TigerMania II Begins

Tiger has won again and the golf media in general is ecstatic. Now, instead of having to do the heavy lifting of covering 150 Tour players, they can go back to focusing on The One.  There’s no need to chase interviews—or even go outside the air conditioned, food supplied media tent—because the only interviews Tiger gives are held after a round at the insistence of the Tour. Writers don’t have to worry about being scooped because what anyone knows about Tiger, everyone knows.

The writing aspect just got easier, too. Instead of trying to find clever things to say about players no one has heard of (although if the media did its job that wouldn’t be the case), they can fall back on the worn cliches that surround The Greatest Player Ever.

Television crews will get a breather. Since all the producers will want is shots of Tiger, there’s no need to go dashing about from player to player with all of that equipment. One player, one storyline.

Everything is right again in the media world.

But for the rest of us, I think golf just got a lot less interesting.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Original Golf Blogger on Patreon!

7 thoughts on “TigerMania II Begins”

  1. So, I do not understand how watching the or one of the best golfers ever in a race against history can be considered less interesting than Luke Donald doing anything. It just does not make sense to me.  Sounds like sour grapes from you that Tiger won and in convincing fashion.

    Reply
  2. This really isn’t as much about Tiger, as it is about the sycophantic media.

    For me, a golf tournament/season (or indeed any sport’s game/season) is most interesting when the outcome is in doubt. When Tiger is at his best, the rest of the field melts, the media covers him almost exclusively, and there’s no reason to watch. On Saturday night, you can just check to see if Tiger is in the lead. If he is, there’s no reason to watch Sunday, because the outcome really isn’t in doubt and the media coverage is entirely predictable.

    Simply put: boring

    Yes, I know there’s a certain level of excitement at seeing him make great shots. But I’ve been watching those for a decade. I’m pretty sure I’ve seen them all.

    So. Boring again.

    Years ago, when I was writing my thesis on baseball free agency, I ran across an interesting article in which economist Gerald Scully argued that baseball is at its healthiest when the outcome of the season is in doubt. If we know that the Yankees are going to win, then there’s no reason to watch. I think the same thing applies in baseball.

    Reply
  3. The thing is, its not so much about Tiger vs the field as it is tiger vs jack hogan etc. and history.  don’t you feel privielged to be watching the best golfer ever in his prime? Isnt the comebackstory fascinating??

    Reply
  4. I guess that’s the fundamental difference in our views, then. For me it is about the competition here and now, not a chase of history (which I do not believe can be accurately compared, anyway).I want to see highly competitive events were the outcome is always in doubt. I like the NFL’s mantra of “on any given Sunday.”

    Reply
  5. I certainly understand how boring the media is going to get here.  Without a doubt, they will shortly be saying Rory who?  Regardless if the Irishman wins, places or shows in the next 3 tournaments.  The only thing that will save us from a Masters tournament where 80% of the coverage is Tiger is the fact that the Masters controls the coverage itself.

    But I disagree that we now have the second coming of Tiger.  He won a tournament, and he won it convincingly, and he has been playing better… But let’s see how he does In the majors.  He went 0-4 in 2009, before he ran into the tree.  And 2009 was one of the most dominant years otherwise, and he isn’t close to that level.

    If he stays healthy. I could see a couple more, perhaps to win he FedEx cup.  But I still don’t think he will advance on Jack even once this year.

    Reply
  6. I can see your point if it was like other sports where the outcome was never in doubt.  And perhaps Tiger winning every major by 8 shots would be bad for the sport.  But it isn;t the case.  Even at his best he only wins about 50% of the time. How much more of a toss up could it be?

    Reply
  7. By my count, over his career, Tiger has won approximately 20% of his starts. That’s not bad, except that there are 140 or so players in the field. Assuming that three quarters of those are journeymen who would never really win, that still leaves 40 or so players. So in an even field, Tiger’s expected win percentage would be around two percent. He wins ten times more than expected.

    He’s been so good over his career that’s not surprising. But if the Yankees won ten times as many games as their next competitor, they would finish every season 146 – 16.

    That would be a lot of fun if you were a Yankees fan, but not much fun for everyone else. And it certainly would be bad for baseball.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: