<p>Sending these to my golf-obsessed friends :)</p>
<p>Has anyone seen the episode of *Myth Busters *where Jamie and Adam test whether having dimples on a car (like on a golf-ball) improves its aerodynamics and mileage?</p>
<p>Latest update:
THOUSAND OAKS, Calif. – Tiger Woods withdrew Monday from his own golf tournament, citing injuries from a car crash near his Florida home. He said he would not compete again until next year.</p>
<p>“Has anyone seen the episode of Myth Busters where Jamie and Adam test whether having dimples on a car (like on a golf-ball) improves its aerodynamics and mileage?”</p>
<p>Tiger should have said his club wielding wife was just trying to improve their milage.</p>
<p>Honestly, what happened between Tiger and his wife is really their business and he doesn’t owe any of us an explanation. He has his children to consider. It may be better that he doesn’t talk. Eventually it will die down.
Sometimes it is better to just leave the truth hanging in the air.</p>
<p>“he doesn’t owe any of us an explanation.”</p>
<p>Well, the “problem” is that he gave an explanation. And that explanation is sooooo lame.
As H said two days ago. NO woman chases after her husbands car with a nine iron to “save” him.</p>
<p>Spoken by my pastor this past sunday “Desire is a more powerful force than intellect”. Apparently, this can be proven by looking at brain activity.</p>
<p>I think God just laughs at how silly and stupid we humans are sometimes.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.wired.com/autopia/2008/11/sponsors-teed-o/[/url]”>http://www.wired.com/autopia/2008/11/sponsors-teed-o/</a></p>
<p>He no longer shills for Buick</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I would. :D</p>
<p>Yah Consolation, Tiger makes about 80 million dollars a year. That would do it for me.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, God may be laughing, but the State of Florida may take a dim view of a spouse using a golf club on another spouse. It will be very interesting if this event raises awareness of how domestic abuse gets investigated when the spouses dummy-up. Doubly interesting that it may turn out to be a female domestic abuser.</p>
<p>A caller on NPR’s Talk of the Nation today made the point that it’s hypocritical for a guy who makes hundreds of millions from product endorsements to become indignant about inquiries into his private matters.</p>
<p>Not from golf, mind you, but from endorsements. I think this is a critical distinction.</p>
<p>If his fame and wealth came entirely from his being a great golfer, then it would be reasonable for him to expect that, outside of golf-related activities, no one ought to bother him, since his driving, marital problems, etc. are irrelevant to his golf game.</p>
<p>However, by raking in the dough from product endorsements, he has chosen to bank on his character, which changes the privacy game a bit. While it’s still reasonable to expect that his home and family are off-limits, what happens in full view is open to a new level of scrutiny. After all, if this guy is going to tell me that I should buy a Buick (or whatever), even coming into my living room (in a manner of speaking) uninvited in order to do so, then I have a right to question whether he is a trustworthy spokesman. Particularly in light of his turning up on the street at 2:00 a.m., broken window, damaged tree and fire hydrant, wife with golf club, police (that your taxes and mine pay for) called to the scene.</p>
<p>Don’t want the scrutiny anymore? No problem, Tiger. Drop the endorsements and stick to golf, and you won’t hear another word from me. Doesn’t that seem reasonable?</p>
<p>What do y’all think?</p>
<p>He isn’t banking on endorsements from his character, he is banking on endorsements from his fame as a golfer. The only way his character gets involved is that he isn’t a scumbag. That is a long way from the converse. And I think the premise is flawed anyway. It may not be reasonable for him to expect to have much of a private life given how we are as a nation regarding celebreties, but it doesn’t make it right that we treat them as some other class of human when it comes to personal issues like a marriage. He never put his marriage out there for public scrutiny like some other celebs. Then I could understand a “you reap what you sow” argument. But this guy just went out and played golf better than anyone in history and endorsed some products. No matter the money involved, how in the world does that give any of us the right to know all about his marriage and other personal aspects of his life?</p>
<p><<no matter=“” the=“” money=“” involved,=“” how=“” in=“” world=“” does=“” that=“” give=“” any=“” of=“” us=“” right=“” to=“” know=“” all=“” about=“” his=“” marriage=“” and=“” other=“” personal=“” aspects=“” life?=“”>></no></p>
<p>Because Americans, in general, are nosy when it comes to ‘celebrities’ (and any public figures like politicians are also up for scrutiny).
Personally, I despise celebrity worship of any type. I don’t understand WHY society thinks someone who can swing a golf club well or recite lines in a movie (or sing a song) are worth mega millions of dollars. I don’t ‘get’ reality tv either. Am I the only person in the USA who has never watched ANY of that crap.</p>
<p>Gimme Mythbusters over Dancing with the stars any day. I guess I’m too geek.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No.</p>
<p>I’m delighted to say that my 10-year-old daughter loves Mythbusters. It’s her second-favorite non-Disney show after Dirty Jobs. Great kid!</p>
<p>“I don’t ‘get’ reality tv either. Am I the only person in the USA who has never watched ANY of that crap.”</p>
<p>I’ve never watched those shows, but then I rarely watch TV. This year, I watched TV once: during the inauguration and the festivities that night. I haven’t even bothered to get the TV upgraded to whatever one needs now for cable.</p>
<p>Milkandsugar–I agree, but since when did caring about some celebrity’s kids keep anyone from getting their jollies by idle speculation? T and wife chose this life, right? So they apparently *do *owe us, and their kids do, too. I’m sure it’s in a contract, somewhere.</p>
<p>I guess they should have picked their parents better. Serves them right.</p>
<p>And sure, giving as much explanation as they choose to definitely gives me a right to need more…because, I guess, real life is just too boring.</p>
<p>No, not a fan of reality TV, either.</p>
<p>I haven’t even bothered to get the TV upgraded to whatever one needs now for cable.
Here we need a box to get digital reception- I thought that was national?
We had to get the converterbox, so we could get the news- but our 2nd tv ( in the garage- where H used to watch the football games), isn’t upgradable at all.</p>
<p>I don’t watch reality shows *or *mythbusters- ( I like watching Hulu though on my laptop occasionally) although H & D love it when we go to a hotel with cable.
They are just engrossed, but it is so loud! H even has the discoverychannel on his ipod.</p>
<p>"Because Americans, in general, are nosy when it comes to ‘celebrities’ "</p>
<p>It is MUCH worse in Europe and Asia. Americans do not have a lock on celebrity culture.</p>
<p>We had house guests from Milan last month, a professor of architecture no less. INSISTED on seeing the “homes of the stars”. Staggering.</p>
<p>But I missed something. Is Tiger Woods on reality TV? “Celebrity Bumper Cars”?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Female on male domestic violence is rarely even considered, investigated or prosecuted as a crime anywhere in our country. (Unless the act has witnesses or is caught on tape) It’s the way our crazy law works. </p>
<p>I dare anyone to challenge that.</p>
<p>Part of Wood’s reputation/brand is that he is a good guy. It seems to me he can continue that persona (to some extent) because although his wife knocked the daylights out of him, he did not hit her back. Many guys would have beat up their wives after having been assaulted. Instead, Woods did the right thing and left his abusive wife.</p>
<p>Did I miss something? how did we “determine” that the wife is abusive? It may be true, but that’s still a leap. I sure do wish Tiger can stop being so evasive and explain what happened. Canceling an interview with the police three times is a bit much. (First time, his lawyer told him no, second time his PR marketing guy told him don’t do it, and third time it was his wife.)</p>
<p>I know the companies/products he endorses have said they “stand by him”, but why wouldn’t they? Tiger is protecting them, really. They’ve paid huge sums of money for that squeeky-clean image and that’s really why Tiger refuses to talk.</p>