thus spoke the mad hatter, that famous purveyor of nonsense. i love nonsense in almost any form. (i also love lewis caroll, who penned this answerless question. he was a logician, which sounds like magician for obvious reasons, but that is another post to be typed at another time). the only kind of nonsense i dont like is the kind where someone thinks they are making a really profound point in a flawless, impenetrable argument when what they are really doing is looking like an idiot. this is especially awesome when they do it in public. on the radio. on the john moore show. which has a huge audience.
so heres what happened. at 824 in the morning, john moore shoots the shit with liza fromer (sp?) for a few minutes. of course, the hot topic today was the master's golf tournament that ended yesterday. anyway, liza was all up in arms because, as we all wonder from time to time, is golf really a sport? (see my post hurry hard! for my thoughts on curling and this question). she thinks not. then, later on in the show, john was talking to some golf guy whos opinions on the events of this years masters are supposedly interesting and relevant and authoritative. at the end of the interview, john moore informed this guy of liza's opinion that golf is not a sport and asked him what his response is to people who say that. here is the jist of this guys argument. (i apologise that i cant reprint it verbatim, but it was on the radio, so its not like i have a transcript).
"i dont know who said that personally, so i cant say what her experience is, but i hate it when people criticise something without actually trying it first. there is no way to really understand what it takes to do something without trying it yourself and its easy to be critical if youre just passively observing"
so far so good right? he continues:
"i would like for people who think that way to go out and see how they feel once they have to try walking from hole to hole when its really hot out or really cold. then they can come back and tell me that golf isnt a sport and doesnt require athleticism"
ok so my problem with this is twofold:
1) wow. walking. sooooo hard. also, they drive most of the time, and they have someone else carrying the 50 pound bag.
2) even if the walking is such a feat of fitness, it has no bearing on the outcome of the game itself. therefore, the "athleticism" required to walk around the golf course doesnt make the game of golf athletic. thats like saying if you ride your bike to your poker game, playing cards is athletic. its not a race from hole to hole, so the amount and strenuousness of the walking is completely irrelevant.
and thats all i have to say about that.