Hank Haney's Book "The Big Miss" about his time teaching Tiger - Page 19

Two independent sources cited by HH relating to the source of the injury.  One was Tiger's best golfing bud.

 

What is "almost anything" involving Elin?  Is that what you call a citation to a passage in the book, or is it speculation about what you thought might be in the book based on excerpts?

 

Popsicle-gate is stupid.  When I posted my specific thoughts on this topic, your response was "I'm not going to read your analysis, because I don't care" or something like that.

 

I'm not trying to be argumentative here, but I do think you need to justify your opinions if you're going to attack mine.  Otherwise, your opinion is that of someone with a Tiger man-crush who refuses to read the book, but insists on judging it anyway.

The strongest critics of the book haven't read it, and have stated that they won't read it.  (To be fair, majorchamp came back off his statement and said he might read it at some point.  Iacas stated he would read it after he reads 20 or 30 other books, which is effectively a refusal.)
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And just as interesting, every person who has claimed to read the book and posted to this thread is quoted below.  (If I missed someone, I'm sorry, and I quoted a couple others who talked about reviews by others who had read the book.)  Not one person concludes, after reading the book, that it's a "massive breach of trust."  I think I'm in safe company.
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

k-troop, buddy, I'm not sure why you've got a bug up your rear about this. I've simply responded lately to your assertions that people "speculated" and formed opinions based on that speculation when they did no such thing. They formed opinions based on actual portions of the book. Those aren't "my opinions" - those are the facts of the discussion. If you think it's silly to form an opinion based on small excerpts, fine, but I saw nobody saying "the whole book is complete trash, and I know because I read 0.24% of it!"

 

I also made up the sewage/fine wine comparison. To some, if even 0.24% of the book is sewage, then the whole book is at best only slightly worse sewage.

 

The book is three feet from me btw. I'll read it after I read 20-30 others, including Moe and Me and the Billy Casper book.

You blasted my credibility, judgment, and bias. 

 

Do you know how one establishes credibility, judgment, and bias?  State explicitly what facts you're relying on.  Explain your conclusions, and the logic used to reach those conclusions.  Demonstrate openness to new facts, and willingness to reconsider your opinions based on those facts.  I've done that a few times.  I've invited you to comment on my analysis, and you've dismissed it as unnecessary.

 

Yet you continue to blast my credibility, judgment, and bias.  And you continue to offer your opinion as "based in fact," yet you won't reveal exactly what those facts are (vague references to categories of information don't cut it, IMO), and you won't explain why those specific things constitute a breach of trust.

 

I've got the same bug up my rear that Phil Mickelson would have if Kevin Stadler called him fat.

 

Wow. No, I haven't. But you clearly take stuff like this about 10x more seriously than I do, or something. I don't know how you think I've "blasted" you at all, but whatever (??).

 

My only real issue in this is that you keep saying people are speculating or forming opinions based on non-facts. No, they're not - they're forming opinions based on less information than you'd like, but they aren't speculative.

 

That's about it.

I read the book.  I didn't at the time I made that post but since then I have and posted some comments.  Talk about taking quotes out of context....
 

 

Good Heavens. You said (of K-troop), "I suspect many would not peg you as unbiased in this, so I don't know that your judgment can be relied upon to post things that others might want to discuss."

I don't know that your judgment can be relied on to moderate fairly, as IMO you have far different standards for some posters than others, including yourself. Do you consider that a blast? Do you consider it an insult worth deleting, like other posts that violate your constantly shifting standards?

You're right, and I stand corrected. 

 

 

 

Why do you think that it's a "fact" that it was a betrayal of trust?  What specific revelations in the book do you think were made as a result of HH taking advantage of his unique access?  What confidential communications did he reveal?  (I'm not saying there were none, I just don't think they were that bad, particularly in the Tiger-Elin relationship, which is where he should be most subject to criticism if he crossed the line.)

 

Also, why do you think it's sad that HH compared his record to Butch?  Obviously, a lot of people proclaim that Tiger was "better" under Butch.  HH obviously disagrees; it's hard to blame him for wanting to answer those who would criticize the most important project of his life.  He also provides some compelling evidence, giving stats of Tiger's win/top-3/top-10 percentages under him vs. under Butch.  Is it not appropriate for him to take the opportunity to state his case why he did just as good a job, if not better, than Butch?

 

 

 

I know what I said (Duh.)

 

Some would put k-troop in the group who finds nothing wrong with what Hank did. As such, he may "miss" some parts of the book that he sees nothing wrong with but which other people might claim as evidence to support their opinion that writing a book was not 100% completely "cool."

 

If I hated Tiger Woods, or absolutely loved him, I'd be a biased source for information about that too. If I was a Haney instructor, I'd be a biased source. On this, I'm largely an uninterested source. K-Troop seems to be a little towards the "Haney-fan, Tiger-hater" side of the spectrum. Not a lot, but a little.

 

Nope and nope (obviously). Stick to the topic, though, eh? Thanks.

this thread is still going on. wow.

Hank became Tigers employee because Tiger and Mark O'Meara (Hanks student and Tigers friend) lived in the same community, used the same range and Tiger trusted Mark.  Hank makes it pretty clear in his book he had an interest in becoming Tigers instructor and used O'Meara to help gain Tigers trust and confidence.   Tiger opened his home and life to Hank, and pretty much gave Hank free reign as Hank made numerous mentions on how he came in after hours and had his own room in Tigers house.  You don't let a man sleep in the same house as your wife and kids if you don't trust them so there was an implied trust that goes with it.  

 

I highly doubt Tiger would have shared his thoughts about the Navy SEALs or his problems with Elin if he believed Hank was going to write a tell all book.  Hank had no business sharing anything Tiger told him within the scope of their friendship.  So IMO, anything regarding his Navy SEALs interest, his relationship with Elin, the Ian Poulter story, the popscicle story, the crazy army body guard who channeled Earl and anything else outside of their professional relationship was off limits in the book.  I have no problem with Hank talking about Tigers swing issues, lack of practice or even his fear of the driver would have been okay because that was job related and Tiger didn't force Hank to sign a non-disclosure.  Hank further betrays the trust by taking these isolated incidents he witnessed as Tigers friend and attempts to play monday morning shrink by relating them to what he claims to have read in the press.   Hank had no idea who or what Tiger was texting, so he should have kept it to himself rather than speculate.  If Tiger approved of the content in Hanks book he would have wrote the Foreward or endorsed the book.  Hank knew when he wrote it, it was a betrayal of trust and he attempted to do damage control once it was announced the books release date.   I'd guess Tiger learned some things about Hank that Hank wouldn't want made public and Tiger to date hasn't discussed a single incident. 

 

As for comparing his stats with Butch it comes off as petty and makes Hank look very insecure.  Someone who is self confident and proud of their accomplishments is usually humble and deferential when asked to compare themselves to someone else.   When Jack is asked about Tiger he gives Tiger props and claims it's not for him to say who's the best that fans and history will decide.  Hank goes through multiple pages of contrived statistical analysis just to give his readers proof that Tiger performed better with him than Butch.  This tells me that Hank feels substandard to Butch and felt the need to justify in print he's just as good or better.  To me that's just sad, I don't see Butch offering a counter-argument or statistical analysis to support that he was the better swing coach, he's letting the fans and history decide. 

 

 

I just finished reading the book and I really don't know what all the fuss is about. I've come away with nothing new or discovered anything really surprising. Tiger may have been against the book initially as he probably thought HH was going to spill a lot more beans. I'm fairly certain Tiger has read the book now and thought phew, that wasn't so bad.

Some comments, from someone who has not yet read the book but plans to get hold of a copy today and start reading it.

 

1) This is one of the most amusing and entertaining threads I've read in a long time.  Tx to all for that.

2) It is remarkable that so many here would so viciously attack the author of a book that they have never read, based on some excerpts that have been selected for obvious marketing purposes. 

3) I would never form anything like a firm judgement, of the kind made here by many, about a book that I have never read.  This is a silly thing to do imho.  Context is everything in literature, even in the case of a golfing book like this.

4) I have been reading the thread in reverse-chronological order and had k-troop figured for a lawyer after a while, well before I saw his reference to his vocation in one of his posts.  The guy makes his arguments so cogently, maintains his position so consistently and responds to points made by others so effectively, that I would have bet money on it.  Alternatively, he might have been a scientist ....

5) When I have read the book I will post my mini-review.  I am a severe critic of many of Tiger's personal life decisions (see various old threads) but a strong and consistent admirer of him as a golfer, including his recent attempts to get back to previous form and success.  I hope he is successful in this but have my doubts.  I find the whole "Tiger hater" or "fan-boy" categorization by others simple-minded and unhelpful.  Life is almost never that simple, and that goes for attempts to understand major sporting figures like TW.

6) Carry on with the entertaining thread chaps, I can't get enough of it.   

 

p.s. I could be wrong but despite received wisdom here I suspect that most buyers of this book will be those with a genuine interest in TW as a golfer, rather than those with a prurient or otherwise non-golfing interest in TW as celebrity.  It does sound like the latter type of reader will be sorely disappointed in Haney's book, from all I have read here and elsewhere.  I suspect that Haney could have written a true "tell all" book to serve those prurient or non-golfing interests rather well, had he chosen to do so - full of personal and unflattering observations about TW's domestic life, interpersonal interactions, comments about him by other golfers, etc etc.  It seems he chose not to do that, but I'll have to read the blasted book to see for myself if this is the case.

Edited by Chas - 4/22/12 at 10:07am

Rick Smith commented and said Hank Haney violated "the code of ethics" (unwritten, of course). Now Butch Harmon has done the same.

 

 

 

 

 

Butch obviously hasn't read the book, but heard about HH's final chapter when HH proves he had a better record coaching Tiger. Elin and the kids appear in like 5 lines, and usually as a throwaway comment like, "I arrived at Tiger's house and I was surprised to see Elin and the kids there. They left soon after I arrived. Anyway, back to Tiger's swing....". If anything is documented it is because it is fairly easy to remember when The Masters, US Open, Open Championship and USPGA Championships are played.

 

In my opinion, Butch is making these comments in order to come off looking better in the public eye. Strange, as HH was very complimentary of him as Tiger's coach.

Does anyone know if Harmon has read the book? Does anyone who has actually read the book understand what exactly he might be referring to in the book regarding Erin or the kids, other than the icy stares?

Time to read the book I guess ....

Later (after reading Pharaoh's post above, which I hadn't seen): I agree, Harmon appears to be trying to 'take the high ground' on the subject by denigrating Haney. If he hasn't read the book it's rather pitiful.

I don't believe Hank was complimentary of Butch, he said some nice things but in a backhanded sort of way.  Hank was quite vocal about not liking how Tigers backswing would cross the line with Butch, and how Butch was loud and always trying to garner attention.  He later goes on to say how he believed Tiger was attracted to Hank because HH was quiet and content to sit off to the side. 

 

You're also minimizing the references HH makes about Tigers personal life.  While not the primary topic of many chapters, Hank manages to sneak in details about Tigers personal life as filler for many of the points he was discussing in each chapter.  One example is when HH discussed Tigers relationship with Steve Williams, their relationship had nothing to do with Hank but Hank felt the need to include them and indicate how Steve and Hank were allies and how Steve didn't like Butch.