| |
Main
Date: 30 Mar 2007 20:27:59
From: multi
Subject: Beem and Faxon
|
Both missed the cut, in an event that most of the big names skipped.
Tiger is doing them a favor. The more events they play, the more
money they lose.
|
|
| |
Date: 01 Apr 2007 08:03:34
From: BigPurdueFan
Subject: Re: Beem and Faxon
|
> > The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and
> > expecting a different result?
>
> > You are helpless.
>
> I go to sleep every night expecting to wake up in the morning. That's
> insane?
You don't expect to wake up in the morning?
|
| |
Date: 31 Mar 2007 20:07:56
From: Ben.
Subject: Re: Beem and Faxon
|
On 31, 8:39 pm, multi <m...@asm.org > wrote:
> It must give you great satisfaction to be the understudy for Pitts.
I have no idea what this means.
> As for Faxon, I could comment on your fascination with him by making
> some rek as crude as your "slurping" crack, but I won't. I'll
> just say that if he's half the man you think he is, he's willing to
> take the heat for the opinions he gives to reporters, fully aware that
> they are going to be printed. By heat, I of course mean criticism
> from his peers, not from some nobody in a newsgroup he doesn't read.
> But I'm sure he feels better, knowing you're there to protect him from
> me.
How many posts have I penned on Brad Faxon? If it's more than...one,
I'm shocked. How many posts have you penned singing Tiger's praises?
When there's one that doesn't, I'm shocked. You're seem like an
intelligent guy, I guess, but you are also a broken record with
apparently _very_ little interest in the game outside of Tiger's
universe. I, OTOH, play the game, I go to toonamints, I closely
follow events even when Tiger isn't in the field. Just as much as
you, or any other person, I appreciate what Tiger does _on the
course_. But the game is bigger then he, and I recognize that. You
don't and never will.
> >The PGA TOUR existed for a long time before Tiger, and will continue
> >to do so after he is gone.
>
> Thank you, Master Po. You are the one millionth person to say that.
> This year.
Read it. Learn it. Live it.
>If the Pitts gig doesn't pan out, maybe you can sub for
> Jimmy Roberts
Again, I don't know what this means.
|
| | |
Date: 01 Apr 2007 11:04:08
From: multi
Subject: Re: Beem and Faxon
|
On 31 2007 20:07:56 -0700, "Ben." <kombi45@yahoo.com > wrote:
>On 31, 8:39 pm, multi <m...@asm.org> wrote:
>
>> It must give you great satisfaction to be the understudy for Pitts.
>
>I have no idea what this means.
It means that like Pitts, you can't stand to see me make a post
without making some sexually suggestive comment. It creeps me out.
It's not enough for you two to ignore me, or even to criticize me.
Instead, you have to ask some form of the same question every time,
namely why I want to have sex with Tiger. I think psychologists call
this "projection."
The reason why many of my posts mention Tiger is simple --- this is a
golf group, and Tiger is certainly the best golfer in the world,
probably the best golfer in history, and possibly playing the best
golf he's ever played, right now. Your responses to my posts suggest
a few possibilities, all of them creepy. And people wonder why I
don't use my real name.
>How many posts have I penned on Brad Faxon? If it's more than...one,
>I'm shocked. How many posts have you penned singing Tiger's praises?
>When there's one that doesn't, I'm shocked.
Horse shit. I just looked at my posts for this year. It's hard to
write about pro golf without mentioning Tiger, but I didn't see any
that were "singing his praises." This thread is a great example. It
set you off about how I am "slurping" on Tiger, but he was mentioned
only because he's hosting the tournament. If it had been Arnie's or
Jack's event, the subject would have been exactly the same, namely
mediocre (by pro standards) players whining that they should not have
to qualify for an elite event. In Beem's case, he was "insulted" that
he should have to play well to be invited.
My other threads this year were all over the place. Comments on
Sergio, Arjun Atwal, Phil, etc. I've tried to cut down on political
posts, which were probably over half my posts in the past, but I did
let myself get into some threads on religion. I posted general PGA
news that I thought people might find interesting, like the new event,
and the rules changes about grooves. I answered some questions from
newbies, like how you pronounce "Els." The thread most involving
Tiger was probably the "comparison challenge," but again, that was
only incidentally about Tiger, and mainly a defense of Phil, Vijay,
and other top pros not named Tiger.
I would modestly suggest that I what I post is more interesting to
more people than what the "purists" like you think is proper, namely
their own golf scores. Those are precisely as interesting to me as
their vacation slides, or pictures of their grandkids. And if my
posts don't interest anybody but me, that's fine, too. I'm a numbers
guy, and I enjoy stats, and I don't care if anyone else finds them
interesting, especially when their responses make it clear that they
can't even follow the logic. The main reason I use this group for
posts about stats is so I can find them later. With Google, I can
easily find a post I made five years ago. On the other golf boards
I've seen, I can't find a post I made five days ago.
> You're seem like an
>intelligent guy, I guess, but you are also a broken record with
>apparently _very_ little interest in the game outside of Tiger's
>universe.
Since Tiger's universe is pro golf, you're mostly correct. I have
little interest in amateur golf, except the US Am, and little interest
in women's golf, except when my favorite players (based mostly on
looks) are contending. I care more about the PGA tour than the
Nationwide tour, and I care more about who wins elite events and
majors, than who wins the Mayakoba or Reno-Tahoe. I try not to miss
an event that Tiger plays, but I also enjoy watching Phil, Ernie, and
Vijay, for excellence, and Daly, Bubba, and JT Holmes, for the long
ball. And that makes me different from most golf fans, how?
> I, OTOH, play the game,
Oh, please. Pro golf is a spectator sport. The worst golfer on the
PGA tour hasn't had a game resembling yours since he was in junior
high.
Suppose this were a basketball group, and I posted something about the
Final Four, and you said that I should defer to your superiority,
because you went down to the Y once a week and played half-court with
some other middle-aged lard asses. I would be just as impressed.
I played football, baseball, basketball, and golf when I was young.
I'm not young anymore. So what? I still enjoy watching them all.
> I go to toonamints,
I don't know who told you that baby talk was cute from a middle-aged
man, but it's not. It just adds to your general creepiness.
>I closely
>follow events even when Tiger isn't in the field.
Knock yourself out. I don't "closely follow" golf at all, any more
than I "closely follow" American Idol. Golf is something I enjoy
watching for entertainment. Again relating it to basketball, am I not
allowed to post about Florida if I don't closely follow Podunk State?
I've got news for you; most football and basketball fans have favorite
teams, and watch only their games, at least until the playoffs. They
catch the highlights of the others.
>Just as much as
>you, or any other person, I appreciate what Tiger does _on the
>course_. But the game is bigger then he, and I recognize that. You
>don't and never will.
What you don't recognize is how tired and lame your cliches sound, and
how smug all you guys sound when you talk about "Tiger fans," as if
anybody who enjoys watching the best players in a sport is
automatically riffraff. I watch golf exactly the same way I watch
other sports. When it's football season, I don't watch a couple of
perennial losers, I watch Manning and LT. I do it to please myself,
not you. If you think it will somehow make you superior to watch the
US Bank instead of the Open this July, be my guest. Your buddy Faxon
will probably be playing.
And yes, there would be a PGA without Tiger, but it would probably be
on the Golf Channel. Even with Tiger, golf can't compete with other
sports. Hell, PRO golf can't compete with COLLEGE football or
basketball. If Tiger, Phil, and Vijay each shoot 59-59-59-59 to get
into a playoff for the Masters, the rating will still be less than for
yesterday's semifinal college basketball games.
So knock yourself out. Attack anybody who posts about Tiger,
preferably with some disgusting sexual innuendo, and complain about
the attention the media gives him. Petition the PGA to not let him
run his tournament the way he wants. Lobby for changes to golf
courses, like fairways that pinch in and have extra bunkers at 300
yards, that will penalize him for hitting long drives.
And enjoy watching the majors on the Golf Channel after he decides
he's had enough of the ankle biters, plops Elin and a couple crates of
cash on his yacht, and heads off to Aruba.
|
| |
Date: 01 Apr 2007 01:44:13
From: Robert Hamilton
Subject: Re: Beem and Faxon
|
"Ben." wrote:
> On 31, 5:40 pm, Robert Hamilton <D...@att.net> wrote:
>
> > So what are you, the NBC news of Tiger? Tiger is evil. Everything Tiger does
> > is bad? ;^)
>
> Try to follow the discussion if you're going to jump in,
> Prof...please. I don't have, and never have had, ANY problems with
> what Tiger says or does (Google it if you give a shit)...including the
> language and temper. Doesn't bother me. He's the greatest _golfer_
> of all time and we all know it. It's the deceased equine puncher
> Multi that annoys me. We know, we get it, we are aware. Tiger great
> - Criticizers bad. In this case, Brad Faxon. A great guy, a rare
> nice guy on TOUR (yes, I've met him) who has done nothing but
> contribute in a positive manner to the TOUR and his community (CVS
> Chaity toonamint). He didn't even complain when the great Tiger
> refused to sign a flag or a ball or a scorecard, or whatever it was,
> for the auction at the CVS one year. Someone else leaked it, and
> Faxon diplomatically skirted the issue. Faxon is a class act, and I
> don't think we need Multi's sycophantic ass to bag on him for speaking
> out on the DC toonie.
>
So much for the smiley......
You must be the guy who had to rant on about long drive contestants and
roids.... ;^)
|
| |
Date: 31 Mar 2007 17:45:37
From: Ben.
Subject: Re: Beem and Faxon
|
On 31, 5:40 pm, Robert Hamilton <D...@att.net > wrote:
> So what are you, the NBC news of Tiger? Tiger is evil. Everything Tiger does
> is bad? ;^)
Try to follow the discussion if you're going to jump in,
Prof...please. I don't have, and never have had, ANY problems with
what Tiger says or does (Google it if you give a shit)...including the
language and temper. Doesn't bother me. He's the greatest _golfer_
of all time and we all know it. It's the deceased equine puncher
Multi that annoys me. We know, we get it, we are aware. Tiger great
- Criticizers bad. In this case, Brad Faxon. A great guy, a rare
nice guy on TOUR (yes, I've met him) who has done nothing but
contribute in a positive manner to the TOUR and his community (CVS
Chaity toonamint). He didn't even complain when the great Tiger
refused to sign a flag or a ball or a scorecard, or whatever it was,
for the auction at the CVS one year. Someone else leaked it, and
Faxon diplomatically skirted the issue. Faxon is a class act, and I
don't think we need Multi's sycophantic ass to bag on him for speaking
out on the DC toonie.
> One interesting thing Woods could pull off that would be fun to watch if it
> happened is renounce professionalism, get back his amateur status and play
> as an amateur. Then the Beem's and the Faxon's could manage the tour as they
> see fit without having to deal with any Tiger! The could then have a "full
> field" of 140 players playing for the $0.50 in every PGA Tour event
The PGA TOUR existed for a long time before Tiger, and will continue
to do so after he is gone. Tiger has been an insanely positive force,
but the TOUR will continue. There will be another Tiger.
|
| | |
Date: 31 Mar 2007 18:39:41
From: multi
Subject: Re: Beem and Faxon
|
On 31 2007 17:45:37 -0700, "Ben." <kombi45@yahoo.com > wrote:
>On 31, 5:40 pm, Robert Hamilton <D...@att.net> wrote:
>
>> So what are you, the NBC news of Tiger? Tiger is evil. Everything Tiger does
>> is bad? ;^)
>
>Try to follow the discussion if you're going to jump in,
>Prof...please. I don't have, and never have had, ANY problems with
>what Tiger says or does (Google it if you give a shit)...including the
>language and temper. Doesn't bother me. He's the greatest _golfer_
>of all time and we all know it. It's the deceased equine puncher
>Multi that annoys me. We know, we get it, we are aware. Tiger great
>- Criticizers bad. In this case, Brad Faxon. A great guy, a rare
>nice guy on TOUR (yes, I've met him) who has done nothing but
>contribute in a positive manner to the TOUR and his community (CVS
>Chaity toonamint). He didn't even complain when the great Tiger
>refused to sign a flag or a ball or a scorecard, or whatever it was,
>for the auction at the CVS one year. Someone else leaked it, and
>Faxon diplomatically skirted the issue. Faxon is a class act,
>don't think we need Multi's sycophantic ass to bag on him for speaking
>out on the DC toonie.
It must give you great satisfaction to be the understudy for Pitts.
As for Faxon, I could comment on your fascination with him by making
some rek as crude as your "slurping" crack, but I won't. I'll
just say that if he's half the man you think he is, he's willing to
take the heat for the opinions he gives to reporters, fully aware that
they are going to be printed. By heat, I of course mean criticism
from his peers, not from some nobody in a newsgroup he doesn't read.
But I'm sure he feels better, knowing you're there to protect him from
me.
>The PGA TOUR existed for a long time before Tiger, and will continue
>to do so after he is gone.
Thank you, Master Po. You are the one millionth person to say that.
This year. If the Pitts gig doesn't pan out, maybe you can sub for
Jimmy Roberts.
|
| | | |
Date: 01 Apr 2007 01:47:42
From: Robert Hamilton
Subject: Re: Beem and Faxon
|
multi wrote:
> On 31 2007 17:45:37 -0700, "Ben." <kombi45@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >On 31, 5:40 pm, Robert Hamilton <D...@att.net> wrote:
> >
> >> So what are you, the NBC news of Tiger? Tiger is evil. Everything Tiger does
> >> is bad? ;^)
> >
> >Try to follow the discussion if you're going to jump in,
> >Prof...please. I don't have, and never have had, ANY problems with
> >what Tiger says or does (Google it if you give a shit)...including the
> >language and temper. Doesn't bother me. He's the greatest _golfer_
> >of all time and we all know it. It's the deceased equine puncher
> >Multi that annoys me. We know, we get it, we are aware. Tiger great
> >- Criticizers bad. In this case, Brad Faxon. A great guy, a rare
> >nice guy on TOUR (yes, I've met him) who has done nothing but
> >contribute in a positive manner to the TOUR and his community (CVS
> >Chaity toonamint). He didn't even complain when the great Tiger
> >refused to sign a flag or a ball or a scorecard, or whatever it was,
> >for the auction at the CVS one year. Someone else leaked it, and
> >Faxon diplomatically skirted the issue. Faxon is a class act,
> >don't think we need Multi's sycophantic ass to bag on him for speaking
> >out on the DC toonie.
>
> It must give you great satisfaction to be the understudy for Pitts.
> As for Faxon, I could comment on your fascination with him by making
> some rek as crude as your "slurping" crack, but I won't. I'll
> just say that if he's half the man you think he is, he's willing to
> take the heat for the opinions he gives to reporters, fully aware that
> they are going to be printed. By heat, I of course mean criticism
> from his peers, not from some nobody in a newsgroup he doesn't read.
> But I'm sure he feels better, knowing you're there to protect him from
> me.
>
> >The PGA TOUR existed for a long time before Tiger, and will continue
> >to do so after he is gone.
>
> Thank you, Master Po. You are the one millionth person to say that.
> This year. If the Pitts gig doesn't pan out, maybe you can sub for
> Jimmy Roberts.
Right now a few golfers on the tour are responsible for most of the revenue. Take
them away, and the tour isn't worth much. If Woods, Mickleson, Els, Garcia, Singh
and a few others turned in their cards and entered events on sponsors exemptions,
the tour would be in big trouble.
|
| |
Date: 31 Mar 2007 22:40:54
From: Robert Hamilton
Subject: Re: Beem and Faxon
|
"Ben." wrote:
> On 31, 2:11 pm, multi <m...@asm.org> wrote:
> > On 31 2007 06:55:34 -0700, "Ben." <komb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > >And why do I get
> > >the feeling Tiger could speak out against pediatric AIDS research for
> > >orphaned baby seals and Multi would be on board.
> >
> > Because you're an idiot?
>
> Ouch, Grumpy.
>
> > The fact is, Tiger doesn't f**k up very often, especially compared
> > with other superstar athletes and celebs. But when he does, I
> > criticize him. A recent example was the end of last season, when he
> > couldn't be bothered to play enough rounds to collect the Vardon
> > Trophy. No excuse short of injury for that, IMO.
>
> Yes, a regular Bill O'Reilly you are. You're the Fox News of Tiger
> fans - fair and balanced when it comes to your man. And for the
> record, it isn't so much the slurping noises coming from your corner
> when it comes to El Tigre, it's your denigration of other quality
> individuals, such as Faxon in this case, when they dare disagree with
> The Might One. Slurp on, Billy Boy.
So what are you, the NBC news of Tiger? Tiger is evil. Everything Tiger does
is bad? ;^)
One interesting thing Woods could pull off that would be fun to watch if it
happened is renounce professionalism, get back his amateur status and play
as an amateur. Then the Beem's and the Faxon's could manage the tour as they
see fit without having to deal with any Tiger! The could then have a "full
field" of 140 players playing for the $0.50 in every PGA Tour event!
|
| |
Date: 31 Mar 2007 12:58:00
From: Ben.
Subject: Re: Beem and Faxon
|
On 31, 2:11 pm, multi <m...@asm.org > wrote:
> On 31 2007 06:55:34 -0700, "Ben." <komb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >And why do I get
> >the feeling Tiger could speak out against pediatric AIDS research for
> >orphaned baby seals and Multi would be on board.
>
> Because you're an idiot?
Ouch, Grumpy.
> The fact is, Tiger doesn't f**k up very often, especially compared
> with other superstar athletes and celebs. But when he does, I
> criticize him. A recent example was the end of last season, when he
> couldn't be bothered to play enough rounds to collect the Vardon
> Trophy. No excuse short of injury for that, IMO.
Yes, a regular Bill O'Reilly you are. You're the Fox News of Tiger
fans - fair and balanced when it comes to your man. And for the
record, it isn't so much the slurping noises coming from your corner
when it comes to El Tigre, it's your denigration of other quality
individuals, such as Faxon in this case, when they dare disagree with
The Might One. Slurp on, Billy Boy.
|
| | |
Date: 31 Mar 2007 15:28:58
From: multi
Subject: Re: Beem and Faxon
|
On 31 2007 12:58:00 -0700, "Ben." <kombi45@yahoo.com > wrote:
>On 31, 2:11 pm, multi <m...@asm.org> wrote:
>> On 31 2007 06:55:34 -0700, "Ben." <komb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> >And why do I get
>> >the feeling Tiger could speak out against pediatric AIDS research for
>> >orphaned baby seals and Multi would be on board.
>>
>> Because you're an idiot?
>
>Ouch, Grumpy.
>
>> The fact is, Tiger doesn't f**k up very often, especially compared
>> with other superstar athletes and celebs. But when he does, I
>> criticize him. A recent example was the end of last season, when he
>> couldn't be bothered to play enough rounds to collect the Vardon
>> Trophy. No excuse short of injury for that, IMO.
>
>Yes, a regular Bill O'Reilly you are. You're the Fox News of Tiger
>fans - fair and balanced when it comes to your man. And for the
>record, it isn't so much the slurping noises coming from your corner
>when it comes to El Tigre, it's your denigration of other quality
>individuals, such as Faxon in this case, when they dare disagree with
>The Might One.
I couldn't care less whether they disagree with Tiger. I ding them
when they disagree with me. I think Phil was right on the money when
he said they are taking the narrow view of this.
|
| | | |
Date: 01 Apr 2007 18:00:34
From: Chris Bellomy
Subject: Re: Beem and Faxon
|
multi <multi@asm.org > wrote:
: I couldn't care less whether they disagree with Tiger. I ding them
: when they disagree with me.
A distinction with no difference.
--
Chris Bellomy
C-List Charter Member
http://clist.org/
|
| |
Date: 31 Mar 2007 06:55:34
From: Ben.
Subject: Re: Beem and Faxon
|
On 31, 8:13 am, "annika1980" <annika1...@aol.com > wrote:
> On 31, 9:01 am, John van der Pflum <nowhammymyspa...@bite.org>
> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 30 2007 20:27:59 -0700, multi <m...@asm.org> wrote:
> > >Both missed the cut, in an event that most of the big names skipped.
> > >Tiger is doing them a favor. The more events they play, the more
> > >money they lose.
>
> > Well, technically, they don't LOSE money. They just don't earn any.
> > :-)
>
> Travel and caddies ain't free.
Faxon was and is one of the class acts on TOUR - regardless of his
opinion on Tiger's little DC invitational toonamint. And why do I get
the feeling Tiger could speak out against pediatric AIDS research for
orphaned baby seals and Multi would be on board...just a hunch.
Also, in terms of expenses, I know Acushnet isn't the highest paying
sponsor, but I'm pretty sure Faxon isn't wanting for money...toonamint
winnings aside. I knew a guy from Fresno who qualified for the
Nationwide Tour one year - qualified. He was fully exempt, and from
his sponsorships - Titlesit and Taylor Made, he was making around
$1500/wk just to play their schwag. Not sure what a PGA TOUR player
of Faxon's stature makes, but I'm gusssing it's more than $1500/wk.
PS - Bret; you getting in the Masters pool I sent out?
|
| | |
Date: 31 Mar 2007 12:11:38
From: multi
Subject: Re: Beem and Faxon
|
On 31 2007 06:55:34 -0700, "Ben." <kombi45@yahoo.com > wrote:
>And why do I get
>the feeling Tiger could speak out against pediatric AIDS research for
>orphaned baby seals and Multi would be on board.
Because you're an idiot?
The fact is, Tiger doesn't f**k up very often, especially compared
with other superstar athletes and celebs. But when he does, I
criticize him. A recent example was the end of last season, when he
couldn't be bothered to play enough rounds to collect the Vardon
Trophy. No excuse short of injury for that, IMO.
|
| | | |
Date: 01 Apr 2007 00:27:18
From: Howard Brazee
Subject: Re: Beem and Faxon
|
On Sat, 31 2007 12:11:38 -0700, multi <multi@asm.org > wrote:
>The fact is, Tiger doesn't f**k up very often, especially compared
>with other superstar athletes and celebs. But when he does, I
>criticize him. A recent example was the end of last season, when he
>couldn't be bothered to play enough rounds to collect the Vardon
>Trophy. No excuse short of injury for that, IMO.
Why should he *need* an excuse? Who determined that he was obligated
to do so?
|
| | | | |
Date: 31 Mar 2007 18:40:25
From: multi
Subject: Re: Beem and Faxon
|
On Sun, 01 Apr 2007 00:27:18 GMT, Howard Brazee <howard@brazee.net >
wrote:
>On Sat, 31 2007 12:11:38 -0700, multi <multi@asm.org> wrote:
>
>>The fact is, Tiger doesn't f**k up very often, especially compared
>>with other superstar athletes and celebs. But when he does, I
>>criticize him. A recent example was the end of last season, when he
>>couldn't be bothered to play enough rounds to collect the Vardon
>>Trophy. No excuse short of injury for that, IMO.
>
>Why should he *need* an excuse? Who determined that he was obligated
>to do so?
As I said --- IMO.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 01 Apr 2007 14:34:07
From: Howard Brazee
Subject: Re: Beem and Faxon
|
On Sat, 31 2007 18:40:25 -0700, multi <multi@asm.org > wrote:
>>Why should he *need* an excuse? Who determined that he was obligated
>>to do so?
>
>As I said --- IMO.
OK, who would he give his excuse to - IYO?
Who is he obligated to - IYO?
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 01 Apr 2007 09:09:08
From: multi
Subject: Re: Beem and Faxon
|
On Sun, 01 Apr 2007 14:34:07 GMT, Howard Brazee <howard@brazee.net >
wrote:
>On Sat, 31 2007 18:40:25 -0700, multi <multi@asm.org> wrote:
>
>>>Why should he *need* an excuse? Who determined that he was obligated
>>>to do so?
>>
>>As I said --- IMO.
>
>OK, who would he give his excuse to - IYO?
The other pros. The game in general.
>Who is he obligated to - IYO?
Same answer. IMO, refusing to collect the Vardon when he had it won
is like conceding a match when you are three up with three to play, so
you can go home early for supper. It's like taking a dive. Playing
two events in two months is not a huge burden, especially when the
Disney was across the street.
I don't know why you are so combative about this. It's my own stupid
opinion, as I've said several times now. Sue me.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 31 Mar 2007 22:19:58
From: BAR
Subject: Re: Beem and Faxon
|
multi wrote:
> On Sun, 01 Apr 2007 00:27:18 GMT, Howard Brazee <howard@brazee.net>
> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 31 2007 12:11:38 -0700, multi <multi@asm.org> wrote:
>>
>>> The fact is, Tiger doesn't f**k up very often, especially compared
>>> with other superstar athletes and celebs. But when he does, I
>>> criticize him. A recent example was the end of last season, when he
>>> couldn't be bothered to play enough rounds to collect the Vardon
>>> Trophy. No excuse short of injury for that, IMO.
>> Why should he *need* an excuse? Who determined that he was obligated
>> to do so?
>
> As I said --- IMO.
Your opinion and $2 will get you a cup of coffee.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 31 Mar 2007 19:40:10
From: multi
Subject: Re: Beem and Faxon
|
On Sat, 31 2007 22:19:58 -0400, BAR <screwed@you.com > wrote:
>Your opinion and $2 will get you a cup of coffee.
That is just as true as it was when you said it, in slightly different
words, a few hours ago. I look forward to your next repetition.
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 31 Mar 2007 22:50:59
From: BAR
Subject: Re: Beem and Faxon
|
multi wrote:
> On Sat, 31 2007 22:19:58 -0400, BAR <screwed@you.com> wrote:
>> Your opinion and $2 will get you a cup of coffee.
>
> That is just as true as it was when you said it, in slightly different
> words, a few hours ago. I look forward to your next repetition.
The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and
expecting a different result?
You are helpless.
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 01 Apr 2007 03:02:32
From: Robert Hamilton
Subject: Re: Beem and Faxon
|
BAR wrote:
> multi wrote:
> > On Sat, 31 2007 22:19:58 -0400, BAR <screwed@you.com> wrote:
> >> Your opinion and $2 will get you a cup of coffee.
> >
> > That is just as true as it was when you said it, in slightly different
> > words, a few hours ago. I look forward to your next repetition.
>
> The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and
> expecting a different result?
>
> You are helpless.
I go to sleep every night expecting to wake up in the morning. That's
insane?
:^)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 01 Apr 2007 03:28:08
From: Bobby Knight
Subject: Re: Beem and Faxon
|
On Sun, 01 Apr 2007 03:02:32 GMT, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net >
wrote:
>
>
>BAR wrote:
>
>> multi wrote:
>> > On Sat, 31 2007 22:19:58 -0400, BAR <screwed@you.com> wrote:
>> >> Your opinion and $2 will get you a cup of coffee.
>> >
>> > That is just as true as it was when you said it, in slightly different
>> > words, a few hours ago. I look forward to your next repetition.
>>
>> The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and
>> expecting a different result?
>>
>> You are helpless.
>
>I go to sleep every night expecting to wake up in the morning. That's
>insane?
>
Wouldn't that depend on what result you're expecting?
--
___,
\o
|
| | | |
Date: 31 Mar 2007 17:13:59
From: BAR
Subject: Re: Beem and Faxon
|
multi wrote:
> On 31 2007 06:55:34 -0700, "Ben." <kombi45@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> And why do I get
>> the feeling Tiger could speak out against pediatric AIDS research for
>> orphaned baby seals and Multi would be on board.
>
> Because you're an idiot?
>
> The fact is, Tiger doesn't f**k up very often, especially compared
> with other superstar athletes and celebs. But when he does, I
> criticize him. A recent example was the end of last season, when he
> couldn't be bothered to play enough rounds to collect the Vardon
> Trophy. No excuse short of injury for that, IMO.
How much of your sage advice has Tiger taken advantage of over the past
10 years? I believe that he has done very well ignoring you completely.
|
| | | | |
Date: 31 Mar 2007 15:24:29
From: multi
Subject: Re: Beem and Faxon
|
On Sat, 31 2007 17:13:59 -0400, BAR <screwed@you.com > wrote:
>How much of your sage advice has Tiger taken advantage of over the past
>10 years? I believe that he has done very well ignoring you completely.
Me, and six billion other people. But if they had a Nobel Prize for
mastery of the obvious, I'd nominate you anyway.
|
| | | |
Date: 31 Mar 2007 13:39:53
From: Bill
Subject: Re: Beem and Faxon
|
multi wrote:
> On 31 2007 06:55:34 -0700, "Ben." <kombi45@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> And why do I get
>> the feeling Tiger could speak out against pediatric AIDS research for
>> orphaned baby seals and Multi would be on board.
>
> Because you're an idiot?
>
> The fact is, Tiger doesn't f**k up very often, especially compared
> with other superstar athletes and celebs. But when he does, I
> criticize him. A recent example was the end of last season, when he
> couldn't be bothered to play enough rounds to collect the Vardon
> Trophy. No excuse short of injury for that, IMO.
Well, I can think of a non-injury reason, due this summer on a par 9
month course. So 3 guesses on when Tiger tee'd off and why he wouldn't
be bothered playing golf for yet another non-major award :-)
Bill
|
| | | | |
Date: 31 Mar 2007 15:26:07
From: multi
Subject: Re: Beem and Faxon
|
On Sat, 31 2007 13:39:53 -0700, Bill <billmuy@comcast.net > wrote:
><multi wrote:>
>> The fact is, Tiger doesn't f**k up very often, especially compared
>> with other superstar athletes and celebs. But when he does, I
>> criticize him. A recent example was the end of last season, when he
>> couldn't be bothered to play enough rounds to collect the Vardon
>> Trophy. No excuse short of injury for that, IMO.
>
>Well, I can think of a non-injury reason, due this summer on a par 9
>month course. So 3 guesses on when Tiger tee'd off and why he wouldn't
>be bothered playing golf for yet another non-major award :-)
If he's anything like me, a bout of hot monkey love only takes about
two minutes, so that's no excuse.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 31 Mar 2007 15:32:53
From: multi
Subject: Re: Beem and Faxon
|
On Sat, 31 2007 15:26:07 -0700, multi <multi@asm.org > wrote:
>On Sat, 31 2007 13:39:53 -0700, Bill <billmuy@comcast.net> wrote:
>><multi wrote:>
>>> The fact is, Tiger doesn't f**k up very often, especially compared
>>> with other superstar athletes and celebs. But when he does, I
>>> criticize him. A recent example was the end of last season, when he
>>> couldn't be bothered to play enough rounds to collect the Vardon
>>> Trophy. No excuse short of injury for that, IMO.
>>
>>Well, I can think of a non-injury reason, due this summer on a par 9
>>month course. So 3 guesses on when Tiger tee'd off and why he wouldn't
>>be bothered playing golf for yet another non-major award :-)
>
>If he's anything like me, a bout of hot monkey love only takes about
>two minutes, so that's no excuse.
To clarify, it takes me two minutes with the kind of women I can
attract. With Elin, probably ten seconds, tops.
|
| | |
Date: 31 Mar 2007 14:52:22
From: Jack Skwaht
Subject: Re: Beem and Faxon
|
Ben. wrote:
>
> Also, in terms of expenses, I know Acushnet isn't the highest paying
> sponsor, but I'm pretty sure Faxon isn't wanting for money...toonamint
> winnings aside. I knew a guy from Fresno who qualified for the
> Nationwide Tour one year - qualified. He was fully exempt, and from
> his sponsorships - Titlesit and Taylor Made, he was making around
> $1500/wk just to play their schwag. Not sure what a PGA TOUR player
> of Faxon's stature makes, but I'm gusssing it's more than $1500/wk.
I read somewhere a couple of years ago that a simple equipment deal from
a mfgr like Titlelist, for a first year player no one has ever heard of,
is worth about 120K.
--
Jack Skwaht
“Every time you tell me you don’t know, I’ll kill you.”
Knapp--victim recovery specialist on Kidnapped, holding a gun to the
head of a bad guy who (‘til now) refuses to talk.
|
| |
Date: 31 Mar 2007 06:13:12
From: annika1980
Subject: Re: Beem and Faxon
|
On 31, 9:01 am, John van der Pflum <nowhammymyspa...@bite.org >
wrote:
> On Fri, 30 2007 20:27:59 -0700, multi <m...@asm.org> wrote:
> >Both missed the cut, in an event that most of the big names skipped.
> >Tiger is doing them a favor. The more events they play, the more
> >money they lose.
>
> Well, technically, they don't LOSE money. They just don't earn any.
> :-)
Travel and caddies ain't free.
|
| | |
Date: 31 Mar 2007 22:19:48
From: John van der Pflum
Subject: Re: Beem and Faxon
|
On 31 2007 06:13:12 -0700, "annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com >
wrote:
>On 31, 9:01 am, John van der Pflum <nowhammymyspa...@bite.org>
>wrote:
>> On Fri, 30 2007 20:27:59 -0700, multi <m...@asm.org> wrote:
>> >Both missed the cut, in an event that most of the big names skipped.
>> >Tiger is doing them a favor. The more events they play, the more
>> >money they lose.
>>
>> Well, technically, they don't LOSE money. They just don't earn any.
>> :-)
>
>Travel and caddies ain't free.
True........
I stand corrected.
--
jvdp
RSG Cincinnati July 13-15, 2007
http://www.rsgcincinnati.com
|
| |
Date: 31 Mar 2007 09:01:32
From: John van der Pflum
Subject: Re: Beem and Faxon
|
On Fri, 30 2007 20:27:59 -0700, multi <multi@asm.org > wrote:
>Both missed the cut, in an event that most of the big names skipped.
>Tiger is doing them a favor. The more events they play, the more
>money they lose.
Well, technically, they don't LOSE money. They just don't earn any.
:-)
--
jvdp
RSG Cincinnati July 13-15, 2007
http://www.rsgcincinnati.com
|
| | |
Date: 01 Apr 2007 12:05:52
From: Ben.
Subject: Re: Beem and Faxon
|
On Apr 1, 12:04 pm, multi <m...@asm.org > wrote:
> > I go to toonamints,
>
> I don't know who told you that baby talk was cute from a middle-aged
> man, but it's not. It just adds to your general creepiness.
If 35 is "middle aged", you must be Methuselah. And "toonamint" is a
specific golf reference - I didn't make it up. But since it doesn't
have anything to do with Tiger, I wouldn't expect you to get it.
All the other whiny bullshit snipped.
|
|
