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

[k-troop]

Originally Posted by iacas

Sorry. You're right. I think I thought you'd quoted my post and responded. My bad.

"Scum" goes way too far. I think it was a breach of trust. I think that if you invite someone into your home, and he writes a book sharing private details, it's not the most upstanding thing to do. Even if the book was 100% golf I don't think that, as someone Tiger paid, he should necessarily write it while Tiger's still playing. Those parts, according to the people I trust, are a mixture of sour grapes, chest-beating, subtle Butch/Foley-put-downs, and so on.

And I have cited specific things. The first three that spring to mind:

- Hearsay re: Tiger's injuries.

- Almost anything involving Elin.

- Popsicle-gate.

No, I'm still not gonna read it. Not really even because I don't want to (I'm pretty ambivalent). I might get to it in a few years. But there are about 20 books ahead of it on my Kindle and 10 "physical" books I'll read first. I'm currently in the middle of "What I Talk About When I Talk About Running".

I get that the book is 98% "golf-related." Doesn't mean it's not a lousy book.

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.

[k-troop]

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.)

Originally Posted by turtleback

And unless someone convincingly says that those excerpts are not in the book at all, then no, I won't read the book.

Originally Posted by turtleback

No I haven't read the book and I won't.  I have no interest in a barrel of sewage.

Originally Posted by majorchamp

Again the content of the book doesnt matter to me. So whether i read it or not doesnt mean sh*t. Its disrespectful for haney to have written the book...period.

Originally Posted by iacas

I didn't pre-form judgments. I'm relating what others who have read the book have told me.

Originally Posted by iacas

No, I'm still not gonna read it.

Originally Posted by newtogolf

I'll take your word for it that the book is 98% about golf.

[k-troop]

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.

Originally Posted by meenman

Has anyone that has read the book found anything that Hank shouldnt have said?

I am in the 5th chapter and the most damning thing I see is that Hank never got offered a popsicle.

Originally Posted by ggallant1

I finished the book yesterday and seems like a lot of comments in this thread are based on excerpts or hearsay about Hank. Take the time and read the book and your opinion will change drastically. The book is hard to put down and gets into a lot of Hanks philosophies around the golf swing, and Tiger's swing in particular. It IS a golf book. Does he get off on short tangents about Tiger's obsession with the military, his personal life, and his moodiness? Yes, but that probably makes up 5% of the book.

Read the book, you may be surprised at what you learn and how interested you become in different swing theories.

Originally Posted by meenman

I am guessing that you havent listened to many interviews - more have been critical of Haney than not, also those that have been critical have admittedly not read the book

Originally Posted by newtogolf

I heard one on the PGA Channel on XM, and one with Murray on MDR channel on XM.  In both cases they asked if Haney felt he betrayed a trust and when Haney said no they pretty much dropped it.  They also said he was pretty fair in the book to Tiger and that the most negative content was released in the excerpts.  If others have been critical then I must have just heard the wrong ones.  Thanks.

Originally Posted by bodmanza

Read the book. Didn't find it to have an agenda nor be anywhere near as slanderous as early excerpts made it seem.

The Carton accusations regarding the "icy" stares are quite over the top in my opinion.

Originally Posted by clubchamp

I might be in the minority but I didn't find the book to really bash Tiger at all. Outside of the military obsession stuff the rest was stuff that anyone could have gathered on their own from watching Tiger with the media etc. Now the Carton interview I think that was him going for his own ratings because talking about being around Tigers wife after the scandal and seeing them having "icy stares" at each other. Really? what else would happen after something like that came out and again it didn't bash Tiger or Elin but I didn't need Hanks book to tell me that they weren't doing well. I mean did Haney do it for money... yes but I'm sure he could have included a lot of damaging stuff that he left out. All in all it's a decent read

Originally Posted by RichF

Quote:

Actually, it seems you're going to be in majority now that the book actually tells us the opposite of what the media-snippets suggested.

I finished it last night and as predicted, an excellent book...No 'Tiger-bashing' at all - but did portray him as pretty much everyone knows now.

First 120 pages are nothing but praise for Woods and overall its a a fair and balanced account of the period HH spent with Woods. The overall impression is one we all know and that is Tiger is the best golfer we've ever seen, but his full swing changes have taken too much time away from his short game. There were at least 3 or 4 majors that Hank talked about Tiger's putting stats, and his putter was the weapon that did him in.

Unfortunately, certain people that haven't read the book and generally are of the opinion that HH is scum...regardless of the book because now the book is out and proves NOT to be what they all thought it would, they bang on and on about the 'client-confidentially' issue, so now they're put in a dilemma:

They hate Hank but want to read the book but don't want Hank to make any money off Tiger.

Do yourselves a favor: read the book and then make an objective comment.

Originally Posted by meenman

I just finished reading the book. The excerpts are definitely like movie ads - trying to draw controversy and sell more books (which would be the publisher's doings and not Hanks.) There was nothing I found to be sensationalized just to sell books.

I will admit to being a fan of Haney and Tiger - but those trashing it, without reading it are nothing more than puppets jumping on the *trash Hank* bandwagon.

I definitely recommend it to all - for me to finish a book in 5 days when I have read maybe 2 other books in the last 20 years says a lot.

Originally Posted by mchepp

The truly surprising part to me is not that the book was revealing about Hank the person but that it revealed how insecure Hank is about himself and what he taught. It seems to me that Hank is really desperate for Tiger to appreciate all the work he did. If there is a theme it is that Tiger never appreciated him and when Hank was really feeling unappreciated he would send Tiger a really long email....whining.

The way Hank attempts to show us that Tiger doesn't appreciate people is the relationship with Keith Kleven, Tiger's trainer, that Keith was always looking for Tiger's approval and appreciation and Hank claims Tiger never really gave it to him. I think Hank threw Keith under the bus, in order to let us the reader know Tiger doesn't appreciate anyone. Truly a passive aggressive move if you ask me.

I have very mixed feelings about the book. On the one hand, I can see Hank's viewpoint, and he does make some valid points, but on the other hand he takes shots at Tiger because Hank feels he worked so hard but never got any love.

I may write a longer review later on after I think some more about it.

Originally Posted by mchepp

No. All are in the book. Now, taken out of context, yeah, probably. Like anything once you hear it in context with everything else Hank wanted to say I think your view of it will be different, at least mine was.

[iacas]

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.

[k-troop]

Originally Posted by iacas

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.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by k-troop

You blasted my credibility, judgment, and bias.

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.

[newtogolf]

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....

Originally Posted by k-troop

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.)

[brocks]

[quote]Originally Posted by k-troop: You blasted my credibility, judgment, and bias.

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 (??). [/quote] 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?

[k-troop]

You're right, and I stand corrected.

Originally Posted by newtogolf

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....

Originally Posted by newtogolf

Haney takes observations he remembers from his time with Tiger and then tries to apply them to what we know now.  For example Haney states toward the end, Tiger started to pay more attention to his cell phone, changing numbers frequently, taking calls and texting during practice sessions which is something he wouldn't do in the past.   Haney then mentions the news reports after the accident and assumes that Tiger was texting these women and this was the reason for the behavior change during practice, but claims he doesn't know for certain.

I'll agree the book could have been more damaging to Tiger, but the fact is it was still a betrayal of trust.  It's also sad Haney felt the need to give his own statistical analysis of Tigers performance with him versus Tigers time with Harmon to soothe his ego and respond to those who felt Tiger did worse during his time with Haney.

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?

[iacas]

Originally Posted by brocks

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 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.

Originally Posted by brocks

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?

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

[majorchamp]

this thread is still going on. wow.

[newtogolf]

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.

Originally Posted by k-troop

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?

[The_Pharaoh]

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.

[Chas]

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.

[iacas]

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

This appeared in the Wall Street Journal on Friday. These may be the first comments by Butch on this book.

Quote:

"I'm very surprised that he would write it," Harmon said this week. "I'd never do that to Tiger or Greg [Norman] or any of the guys I've been with. We get to spend a lot of time with these people, sometimes even more time than their own families. Things are said, or you see different things, and it's just — it is what it is, you just leave it where it belongs. I was really shocked to see him talk about Elin and Tiger's kids and stuff like that, I don't think that had any place in it."

He went on: "It almost seems the way he has everything documented in there—too many times and dates and places that you wouldn't come up with from memory—it's like he kept precise notes all along with writing a book in mind."

[The_Pharaoh]

Originally Posted by iacas

Quote:

"I'm very surprised that he would write it," Harmon said this week. "I'd never do that to Tiger or Greg [Norman] or any of the guys I've been with. We get to spend a lot of time with these people, sometimes even more time than their own families. Things are said, or you see different things, and it's just — it is what it is, you just leave it where it belongs. I was really shocked to see him talk about Elin and Tiger's kids and stuff like that, I don't think that had any place in it."

He went on: "It almost seems the way he has everything documented in there—too many times and dates and places that you wouldn't come up with from memory—it's like he kept precise notes all along with writing a book in mind."

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.

[Chas]

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.

[newtogolf]

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.

Originally Posted by The_Pharaoh

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.