Least Favorite Player

[Wisguy]

  David L Yskes said:

Probably the best thing that ever happened was Tiger and his Ex getting into the imfamous fight and Tiger crashing his SUV, and the world finally finding out who he really is.....   A extremely bratty guy with a lot of money who thought he could get away with basically banging all the ****s in the world... Yet he was married to a really attractive women, yet she just was not enough...   And then his golf game went to crap, and he ended up being just another good golfer..

One of my guilty pleasures is that I sometimes read advice columns (yes, it's kind of lame) and this opinion and other similar ones I've seen here condemning Tiger for his infidelity remind me of the many letters I saw years ago to rather crusty, conservative Ann Landers and her sister Dear Abby on the topic of marital infidelity. Almost every single one of those "Abby, my/my sister's/my daughter's/my friend's hubby/boyfriend is cheating!" letters received exactly the same response - the filthy, no good b*st*rd was always 100% to blame, men were always assumed to be fully responsible for cheating and the woman was always the poor, innocent victim, 100% blameless. Given that the infidelity rate for marriages in the US is supposed to be around 50% and there's no small coterie of super-skank women who are responsible for all this cheating, that means that many millions of woman are also fully to blame for the adultery. It is simply unfair to say that one spouse is fully to blame, one is completely blameless without knowing all of the facts.

Now there are many reasons why one could criticize Tiger's judgment about decisions he made when cheating on his wife relating to who, what, where, when, why, how many, how likely indiscrete, etc.... However, none of us know a damn thing about his marriage or about Elin other than she was blond, Swedish and very pretty. Yes, she has innocent, somewhat angelic looks, but does that mean she was an angel? No, of course not. Maybe she turned into a horrible nag. Maybe she developed body issues and became self-conscious after her pregnancies, maybe she became religious or super-feminist, or maybe things just cooled off for her romantically and she turned into a frigid ice queen and she wasn't willing to do anything to make the situation better (haven't we all had at least a friend or two who found that stereotype about marriage coming true with their wives?). That would not altogether excuse Tiger's actions but it would go quite a ways toward making them seem less unreasonable. Just because Elin is attactive does not mean that she did not contribute toward problems in her marriage. Or maybe Elin was a terrific wife in all ways and Tiger really was the ego-driven POS that some people believe him to be. We just don't know. So, absent situations involving abuse and out-of-control addictions, I tend to hold back a bit on judging other people's relationship problems because there are two sides to every story and we seldom get to know the whole truth.

[jdwillas]

Gary Player comes off extremely narcissistic at times, but also comes off generous and congratulatory toward others. Stenson and Blixt sometimes come off as prickish in their interviews, but I think that might just be unfamiliar Swedish mannerisms. Bubba Watson's personality rubs me the wrong way.

However, I wouldn't root against any of the previously mentioned players. The only person on tour who I actively root against is Tiger Woods. The guy's an immature, arrogant phony. I would find it incredibly satisfying if he finished his career with 100+ wins and only 14 majors.

[3putter]

  Wisguy said:

Originally Posted by Wisguy

One of my guilty pleasures is that I sometimes read advice columns (yes, it's kind of lame) and this opinion and other similar ones I've seen here condemning Tiger for his infidelity remind me of the many letters I saw years ago to rather crusty, conservative Ann Landers and her sister Dear Abby on the topic of marital infidelity. Almost every single one of those "Abby, my/my sister's/my daughter's/my friend's hubby/boyfriend is cheating!" letters received exactly the same response - the filthy, no good b*st*rd was always 100% to blame, men were always assumed to be fully responsible for cheating and the woman was always the poor, innocent victim, 100% blameless. Given that the infidelity rate for marriages in the US is supposed to be around 50% and there's no small coterie of super-skank women who are responsible for all this cheating, that means that many millions of woman are also fully to blame for the adultery. It is simply unfair to say that one spouse is fully to blame, one is completely blameless without knowing all of the facts.

Now there are many reasons why one could criticize Tiger's judgment about decisions he made when cheating on his wife relating to who, what, where, when, why, how many, how likely indiscrete, etc.... However, none of us know a damn thing about his marriage or about Elin other than she was blond, Swedish and very pretty. Yes, she has innocent, somewhat angelic looks, but does that mean she was an angel? No, of course not. Maybe she turned into a horrible nag. Maybe she developed body issues and became self-conscious after her pregnancies, maybe she became religious or super-feminist, or maybe things just cooled off for her romantically and she turned into a frigid ice queen and she wasn't willing to do anything to make the situation better (haven't we all had at least a friend or two who found that stereotype about marriage coming true with their wives?). That would not altogether excuse Tiger's actions but it would go quite a ways toward making them seem less unreasonable. Just because Elin is attactive does not mean that she did not contribute toward problems in her marriage. Or maybe Elin was a terrific wife in all ways and Tiger really was the ego-driven POS that some people believe him to be. We just don't know. So, absent situations involving abuse and out-of-control addictions, I tend to hold back a bit on judging other people's relationship problems because there are two sides to every story and we seldom get to know the whole truth.

C'mon man. You have to drop reason at the door, and hastily render judgment on a situation most know nothing (Outside of media reports) about. I am 100% in agreement with you. However, it's a stick his haters will use to beat him with till the end of time. They obviously can't legitimately hate on him winning more than anyone playing right now, so they act like he had non-consensual sex with their wives/Sisters/daughter...etc.

[MSchott]

  jdwillas said:

Originally Posted by jdwillas

Gary Player comes off extremely narcissistic at times, but also comes off generous and congratulatory toward others. Stenson and Blixt sometimes come off as prickish in their interviews, but I think that might just be unfamiliar Swedish mannerisms. Bubba Watson's personality rubs me the wrong way.

However, I wouldn't root against any of the previously mentioned players. The only person on tour who I actively root against is Tiger Woods. The guy's an immature, arrogant phony. I would find it incredibly satisfying if he finished his career with 100+ wins and only 14 majors.

I'm confused. You come here out of nowhere and are generous towards various players who have shown possible personality flaws yet you show zero interest in forgiving Tiger Woods. This just feels hypocritical to me. You and don't know anything about who he really is yet feel that you can judge him harshly as a human being. This is the issue with this entire thread, we make judgements about others without having a real clue as to why.

[Lefty-Golfer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris223

As for the person who lost respect for phil because he applauded GREAT shots made by Rose during the Ryder Cup... clearly just doesnt understand the game, its history and what it stands for

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ernest Jones

Glad to see I'm not alone in this regard. I've heard lots of people slam Phil for the Ryder Cup match vs Rose and I just don't get the mentality. I thought it was pure class.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shorty

Agreed.

He was acknowledging good play, not "applauding his opposition".

Quote:

Originally Posted by Golfingdad

I'm with all of you three.  There was an extensive argument on this topic in the Ryder Cup thread ... if only Shorty was around at the time (I think it was during your hiatus)  ;)

I disagree with all of you, i don't have a problem giving credit to the opponent after the round...that is part of a press conference. i have a problem with acknowledging good play by applauding his shot. to me they are different acts entirely. give him a tip of the hat and walk way - that is an acknowledgement.

I love Phil's game and cheer for him all the time but he was wrong on that one in my opinion. you can damn certain it would not have happened the other way around if Phil had made the putt.

[HomerJay20]

  BallStriker said:

Originally Posted by BallStriker

Steve Stricker......I will keep the underlying reasons to myself, but a complete ass*hole

I'm going to assume that BallStriker is being sarcastic.  He probably had trouble deciding whether to use Steve Stricker or Zach Johnson for the post.

[Blitz28179]

  Lefty-Golfer said:

Originally Posted by Lefty-Golfer

I disagree with all of you, i don't have a problem giving credit to the opponent after the round...that is part of a press conference. i have a problem with acknowledging good play by applauding his shot. to me they are different acts entirely. give him a tip of the hat and walk way - that is an acknowledgement.

I love Phil's game and cheer for him all the time but he was wrong on that one in my opinion. you can damn certain it would not have happened the other way around if Phil had made the putt.

But this is phil micklelson we are talking about..You look up good sportmanship in the dictionary its gonna have a picture of Phil tipping his hat lol..I seen nothing wrong with what phil did to justin at the ryder cup.Jordan speith did the same thing to the dude who won this weekend on the PGA tour(forgot his name) after that great shot he hit from under the trees.

[Golfingdad]

  Lefty-Golfer said:

Originally Posted by Lefty-Golfer

You can damn certain it would not have happened the other way around if Phil had made the putt.

You can?  How?

And even if you could, what does that prove?  Just because somebody else wouldn't react that way doesn't make it wrong.

[hypocritenutter]

  GHIN0011458 said:

Originally Posted by GHIN0011458

Just seeing the guys you root against on TOUR:

I dislike Ian Poulter and Rory Sabbatini. But we always talk about whose better and favorites..

I agree, Ian Poulter is not very likeable. Seems to think that he rules the tour. He's great in Ryder Cups , but during the season you won't know he's there if it wasn't for his bright Puma feathers.