Has Tiger Woods been good for the game of golf?

[Tim Pitner]

I've never understood why the average person would care about growing the game or the televison ratings of a golf event.  I understand why people in the golf and television industries care about these things, but not the rest of us.  If you enjoy golf, you'll play it and you'll introduce your children to it.  I fully support making golf more accessible and building more architecturally-interesting courses, but growth in and of itself doesn't guarantee that.  I wouldn't mind at all if golf returned to being more of a niche sport--perhaps tee times would be more available and more civility would return.  

Tiger has been good for the game because he's played it at a higher level than ever seen before.  I've rooted against Tiger for years (I tend to favor the underdog) and his play, particularly in the clutch, has been staggeringly good.  When you raise the bar of an entire sport, that has to be good for the game.  Were Babe Ruth, Willie Mays and Hank Aaron good for baseball?  Julius Erving, Larry Bird, Magic Johnson and Michael Jordan good for basketball?  I think you'd have to say yes.  (Maybe you could argue that Jordan encouraged 1 on 1 play and clear-outs just as Tiger maybe encouraged lengthening courses, but in each case that had more to do with other factors--e.g., the NBA ban on zones in basketball and equipment and course setup decisions in golf).

I really don't see Tiger's philandering affecting the game.  Speaking of Tiger's philandering, the dozen or so "mistresses" currently identified may barely scratch the surface.  It seems that he may have had dalliances with literally scores of women.  So much for the political career some people predicated.

[Richard Choi]

Shiv, believe whatever you will. I have a 7 year old daughter and I regularly play games on-line where kids of all ages roam (and you should really hear what those kids say on-line).

I would argue as many kids know who Sasha Grey is as much as who Tiger Woods is (at least until last week).

But I am sure you know better...

Oh, BTW, a Harvard study found following:

"Analyzing the data, the scholars determined that, in that year, 40 percent of the boys and 46 percent of the girls had had sexual intercourse before their parents had ever given them advice on how to ask someone out on a date. More than 40 percent of the teens had had sex before having a single conversation with their parents about condom use, birth-control options, or sexually transmitted diseases. About 40 percent of the time, parents started telling kids why teens shouldn't have sex—only after the kids already had. "

Shiv, are you sure your 11 year old doesn't know about the birds and bees already?

[Steve Okula]

Every golfer I ever met was introduced to the game by either a family member, a friend, or perhaps a business associate. Nobody ever takes up the game by themselves after watching it on TV, least of all kids, who would need to talk Mom & Dad into outfitting them and ferrying them to the course and then pony up the green fees.

Is there anybody posting here who started the game from watching Arnie, Jack, or Tiger on TV?

[Kalen Braley]

Shiv,

I have an 11 and 13 yr old daughter, so trust me, wherever you are, I've both been there and am still currently there.  And if there is one thing I've learned over the years is that kids are far more perceptive and up to speed on things than we think.  And kids can certainly be far more analytical that we give them credit.

As it pertains to "Adult issues" I think the whole "taboo/never talk about it/ pretend it doesn't exist" thing leads to more problems than it prevents.  As kids become aware of things, parents discussing it with them in an open manner takes away all the mystery of it and all the "ohh, ahh, its soooo bad" aspect of it.

How hard is it to say, "yes some people choose to do it, but it really screws them up emotionally, physically, etc and its really not a great thing to try out or aspire to".  Its when you try to hide it and sheild it that it only gets kids curiousity up and turns it from a molehill into a mountain and they seek out info from undesireable sources.  I'm not saying you should show porn to your kids, but having frank discussion about people who choose that lifestyle, and being open and honest about how destructive it is helps them develop more informed opinions of it as opposed to turning the other way, pretending it doesn't exist, and only adding more fuel to thier inquisitive fires.

My $.02

[Richard Choi]

Shiv, last time I checked, 11 to 18 year old kids watch FAR MORE G4 than the Golf Channel. And those kids are going to know who Sasha is. You do know what G4 is right (without looking it up)? I mean if you are so in tune with your kids and all.

And why are your kids asking you about "porn stars"? I have a 7 year old and she has not asked a SINGLE question about Tiger. But then again, I turn the channel whenever they are talking about Tiger and I strictly control what she watches on TV...

[JMEvensky]

Is there anybody posting here who started the game from watching Arnie, Jack, or Tiger on TV?

I'd be close.Neither of my parents played.I got interested by a friend down the block whose father played.For him,and then me,watching Arnold Palmer on television was pretty motivating--same as watching Mickey Mantle play baseball.

I still flick cigarettes before a shot and I still want to play center field for the Yankees.

[Jud_T]

My 14 year old  daughter swears like a sailor and is the best kid you can imagine...can we please get back to the topic at hand?!

[Phil McDade]

"In terms of growing the game I would say anyone on this board who has children that do not play the game, and anyone on this board who did not take the time to introduce the game to their kids, who rather left home every weekend to play with their buddies, they are the biggest failures and they have betrayed the game."

Kelly:

A tangent to this thread, yes, but I'd have to disagree with their statement. I play golf, less than I used to, but still play it, and I don't feel I've betrayed the game by not "introducing" my kids to it.

I think it's important for parents to introduce their children to sporting activities, for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is to encourage healthy and active lives. Competitive sports, properly taught, supervised and coached, can teach children a lot of things, and instill a lot of good values -- as probably everyone on this board can attest. As the parents of three pretty active boys, my wife and I value the time our children spend on sporting activities, but we really could care less if it's golf, swimming, soccer, tennis or running. And I have to disagree with those -- at attitude you occasionally come across on this board -- who view golf as uniquely able to teach certain values about fairness and self-discipline. I think many sports are capable of this. Actually, I think parents and coaches do most of it, with sports re-inforcing the importance of those values.

Phil,

If someone states they are concerned about growing the game and do not introduce their kids to the game then I think they have betrayed the game, and should recuse themselves from debating the issue because their actions don’t match their concerns.

I think golf is unique among most sports regarding what it can teach kids. It certainly has more diverse attributes as compared to swimming, soccer, and tennis. It has more interesting qualities as compared to the other sports starting with the venue within which it is played. From a competition standpoint, it requires more confidence and perseverance than a team sport. It certainly teaches better values than football, soccer, basketball, etc. If your kid is going to succeed at any sport, or even at school, you have to push them, challenge them, and guide them. I would rather do that with a sport that I am familiar with and understand, I think the supervision and guidance is more meaningful and real if the parent is thoroughly familiar with the sport.

Kelly:

That's all fine and good, but let's not pretend golf is in any way as demanding a sport as, say, swimming. You're welcome to join my 17-year-old son at 5:30 in the morning when he heads off to swim another 5,000 yards (the first of his two practices a day) if you think otherwise.

Physically demanding I agree. But, in competition I don't think there is any sport as mentally and physically demanding as golf. 18 holes, shot by shot, it is a very demanding game. The good thing is that you can enjoy that type of demanding rigor late into life. The physical demand your son is enduring can not be sustained for long. Like football, the abuse to the body will cause long term, possibly dehabilitating physical problems.

Kelly:

I agree about golf and its life-long ability to keep people in the game; it's one of its best attributes. I would quibble about the comparison between football and swimming -- I'd argue swimming is both harder than football (ask my son's teammate on his swim team -- an all-conference and honorable mention all-state football player -- who took up high school swimming this year and found to his surprise that it was far more taxing than any football practice he'd ever experienced) and less prone to debilitating injuries. I've known several high school football players who have already undergone surgery for knee and shoulder injuries; I have yet to encounter a high school swimmer who has (and I hang around a bunch of swim parents).

My neighbor (she's in her 50s; I'm too polite to state her actual age ), has been swimming competitively since she was in high school, and is now annually winning statewide masters swimming titles. She's currently training to compete in an Ironman competition next fall. She's the epitome of what a single sport like swimming can do to encourage life-long healthy activities.

[Kalen Braley]

Shiv,

Its not a question of why, its a question of when.  Sooner or later they will hear about it, unless you resort to the lock em in thier bedroom closet option. 

Kids will become aware of things, when they become aware of them....asking why seems to be beyond relevant.  You just deal with what you have when it pops up....this is the way it works.  What I don't get is how Tiger is somehow responsible for kids getting this information "too early".  I mean if it were up to Tiger, it wouldn't have leaked at all, its clearly the media's fault right?     They showed restraint with guys like JFK and Babe Ruth, so the only thing thats changed is the media not Tiger!    I half kid, but I do think there is a valid point there.

In the end though, we live in the information age...and if you dont like that, move to a small village on a South Pacific island somewhere and you can be the gatekeeper of all information!!   

P.S.  I'm under no delusion that kids are worse off now than in the good old days.  Ahh the good old days back when they were submitted to child labor with no protective laws, few attended school and the chance to get an education, beat early and often by parents as there were no protective laws, etc.

[Jud_T]

Shiv,

clearly they need this for the holidays (sorry couldn't resist):

[Sean_A]

"I would argue as many kids know who Sasha Grey is as much as who Tiger Woods is (at least until last week)."

Richard, I just looked up this Sasha person.

You actually believe that as many kids know who she is as know who Tiger Woods is?

If so, that's the end of this discussion because that's simply indefensibly irrational.  Nobody knows who this person is....I'll bet she has 3% of the Q rating of Phish, for crying out loud.  First it was Ward with the silly comparison to Sinatra, and now this?  Geez, guys, if you're going to make comparisons, at least bring me something that isn't laughably and incontrovertibly wrong...

Sasha who?  Shivas is right.  If anything, the vast majority of these kids know who the most recent pop star or tv star is.  Very few know any specifics about the sex industry and if they did, as a parent, I would be worried.  

Where I disagree with Shivas is the teaching moment.  If a kid is asking questions about something, now is the time to answer.  Otherwise, they will get their info and more importantly, the interpretation of the info elsewhere.  

Ciao

[Richard Choi]

First of all, my kids didn't ask what a porn star is.  Other parents in the neighborhood's kids did, as did the kids of countless other parents.  Get your facts straight.

Then why are you complaining about it? Obviously those parents are clueless. You don't even know if those kids heard "porn stars" because of Tiger. They could have learned about it from somewhere else and the parents are just starting to get clued in. You could surf the Web for 5 min and find things far far worse.

Second, my kids have a Wii and that's it.  No other video games.  They're happy with that.  They play DDR, Mariocart, golf, bowling, and tennis and that's about it.   So, your presumption that I'd have to know what G4 is to be in touch with my kids is in error.  They aren't video game addicts.  Why?  Because they know that's a waste of their time.   Other than the Wii games they have (and frankly hardly ever use), they have no need for G4 - which explains why I had never heard of it.

But what about your kids friends? What about your neighbors kids who are complaining about "porn stars"? Kids know far more things than what they get exposed at home. Which is the whole point of that study. Most parents don't have a clue.

[Joel Zuckerman]

FWIW, I had never heard of Sasha Gray either, and after a quick search on "Google," don't want to know anything about her.

[Kalen Braley]

Shiv,

Its not a question of why, its a question of when.  Sooner or later they will hear about it, unless you resort to the lock em in thier bedroom closet option. 

You're right.  What I'm saying is that they can either get curious about it and want to know more about this garbage, or they can realize, with parental teaching, that these attempts from the outside to pullute their minds are precisely what they are: garbage to be ignored of their own volition -- and focus their curiosity on things that THEY are curious about on their own without such prompting, and that will actually do them some good.

Shiv,

We actually agree here...mostly.  Parents can talk about it and say the right things, but you can't control how much curiousity they actually develop for it, you can only talk openly and frankly and try to instill how we can learn from other peoples mistakes.

[Kalen Braley]

Shivas,

The saddest part about where your coming from, is that in my opinion you are setting a bad example for your kids.  There is enough, death, destruction, and others forms of bad behavoir in the world for every last person to be affected and influenced by it.  But in the end, we all have to make the best of what we have and build our own happiness, independent of how much ca-ca is going on around us.   If anything, you should be telling your kids its up to them what they will be, what they will think, and what kind of person they will be.

Looking to others to find blame for your misery, or thiers, is clearly well on the road to dis-satisfaction of everyone and everything, regarldess of your own personal station in life.  Shielding them is not doing them any favors....if anything you are crippling your kids and making them unable to process what the world is and denying them controlled experiences to teach them how to think for themselves.  You think your kids "belong" to you?  Your kids are on loan to you and no more belong to you than they belong to me.  Teaching them how to critically analyze thier surroundings, wherever they may be is one of the best gifts you could ever give them.  Forcing them to wear rosy glasses and only showing them unicorns and rainbows is a huge dis-service.

Once again, my $.02. 

[Tim Pitner]

Veering away from theories of parenting . . . given what we know now about Tiger's behavior and judgment, would it really surprise you if it came out that Tiger used PEDs?  I'm afraid the answer, for me, is no.  

[Kalen Braley]

Veering away from theories of parenting . . . given what we know now about Tiger's behavior and judgment, would it really surprise you now if it came out that Tiger used PEDs?  I'm afraid the answer, for me, is no. 

Tim,

I really hope this isn't true, because while his other activities have tarnished his "away from golf" side, his achievements on course remain an awesome achivement.  If this were somehow tainted and he were slotted into the Barry Bonds, Mark McGuire camp, then that really would be a pity and perhaps one of the greatest "falls" in all of professional sports.

[Jud_T]

Sadly this episode I fear has pulled back the curtain on Tiger and perhaps on pro golf in general..These guys are professional athletes, just like all the other ones who've been in the news since the Greek Olympics...Just because a lot of them grew up on country club courses and they're predominantly caucasian doesn't mean they're that much different...They all want to win, many have extra large egos, and some will do whatever they can get away with, personally and professionally....

[Dan_Callahan]

Veering away from theories of parenting . . . given what we know now about Tiger's behavior and judgment, would it really surprise you now if it came out that Tiger used PEDs?  I'm afraid the answer, for me, is no. 

I wouldn't be surprised at all, unfortunately. I didn't think my opinion of Tiger could sink any lower, but it certainly would if we knew for certain he was cheating at golf in addition to cheating on his wife.

What will crack me up is when certain people on this site explain that Tiger's steroid use is no big deal because Sinatra used steroids and it doesn't lessen his musical genius.

[Sean Eidson]

5. By virtue of his fraud, he made golf a profit center.  By definition, this made golf less of an honorable game. There are a finite number of motivations for any endeavour. By increasing one, all others are diminished. He drew countless profiteers to a game that had not previously been a profiteer's pursuit. In short, he created a bubble. And history shows that we all pay the price for that.
 

Tiger as bubble inflator is very insightful, at least for me.  I began playing golf shortly after TW arrived, became an avid player when he dominated Y2K, and invested countless hours watching him and dollars buying Nike apparel.  I wouldn't say that he's uniquely responsible for it, but he was a big part of the reason that golf has become my passion after growing up in a family without the game.

My 2-year old son can recognize TW in a moment on TV.  For a couple months, he wanted to fall asleep after I read him a TW children's book.  I have a copy of "How I play golf" that my son has literally spent hours flipping through and has been my vehicle to teach things like "Putter," and "Driver" that joined "Tiger" among his first hundred or so words.

From a purely personal perspective, Tiger inflated a bubble that my son is going to have to pay for, just as he will be responsible for the the reckless financial overindulgence of the last 15 years.  He'll pay with anxiety that he never earned on his own.

[Jim_Kennedy]

So like, at least he's got this goin' for him:

http://www.worldgolf.com/newswire/browse/61426-Tiger-Woods-named-Mens-Crisis-Centers-Man-Year-09

[Carl Rogers]

I am hoping (probably forlornly) that this TW episode will enable a larger segment of the public (yes, you can fool some people all the time) to distinguish the abilities of the athlete on the course, court, field etc. from what they do or do not all the rest of the time.