Tiger wins British Open

Discussion in 'Golf' started by jaxvid, Jul 15, 2005.

  1. Guest

    Guest Guest

    Good article Tiger is the best that does not mean that he has to be a a nice guy or kiss babies. Tiger owes his fans his best game on the court nothing more.
     
  2. sunshine

    sunshine Mentor

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Messages:
    841
    Woods is more of a symbolic figure for caste. Golf falls out of the realm of athletic superiority for me and most but his rise, along with the Williams sisters has given us pause. Since tennis does fall into our caste/athletic discussion in real terms the Williams sisters more significant. Still one cannot discout Woods or the media. Those Nike ads with a young Tiger that were featured during the British Open were more than a little sickening. I am ambivalent about his success. As I statedbefore sincegolf does not really factor in with athletic discussion per say here at caste Tiger's success is neither here nor there. We all agree he is a great golfer all though one must wonder about the competition these days.But couple his success with the William's sisters and a pattern emerges: Black athletes making huge noises in mainly white dominated sports. And the prevalent theme--much more so in tennis than golf -of blacks rising from the ashes to destroy the white folk of tennis is what we have to think about. Ultimately though black success in golf and tennis is starkly contrasted by the general lack of white athletes in sports. The most glaring example, amoung many,is no white CBs in the NFL. The good news is the success of Tiger has illuminated the fact that whites are disappearing from sports and lack of white cornerbacks etc. wakes up some people to the notion that sports should be for all, not just black athletes. Will whites be able to turn the tide at some point? Of course SI has Woods on the cover again.
     
  3. Bear-Arms

    Bear-Arms Mentor

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2005
    Messages:
    1,150
    Location:
    United States
    I'm not interested in golf, it rates with watching pool, poker, and bowling. I think people would like Tiger Woods if he wasn't on ESPN for everytime he blinked.
     
  4. Gary

    Gary Mentor

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2004
    Messages:
    1,051
    Woods is a jerk and bad role model and with all the bad role models is it any wonder most young blacks go to jail. Tyson,Simpson,Liston,Bowe,ETC-to much bone and not enough brain in the head!
     
  5. Guest

    Guest Guest

    Was Ty Cobb a good rolemodel ?
     
  6. White_Savage

    White_Savage Mentor

    Joined:
    May 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,219
    Location:
    Texas
    He had his vices.

    Then again, he hated Negroids, which as you yourself so often demonstrate, is probably the correct position.
     
  7. White_Savage

    White_Savage Mentor

    Joined:
    May 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,219
    Location:
    Texas
    For those seriously concerned by Woods though, you must remember he is a big man and a fairly good athlete who has been trained to play golf practically since he was in diapers. Take white children with the genetics to be big and strong and give him Tiger's training and you'd see similar results.

    Sort of the same thing with the Williams sisters. There are white women who develop similar freakishly muscular physiques, but most of them are in weight-lifting, hammer throw, etc, instead of being trained to play tennis. You have similar fathers who have abit of a negroid "will to power" thing going in their kids upbringing.

    But take heart guys, we have most of the greatest boxers of the past, probably boxing's future, and total dominance of realistic fighting competitions. A negroid here and there who's good at country club activities doesn't bother me too much.
     
  8. Gary

    Gary Mentor

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2004
    Messages:
    1,051
    Buckwheat-Ty Cobb stopped playing baseball in 1928!! Is that the only White you could mention? Let me tell you some REAL ROLE MODELS-Lou Gehrig,Otto Graham,Kurt Warner,Bruno Sammartino,Brooks Robinson,Jim Thome,Gordie Howe,Bart Starr-the list is endless-Blacks don't have any sense to be a good role model-Thats why Africa is poor,backward and stupid and looks to Europe for AID-thats why states here in the USA with the most blacks are full of crime,low SAT scores,poor and need government AID to make it in life. Blacks will need 100 years of advancement to even catch up with the American Indians! Instead of wasting time on the computer all day you should try and get some education-your wasting your time here. The only thing your tribe ever did was to invent the Fart in 1834!
     
  9. Bart

    Bart Hall of Famer

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2005
    Messages:
    4,329



    Fistfighter wrote: Good article Tiger is the best that does not mean that he has to be a a nice guy or kiss babies. Tiger owes his fans his best game on the court nothing more


    Fistfighter, I totally disagree with you. The game of golf is all about manners, golf etiquette, historyand traditionsthat are far more important than any one player. I don't expect Negoroes to understand these concepts, so I would hope very few of them excel at the game in the future. But then again , it's not likely to happen as even the venerated Tiger Woods benefits from having the greatest percentage of his genetic make up coming from Asian stock coupled with a lesser percentage of white genes. So, his Negroidal tendencies are somewhat mitigated and kept in abeyance.
     
  10. Guest

    Guest Guest

    That is a bullsh*t statement and totally disregards Woods talent.


    Its like saying that everybody in bodybuilding could be as big as Coleman or Arnold.


    You could take someone and have him train just as hard as Arnold or Coleman but h would NEVER EVER be as big as them why ? Bebauuse Arnold and Coleman besides their hard work have superior talent and genetics for the sport.


    Same with punching power


    If you where to take a fighter who weighs as much as Hearns and teach him to punch as Hearns no matter how long he trains he will NEVER be the puncher Hearns was why ? Hearns was a better born puncher,


    Besides the hard work you also need the natural born talent to be a superior champion.
     
  11. White_Savage

    White_Savage Mentor

    Joined:
    May 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,219
    Location:
    Texas
    Hardly. First of all, golf of all things ain't body building, it ain't powerlifting it ain't sprinting, it's not a pure test of athletics in which you could expect one set of genetics to dominate. It's a set of rather strange acquired skills. It's highly unlikely there's any "golf gene".

    A childhood religously devoted to training is a huge advantage that relatively few golfers, even at Tiger's level have. Much like the greatest fencers invariably begin in childhood, so that their mental and physical peaks coincide. Combine that with the fact that yes, he is a pretty good natural athlete, and his greatness is not that hard to fathom. For instance, he's developed a more technically perfect swing than any other big golfers which explains his amazing driving ability. I don't see how it's taking anythng away from Tiger to point out this fact. Your attempt to use him as evidence for Negroid supremacism is however, flawed however, and really falls apart when we consider how much Asian he has in the mix. And he is of course, over-rated by the media, but that would be the case if he was a black quarterback, a black pilot, or a black marbles player, just the way they work.
     
  12. Guest

    Guest Guest

    nonsense a childhood devoted to training is a huge advantage but without natural talent for the game wont make you a better champion.


    You can take two identical twins train them, from childhood in a sport and 1 invariably will be better.
     
  13. White_Savage

    White_Savage Mentor

    Joined:
    May 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,219
    Location:
    Texas
    Gosh Pugnuts, this is just sad. Identical twins are genetic carbon copies of one another, thus you contradicted your own point.

    Might as well give up. You wouldn't be clever enough to win a debate with me even if you were actually right. (This is of course indicative of certain other genetic facts.)
     
  14. foreverfree

    foreverfree Mentor

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2004
    Messages:
    898
    Well, WS, our troll may have a point about the relative success of twins. Wasn't Phil Mahre a more successful slalom skier than his twin Steve?

    John
     
  15. White_Savage

    White_Savage Mentor

    Joined:
    May 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,219
    Location:
    Texas
    foreverfree:
    As an observation that is true, but it is tangential to the main line of debate and contradictory to other points made by faux-fighter. I maintain that Tiger's abilities, particularly driving, derive from being big man and a pretty good athlete who's been trained to technical perfection via an obsessive father, which makes him unique among golfers, as far as I know. Take a big strong white man who's had the same training, you'd see similar results in the driving.

    Faux-fighter hyperbolically dubs Tiger "the greatest ever" and maintains it's a result of his superior "natural born talent", which is another way of saying genetics. This of course meshes well with faux-fighters hard-line Negroid Supremacism
     
  16. White Shogun

    White Shogun Hall of Famer

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2005
    Messages:
    6,285

    Well, I think that says it all. In a fit of contrariness, Mr. Woods explained quite succinctly the difference between the races and the reason the world is as it is. I don't know how one could sum up the differences between the races any better.

    And he says this like its a good thing, which makes the comparison even more stark. He is unaware that his comment could be perceived as insulting.

    Heaven forbid if a white man were to say the same thing.Edited by: White Shogun
     
  17. Guest

    Guest Guest

    Identical twins are not carbon copies idiot. An identical pair of twins would never be exactly the same at a sport . One would be better then the other due to having better aptitude for the sport .


    You cannot learn aptitude or talent for a given Sport. If two men train exactly the same amount of time at the same intensity ONE WILL ALWAYS BE BETTER because one of them will have a better aptitude for the sport.


    A prime example is Micheal Grant in boxing superb natural athlete but HE WAS NOT A NATURAL BOXER and when he went past the usuall bums he got asswhipped badly why ? because he could have trained al he like he just did'nt have what it takes to a boxer. Jameel Mcline is another Athlete turned boxer who fails when he steps up. Wlad is another Great offensive skills but he lacks the will to grind out a victory when the going gets tough Vitali on the other hand while he does not have the learned skills of Wlad does have the mindset of a boxer and the aptitude for the sport.


    Training hard is not enough you need to have the talent to stand out above the rest.
     
  18. White_Savage

    White_Savage Mentor

    Joined:
    May 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,219
    Location:
    Texas
    Well, there you have it folks. The voice of Negroid supremacism has spoken.

    If you don't realize that identical twins ARE genetically identical, and that differences arise from factors after birth, you're the idiot. Nature and nurture, you don't have anything but those two to shape someone, unless you're supposing the Gods reach down from the sky and dub some great athletes.

    So since you've "proven" that negroids are better at everything, and "proven" that this is a result of in-born ability(Which means GENETIC, moron, everything esle is enviroment and training), does this in turn prove the negroid crime and dumb-assery are the result of, shall we say, "in-born ability", and not the result of culture, socio-economic status, or any other of the usual suspects?
     
  19. Guest

    Guest Guest

    BS


    Some athletes will be better at a game then others


    If you trained as hard as the major league baseball players would you be able to be a top batter.


    After all as you say you only need training right ?. So if you trained hard enough you could go into baseball and easily break the alltime HR records .


    If you trained hard enough you could be a top profesional boxer and easily dominate the division once you go pro after all training is all you need .


    You can train all your life if you dont have an aptitude or a talent for the sport you will NEVER be one of the top players.


    Its a pretty easy premise for one who has at least asliver of intelligence.


    Tiger is superbly talented just like Nicklaus was its only an idiot like you who makes it racial.
     
  20. Guest

    Guest Guest

    Genetically identical yes but NOT carbon copies . Based on interest or aptitude one will be better at an activity then the other.


    And where was i talking about Negro's being superior because you might be a foolish bigot does'nt mean i am.
     
  21. White_Savage

    White_Savage Mentor

    Joined:
    May 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,219
    Location:
    Texas
    *sigh* For the last time, when you come on our site dead-set on proving blacks are best at everything, it's absurd for you to accuse others of being "racial". You couldn't even fool other '****** with this obfuscation.

    Your "inborn talent"=genetics and you are much more strongly genetically similar to people you share a common ancestry with-IOW your race.

    You are the one who lacks a sliver of intelligence for refusing to admit that Tiger represents a unique situation-a talented athlete trained since he could walk with all the drive an obsessed Negroid supremacist father could muster. Given these circumstances, the amazing part is that Tiger has in fact so far failed to become the Greatest Ever(tm)

    And answer my question if you dare. If the Negroid athletic triumphs you love to trumpet about are the result of genetics rather than societal/cultural factors, then does it not also follow that the Negroid intellectual failures, despite every advantage given them these 40 years, is in fact the result of those same genetic factors?
     
  22. White_Savage

    White_Savage Mentor

    Joined:
    May 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,219
    Location:
    Texas
    A bigot is defined, btw, as someone who makes judgments about matters without or despite the facts. For instance, for years I was in fact a bigot, since I rejected the position that races are different in favor of the sweet everybody-is-equal-and-good lovey-dovey stuff that sounds so nice. However, it being a position for which there is not one shred of evidence, I gave up this bigotry and adopted a more realistic position on race.
     
  23. Guest

    Guest Guest

    Tiger is on his way to becoming th egreatest ever i predict within five years he will have eclipsed Nicklaus .Inborn talent is not genetics Not every black guy can play basketball and Not every white guy is good at wrestling.


    I never said that Negros are genetically superior . Genetic superiority has been your mantra not mine. Therefore your question is lame .
     
  24. White_Savage

    White_Savage Mentor

    Joined:
    May 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,219
    Location:
    Texas
    "Inborn talent is not genetics"

    Put this one in the library of faux-fighter humdingers. "Inborn Talent" and "Genetics" in-contravertably refer to the same thing, unless you believe constellations or some such effect your abilities and destiny.

    Therefore, you have undeniably been arguing with me that Tiger is the greatest golfer ever because of his genetics, not because of his long and arduous training in the game of golf.

    "I never said that Negros are genetically superior . Genetic superiority has been your mantra not mine. Therefore your question is lame."

    You have asserted that negroids are the best players of every sport discussed on this forum where there is a good negroid player for you to rally around. (If a white man was on a site for black athletes, trying to prove that X white athlete was better than every black individual mentioned, you'd call that racism in a heartbeat, you hypocrite.)

    You have further repeatedly argued with me and others that this is the result of your "inborn talent", IOW genetics, not societal or cultural factors, such a black poverty, black love of sports, or an anti-white caste system. (It is possible of course that you actually think your Negroid supremacism is subtle when in fact it is glaring and obvious to anyone who can read.) And there are many, many more negroids like yourself who have no qualms about voicing (or more typically, hollering) Black athletic superiority in public. Why should they have qualms, society will never condemn THEM for their racism.

    The interesting part, as has been repeatedly pointed, is that blacks quickly cry foul and the P.C. monolith unleashes all of it's fury when someone speculates that the root of many black failings may lie in these same "inborn" factors that make for black athletic triumph.

    Heres how it breaks down:

    You cannot deny the stereotype believed both by blacks and the general populace is that blacks are superior athletes. This is constantly expressed in movies, telivision, and media commentary.

    You cannot, for the many reasons given above, credibly deny that you hold this opinion yourself.

    You cannot deny that black failures in areas of average I.Q. and social behaviors are just as noticeable as black domination of the sprints and other sporting niches.

    You cannot deny that a huge double standard exists in our society, that while every rock is turned trying to locate and exorcise White racism, Black racism slaps us in the face every day while we pretend not to notice. When a title along the lines of "White Men Can't Jump" is blazoned on marquees across the country, and somehow it's "okay", even you can't deny it. So as I say, answer if you can, why is one cheap shot fair and the other foul, and how the devil do you justify the situation.

    "Not every black guy can play basketball and Not every white guy is good at wrestling."

    This is a tangential point, but I just have to address it...

    Like many people of pedestrian intellect, you raise exceptions as if they disproved the existence of racial traits. Upon further examination, this position is ridiculous, since very few general rules in life are in fact without exception. Never the less, these same people will make common sense decisions every day in their lives based upon averages and probabilities, not absolute certainties. There is a very real statistical possibility of being killed every time you drive, but most people do so anyway, judging that their chances of being killed are slim in relation to the benefits of driving. You could quite possibly make a good guard animal out of a Lab or a good retreiver out of a Doberman, but long experience has shown that this will usually not be optimal. Yao Ming's existence does not prove that Asians can accurately be described as an extremely tall, lanky people.

    Perhaps I can make you understand with an analogy. It is a useful and generally true assumption that wood will float and stones will sink. However, certain kinds of pumice and ironwood defy this rule...any reasonable person can understand the existence of exceptions without throwing out a generally true and useful observation. However, the politically correct position as usual defies all reason. The P.C. position on race is similar to asserting that because some woods sink and some stones float, then building my boat out of basalt blocks will yield the same results as building it out of wooden planks.
     
  25. Guest

    Guest Guest

    Inborn talent is not the same as genetics. Some guys are better at a sport then others it does'nt have anything to do with their race rather the oppurtunity to play the sport and the desire. By your way of thinking every black guy is an NBA player and every white guyis a top wrestler.


    Your 1930's era gentic ideas are bullsh*t
     

Share This Page