had not maintained a membership at Scioto
CC, Jack would never have hooked up with Jack Grout.
Ken
|
|
|
| Re: Tiger/Memorial [message #1035258 ] |
Sun, 28 May 2006 22:44 |
|
In article <1148847990.377259.110380 [at] j55g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
kenpittsjr [at] gmail.com wrote:
> Jack won the Open Championship at St Andrews having just lost his
> father Charlie. If Charlie had not maintained a membership at Scioto
> CC, Jack would never have hooked up with Jack Grout.
So you're comparing "maintaining a membership" to playing golf together
and working on one's game from the age of 4 or 5...
That's typical.
|
|
|
| Re: Tiger/Memorial [message #1035261 ] |
Sun, 28 May 2006 22:49 |
|
You think Charlie didn't show Jack how to play? BTW, look into it. Earl
was handing Tiger off to more qualified instructor very early in the
game.
My dad showed me how to play well before I turned ten. It was over 15
years later before I got professional instruction and then got to where
I was a serious threat to break par.
I would bet every guy out there on the tour was shown the game by his
dad at an early age.
Your ignorance is typical.
Ken
|
|
|
| Re: Tiger/Memorial [message #1035267 ] |
Sun, 28 May 2006 22:53 |
|
In article <1148849365.417309.262300 [at] i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
kenpittsjr [at] gmail.com wrote:
> You think Charlie didn't show Jack how to play? BTW, look into it. Earl
> was handing Tiger off to more qualified instructor very early in the
> game.
You think it wasn't clear from the number of times Earl Woods was there
at his son's tournaments that their relationship was particularly
associated with Tiger's golf career?
>
> My dad showed me how to play well before I turned ten. It was over 15
> years later before I got professional instruction and then got to where
> I was a serious threat to break par.
Was it him who taught you to go back on your word?
>
> I would bet every guy out there on the tour was shown the game by his
> dad at an early age.
Does that mean that their relationship was the same as Tiger and Earl
Woods' relationship with respect to golf?
>
> Your ignorance is typical.
LOL
Your bigotry is transparent.
|
|
|
| Re: Tiger/Memorial [message #1035269 ] |
Sun, 28 May 2006 22:59 |
|
In article <1148838134.414013.3900 [at] j55g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
kenpittsjr [at] gmail.com wrote:
> "Aren't you just wonderful......."
>
> No, I'm just like everyone else in the world. We all lose family
> members and our lives continue. Tiger is no more nor less special that
> any of the rest of us who have lost parents.
>
> Is Tiger's grief any worse than that of Darren Clarke? I can tell you
> what losing a loved one to cancer is like (my father). It is a slow,
> protracted, horrible experience with ever increasing doses of morphine
> sulfate. When death finally came for my father, he was never conscious
> at any point for weeks and weeks. It was like he was already gone, but
> still alive in the physical realm. It was a relief for the entire
> family. If he was aware, I'm certain it was for me.
>
> Ken
So are you saying that Tiger should really be jumping for joy at this
point? Get real. In fact, I suspect that Tiger just by-passed the
Memorial so that he could practice ten hours a day getting ready for the
US Open. You certainly don't know any different.
William Clark
|
|
|
| Re: Tiger/Memorial [message #1035272 ] |
Sun, 28 May 2006 23:01 |
|
In article <1148844156.673927.254490 [at] 38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
kenpittsjr [at] gmail.com wrote:
> sfb -
>
> As usual, I am being misrepresented. I didn't say anything about how
> Tiger is handling anything. My point is the media would have us believe
> that Tiger is the only one to ever lose a parent.
>
> "Jack Nicklaus is not a poster boy on handling grief as he didn't even
> go to his own other's funeral."
>
> Where did you dig that one up? I can tell you that such an event is not
> any fun at all. I gave thought to skipping and staying home with my
> dad. He was already unable to go. The thing that made me go is that I
> would probably still be fighting with my sister over it.
>
> Tell me this. Is the loss of Earl Woods any more tragic than Jack's
> loss of a grandchild in a hot tub accident? I say no. Earl Woods lived
> a full life and lived long enough to see his son reach the highest
> level of the sport that they both loved.
>
> http://stormloader.com/users/crossroads/claptonpage.html
>
> How about this? Read "Tears in Heaven". An absolute disaster for
> someone that I consider to be just about the greatest to ever pick up a
> guitar.
>
> Tiger should take off as long as he likes. But he and the media can
> spare me all the dedications to Earl. Once is enough. I think he
> covered that when he won the Masters last year.
>
> Amazing how people use any opinion I have as a reason to attack me.
>
> Ken
Amazing how you use any opinion contrary to yours to paint yourself as a
victim.
William Clark
|
|
|
| Re: Tiger/Memorial [message #1035275 ] |
Sun, 28 May 2006 23:08 |
|
"Does that mean that their relationship was the same as Tiger and Earl
Woods' relationship with respect to golf?"
I would bet a lot of them had a better relationship.
Ken
|
|
|
| Re: Tiger/Memorial [message #1035283 ] |
Sun, 28 May 2006 23:05 |
|
I have no problem at all with him skipping as many events as he needs.
I certainly understand what he is going through. This whole flame war
has been about the media, not him.
Ken
|
|
|
| Re: Tiger/Memorial [message #1035286 ] |
Sun, 28 May 2006 23:12 |
|
In article <1148844156.673927.254490 [at] 38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
kenpittsjr [at] gmail.com wrote:
> sfb -
>
> As usual, I am being misrepresented. I didn't say anything about how
> Tiger is handling anything. My point is the media would have us believe
> that Tiger is the only one to ever lose a parent.
Funny. I don't see CBS or the name of any media outlet on the subject of
this post...
BTW, did you notice that your television has an off switch?
> Amazing how people use any opinion I have as a reason to attack me.
Amazing how you've gone back on your word not to create posts about
Tiger...
|
|
|
| Re: Tiger/Memorial [message #1035291 ] |
Sun, 28 May 2006 23:19 |
|
In article <1148850498.872648.91980 [at] 38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"BowTie - Chevy" <bowtieroller [at] yahoo.com> wrote:
> "Does that mean that their relationship was the same as Tiger and Earl
> Woods' relationship with respect to golf?"
>
> I would bet a lot of them had a better relationship.
Deliberately avoiding the actual issue... ...very good, Ken!
But let's put back the text you snipped, shall we?
> > In article <1148849365.417309.262300 [at] i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
> > kenpittsjr [at] gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > > You think Charlie didn't show Jack how to play? BTW, look into it. Earl
> > > was handing Tiger off to more qualified instructor very early in the
> > > game.
> >
> > You think it wasn't clear from the number of times Earl Woods was there
> > at his son's tournaments that their relationship was particularly
> > associated with Tiger's golf career?
Well?
> >
> > >
> > > My dad showed me how to play well before I turned ten. It was over 15
> > > years later before I got professional instruction and then got to where
> > > I was a serious threat to break par.
> >
> > Was it him who taught you to go back on your word?
Well?
> >
> > >
> > > I would bet every guy out there on the tour was shown the game by his
> > > dad at an early age.
> >
> > Does that mean that their relationship was the same as Tiger and Earl
> > Woods' relationship with respect to golf?
> >
> > >
> > > Your ignorance is typical.
> >
> > LOL
> >
> > Your bigotry is transparent.
>
|
|
|
| Re: Tiger/Memorial [message #1035293 ] |
Sun, 28 May 2006 23:20 |
|
In article <1148850350.359699.249950 [at] g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
"BowTie - Chevy" <bowtieroller [at] yahoo.com> wrote:
> I have no problem at all with him skipping as many events as he needs.
> I certainly understand what he is going through. This whole flame war
> has been about the media, not him.
>
> Ken
And yet it isn't "CBS" that I see in the subject line...
|
|
|
| Re: Tiger/Memorial [message #1035314 ] |
Mon, 29 May 2006 00:49 |
|
On Sat, 27 May 2006 23:18:20 -0600, "Mark A" <nobody [at] nowhere.com>
wrote:
>Tiger has been practicing this weekend at Wingfoot for the upcoming US Open.
>He took in a Yankees game Saturday night.
Best news I've heard all week. I'm happy that Lumpy is playing well,
but I'd rather watch Tiger in the US Open.
Tiger just can't win. When he went to NZ for Steve's wedding, people
wondered why he wasn't sitting by his father's bedside on a death
watch. Then when he takes some time off after his dad dies, they say
it's too long, he should get over it. No matter what he does,
millions of people don't like it, which is exactly why he should
ignore everybody else, and just do what he wants.
|
|
|
| Re: Tiger/Memorial [message #1035327 ] |
Mon, 29 May 2006 01:50 |
|
multi wrote:
> On Sat, 27 May 2006 23:18:20 -0600, "Mark A" <nobody [at] nowhere.com>
> wrote:
>
>>Tiger has been practicing this weekend at Wingfoot for the upcoming US Open.
>>He took in a Yankees game Saturday night.
>
>
> Best news I've heard all week. I'm happy that Lumpy is playing well,
> but I'd rather watch Tiger in the US Open.
>
> Tiger just can't win. When he went to NZ for Steve's wedding, people
> wondered why he wasn't sitting by his father's bedside on a death
> watch. Then when he takes some time off after his dad dies, they say
> it's too long, he should get over it. No matter what he does,
> millions of people don't like it, which is exactly why he should
> ignore everybody else, and just do what he wants.
Amen! And that is pretty much what he does.
We have developed a whole culture around celebrities and what they do
from moment to moment. The upside is that talent (sometimes) is
recognized and the downside is the extensive media coverage of their
"non-professional" life. Who really cares what bubble heads like
Brittany Spears do. Or who "won" American Idol.
I think that Woods has found the best possible balance in asking the
media to focus on his on course performance, his foundation and keeping
his personal life as private as possible. Like we most of us did in
another age.
Joe
|
|
|
| Re: Tiger/Memorial [message #1035346 ] |
Mon, 29 May 2006 04:10 |
|
<kenpittsjr [at] gmail.com> wrote
..
>
> I would bet when Charlie Nicklaus passed away, there was not a segment
> on the golf broadcast that week dedicated to him. He was certainly as
> much of an influence on Jack's career as Earl was on Tiger's. What if
> the Nicklaus family had not been members at Scioto CC. Jack may have
> ended up running the family pharmacy.
Why am I not surprised that even in the matter of Tiger's father dying, you
would find a way to bring Nicklaus into the discussion and once again assert
that Tiger's way of doing things never quite trumps anything Jack ever did.
You are such a loser.
This isn't about you or your father.
It isn't about Jack or his father.
It isn't about me or my father.
It isn't about the media or their collective fathers.
And it most certainly isn't about bigoldcat2 or his father.
It's about Tiger and his father. And beyond that, it's none of our business
to decide how Tiger handles the grieving and recovery process after a family
loss.
But something tells me that when he does finally emerge on the golf scene
once again, he may be more prepared than anyone expects. He'll have one
less distraction (his father's deteriorating health) to think about than
he's had in quite some time, and he'll have one more motivating factor to
play for (remember Crenshaw's unlikely win at the '95 Masters when Harvey
Penick died?). That could spell trouble for everyone else in the field.
It bears pointing out that of all the players on the PGA TOUR, few have a
comparable number of distractions that *could* cause their mind to drift as
Tiger has, with the biggest galleries always following him, the media
demanding his time after every round (whether or not he's in contention),
etc., etc., etc. But maybe because of the influence Tiger's mom has had on
him, Tiger has an almost Zen-like ability to focus in and let nothing deter
him from his mission. The golf ball may not always behave, but it won't be
for any "give up" he might show, as so many others do when they know they're
out of it. It will be interesting if he makes the US Open his return event
(as I suspect he will) to see him be a sympathetic figure among the fans,
something he has not previously enjoyed.
And it seems to me that with Tiger's uncanny knack for the dramatic in golf,
it would be just like him to win the US Open going away on Father's Day just
to be able to make a strong statement and dedicate the victory to his dad.
I wouldn't bet against him.
Randy
|
|
|
