|
|
Post by 78crusader on Jul 19, 2009 10:55:30 GMT -5
....that golf is not a real sport comes courtesy of 59-year old Tom Watson, who as I write this is leading the British Open after three rounds.
Most of us have long suspected golf is not a real sport, but Mr. Watson has provided us with CONCLUSIVE evidence that golf is more akin to, say, horseshoes or lawn darts than a real sport.
Could a 59 year old guy quarterback his team to the Super Bowl? Lead his team to the NBA title? Bring home the gold in the decathlon? Lead the league in home runs? Of course not.
I know, golf enthusiasts will say, wait a darn minute...golf involves...well, golf involves...ok, golf involves a lot of WALKING and a lot of HAND EYE COORDINATION, so of course it is a legit sport.
To which I say: baloney. Hand eye coordination? Hey, lawn darts requires this also. And horseshoes. Maybe even Mario Cart. Or pinball. And my 70 year old neighbor walks 5 miles per day, but I don't think he's ready to face Zack Greinke or Tim Lincecum, or go one on one with LeBron.
I will admit speaking from zero experience in actually watching golf, which I have never done and never will do. I cannot imagine anything worse than having to watch golf. Maybe a marathon showing of "I'm A Celebrity, Get Me Out of Here" or any episode ever filmed of the Oprah Winfrey Show, but that would be about it.
Paul
|
|
|
|
Post by vu72 on Jul 19, 2009 11:21:17 GMT -5
I'll take the bait. Although you didn't say it, I presume that in addition to never watching golf that you've never played it either.
If you think that Tom Watson or any of the world's best players aren't athletes, then you've never seen Tiger Woods up close. These guys, including Tom, workout non-stop.
Golf requires an incredible amount of inovation, creativity and flat out talent. Swinging a club at 125 miles per hour and reaching a spot on a ball that is 1.625 inches wide, is one thing. Hitting it precisely at the exact spot you want, with the correct angle of attack with the wind, approaching hazzards and match pressure all in mind, is simply beyond challenging. If it were so easy, then why does a player like Woods shoot 62 one day and 75 the next?
Every shot is different, and so vastly diferent then say, tennis.
And finally, although not the case today, if you try to walk 5 miles four four straight days in 90 plus degrees of heat and 75 % humidity, I wish you good luck. Tome Watson couldn't hold up to that.
Having played a great deal of golf, I will tell you that it is indeed a great spectator sport because I understand how difficult the things they do are, shot after shot.
I'll be watching Tom closely today and hoping against hope that this former college classmate of mine (we went to college together at different places) sets the record for being the oldest to win a major championship! Go Tom!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by stlvufan on Jul 20, 2009 10:49:26 GMT -5
It's obviously a great spectator sport, given the huge crowds one sees on TV watching in person. My Dad watches it every chance he gets, when he's not looking in on CNBC or FNC to see what is going on with the market (for reasons passing understanding - mine, at least). Being a duffer who would need a years worth of weekly practice just to match in 9 holes what Tiger Woods shoots for 18 (total strokes, I mean), I can watch it if I have to and have at least a modicum of appreciation for what they are trying to do. But mostly it bores me to tears after about 10 minutes.
It's obviously a sport, as vu72 demonstrated. Hey, 72, if you think this is bad, you should hear dimtwits I've heard describing baseball as an easy sport to play (in the context of "Hey, for 1 million bucks I'd play and be happy about it! Darn ingrates...." to which I respond "So, when are you going to quit you day job and put your money where your mouth is, eh? No? I thought as much.") or that ever popular "it's a kid's game". Both are sports, but I would put golf on one of the lower levels and baseball on one of the higher levels. There is a qualitative difference. I'm not sure I can wrap my brain around it enough to spell it out, but I know it when I see it.
Let's start with this. Everything you described above is just as complicated if not more if we're instead talking about swinging a piece of lumber at a ball that is NOT stationary (ery?) but hurtling toward you at 90+ mph. That adds a whole new complexity factor that golf doesn't have.
|
|
|
|
Post by vu72 on Jul 20, 2009 11:59:02 GMT -5
I'm with you stlvufan, when it comes to describing baseball as clearly a sport, and perhaps one of the most challenging. I've heard it said that hitting a round ball with a round bat (and as you said, with it coming at you at 90 mph--(and perhaps breaking at the same time) as the most challenging thing in sport. Just ask the best basketball player of all time how his baseball career went!
Just food for thought in comparing the challenges of the two sports: Clearly having the ball moving as described is a bigger challenge however having to hit the ball to a specific location, say, 20 feet wide while the wind in blowing one way or another at say, 20+ mph and perhaps having rain at the same time, has to be considered nearly as difficult.
I'n really bumed that my classmate Tom didn't pull off perhaps as big a sports accomplishment as has been done in a long while. Still, just finishing second at age 59, almost 60, must rank right up there.
|
|
|
|
Post by stlvufan on Jul 20, 2009 12:48:51 GMT -5
72, I would suggest that what is extremely difficult to do in golf is absolutely impossible to do in baseball -- on purpose. I'm actually channeling a White Sox fan friend of mine who constantly gets up on his soapbox when confronted by people who swear there have been hitters who could hit the ball exactly where they wanted to. The advantage the golfer has over the hitter is, once again, the ball is stationary (ery?).
By comparison, it is easier to hit the ball to a given *neighborhood* on the field of play, but I think I know just enough about golf to know that's not quite good enough (just as it is not good enough in baseball a lot of times).
By the way, there's one other feat on the baseball diamond that is absolutely impossible to do on purpose. Whether you do it or not is 100% luck. Anybody know what that might be (note: it *is* a very important event when you are successful)?
|
|
|
|
Post by valpo04 on Jul 20, 2009 13:05:06 GMT -5
Stationary \Sta"tion*a*ry\, a. [L. stationarius: cf. F. stationnaire. Cf. Stationer.]
1. Not moving; not appearing to move; stable; fixed.
Charles Wesley, who is a more stationary man, does not believe the story. --Southey.
2. Not improving or getting worse; not growing wiser, greater, better, more excellent, or the contrary.
3. Appearing to be at rest, because moving in the line of vision; not progressive or retrograde, as a planet.
Stationery \Sta"tion*er*y\, n.
The articles usually sold by stationers, as paper, pens, ink, quills, blank books, etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by rlh on Jul 20, 2009 13:41:47 GMT -5
Golf is most DEFINITELY a sport..one of the most exacting, frustrating, thrilling sports ever invented....below is the definition of sport from Wikipedia....'nuff said.... Sport is an activity that is governed by a set of rules or customs and often engaged in competitively. Sports commonly refer to activities where the physical capabilities of the competitor are the sole or primary determinant of the outcome (winning or losing), but the term is also used to include activities such as mind sports (a common name for some card games and board games with little to no element of chance) and motor sports where mental acuity or equipment quality are major factors. Sport is commonly defined as an organized, competitive and skillful physical activity requiring commitment and fair play. Some view sports as differing from games based on the fact that there are usually higher levels of organization and profit (not always monetary) involved in sports. Accurate records are kept and updated for most sports at the highest levels, while failures and accomplishments are widely announced in sport news. The term sports is sometimes extended to encompass all competitive activities in which offense and defense are played, regardless of the level of physical activity. Both games of skill and motor sport exhibit many of the characteristics of physical sports, such as skill, sportsmanship, and at the highest levels, even professional sponsorship associated with physical sports. Sports that are subjectively judged are distinct from other judged activities such as beauty pageants and bodybuilding shows, because in the former the activity performed is the primary focus of evaluation, rather than the physical attributes of the contestant as in the latter (although "presentation" or "presence" may also be judged in both activities). Sports are most often played just for fun or for the simple fact that people need exercise to stay in good physical condition. Although they do not always succeed, sports participants are expected to display good sportsmanship, standards of conduct such as being respectful of opponents and officials, and congratulating the winner when losing.  |
|
|
|
Post by vu72 on Jul 20, 2009 14:20:53 GMT -5
72, I would suggest that what is extremely difficult to do in golf is absolutely impossible to do in baseball -- on purpose. I'm actually channeling a White Sox fan friend of mine who constantly gets up on his soapbox when confronted by people who swear there have been hitters who could hit the ball exactly where they wanted to. The advantage the golfer has over the hitter is, once again, the ball is stationary (ery?). By comparison, it is easier to hit the ball to a given *neighborhood* on the field of play, but I think I know just enough about golf to know that's not quite good enough (just as it is not good enough in baseball a lot of times). By the way, there's one other feat on the baseball diamond that is absolutely impossible to do on purpose. Whether you do it or not is 100% luck. Anybody know what that might be (note: it *is* a very important event when you are successful)? Would it be the unassisted triple play?? Oh yeah, and comparing the two sports again, if 4 out of 10 attempted strokes in golf were successful, I would be a pretty bad golfer. In baseball, I'd be either Ted Williams, Joe Mauer or, at a minimum, in the Hall of Fame!!  |
|
|
|
Post by valpo04 on Jul 20, 2009 15:41:28 GMT -5
Would it be the unassisted triple play?? Oh yeah, and comparing the two sports again, if 4 out of 10 attempted strokes in golf were successful, I would be a pretty bad golfer. In baseball, I'd be either Ted Williams, Joe Mauer or, at a minimum, in the Hall of Fame!! Define successful... Golf has a much, MUCH smaller target and margin of error, so of course its harder to have a "successful" shot in golf than it is in baseball. There is a reason they give you at least 3 swings in baseball per attempt... |
|
|
|
Post by jj on Jul 20, 2009 15:49:18 GMT -5
'72,I know Watson went to Stanford,but you too?I thought the only Stanford campus was in Palo Alto. Where were you?  |
|
|
|
Post by stlvufan on Jul 20, 2009 16:03:25 GMT -5
72, I would suggest that what is extremely difficult to do in golf is absolutely impossible to do in baseball -- on purpose. I'm actually channeling a White Sox fan friend of mine who constantly gets up on his soapbox when confronted by people who swear there have been hitters who could hit the ball exactly where they wanted to. The advantage the golfer has over the hitter is, once again, the ball is stationary (ery?). By comparison, it is easier to hit the ball to a given *neighborhood* on the field of play, but I think I know just enough about golf to know that's not quite good enough (just as it is not good enough in baseball a lot of times). By the way, there's one other feat on the baseball diamond that is absolutely impossible to do on purpose. Whether you do it or not is 100% luck. Anybody know what that might be (note: it *is* a very important event when you are successful)? Would it be the unassisted triple play?? Nope. It is 100% luck whether you are presented with such an opportunity, I suppose, but pulling it off is mostly, if not totally, a matter of skill. |
|
|
|
Post by 78crusader on Jul 20, 2009 16:56:57 GMT -5
To all those misguided golf fans on this forum:
Need I remind you that our Supreme Court, in PGA v. Martin (2001), has ruled that providing a golf cart to a golfer so he does not have to walk between holes is permissible since it "does not alter the essential nature" of the game. This means -- take note here -- that WALKING IS NOT EVEN REQUIRED TO PLAY GOLF. So, we are left with the argument...wait a minute here, I'm trying to find it...I know there is an argument here somewhere...oh, yes, there it is...IT IS HARD TO HIT THAT LITTLE WHITE BALL AND MAKE IT GO WHERE YOU WANT IT TO.
Sure, it is difficult to hit a little white stationary ball. But so is trying to throw my empty Propel bottle into the wastebasket in my garage from my work bench. This doesn't make my "Propel Ball" a real sport. A game, maybe. A sport, no.
As Exhibit A to this legal brief, I simply will attach any photograph of John Daly. No, make that Phil Mickelson.
Paul
|
|
|
|
Post by vu72 on Jul 20, 2009 20:01:15 GMT -5
To all those misguided golf fans on this forum: Need I remind you that our Supreme Court, in PGA v. Martin (2001), has ruled that providing a golf cart to a golfer so he does not have to walk between holes is permissible since it "does not alter the essential nature" of the game. This means -- take note here -- that WALKING IS NOT EVEN REQUIRED TO PLAY GOLF. So, we are left with the argument...wait a minute here, I'm trying to find it...I know there is an argument here somewhere...oh, yes, there it is...IT IS HARD TO HIT THAT LITTLE WHITE BALL AND MAKE IT GO WHERE YOU WANT IT TO. Sure, it is difficult to hit a little white stationary ball. But so is trying to throw my empty Propel bottle into the wastebasket in my garage from my work bench. This doesn't make my "Propel Ball" a real sport. A game, maybe. A sport, no. As Exhibit A to this legal brief, I simply will attach any photograph of John Daly. No, make that Phil Mickelson. Paul Comparing your propel bottle toss to Phil Mickelson is like saying "Old McDonald" and Bach are both just music. I do understand how you might not appreciate what is going on out there on the golf course, never having tried the sport. Up close, when you see a guy bend that little white ball 30 yards around a tree, or hit it 230 yards and stop it within 10 feet, or play it out of thick rough, throw it straight up in the air and land it a foot from the pin, then you understand the skill involved. Forget for a moment that golf is the only game where ethics are a central part of the game. Where you call penalties on yourself, where you repair divots so your opponent has the same chance, where you are silent as to not distract your opponent. Where else does this happen? No where in life, other than on the golf course. Is it comparable to your Propel bottle toss? That is really insulting. |
|
|
|
Post by rlh on Jul 20, 2009 21:14:29 GMT -5
This argument is ridiculous........it's a game, an activity and a SPORT....everyone is right....move on to something important
|
|
|
|
Post by valpo04 on Jul 21, 2009 5:33:48 GMT -5
This argument is ridiculous........it's a game, an activity and a SPORT....everyone is right....move on to something important rlh has spoken. Next time you want to discuss/argue/comment on something on this board, especially the Off Topic board, please run it by him first to make sure its important enough to talk about here. |
|
