Tiger 2.0

The thread on Verducci got me fired up about this latest issue of SI.

I love his story on being an MLB umpire and like I said in that thread, it was the perfect example of how to use the first-person angle and use it well.

Then, that brings me to the story on Tiger by John Garrity. When I saw this week's cover, I was excited to read the story on Tiger... the quote on the cover caught my attention and it helps that I'm a golf junky.

But right away, Garrity throws himself in to the story, but not in the way Verducci did. It starts with Garrity in a conference room for 10 minutes with Tiger and a Nike Golf exec with a G5 plane sitting outside:

"When my time is up, I reach across the table and shake Tiger's hand. Nodding to my friend, I walk out of the room, down the hallway, out the front door of the terminal, across the tarmac and up the stairs of the G5. What? You thought the plane was Tiger's?"

Fine... then we learn about an instance where he was in 14-year-old Tiger's room, at 16, Garrity had a conversation with Tiger regarding how he will have logos on his golf bag soon enough and how later in life he played in a pro-am with Tiger. It was like he was rubbing in the reader's face.

OK, I do cringe when I see people rip other writers on here... I just felt like I got taken A story that could have been about a maturing Tiger was ruined by Garrity making himself a major player in the copy.

 

The story was really confusing. I applaud him for trying to do something different--I thought it was supposed to be about spending time with Tiger on the road, checking in with a legend at what many presumed to be the midpoint of his pro career. But I agree--when contrasted with Verducci's first-person account of life as an umpire, it's easy to see where these types of stories where the writer is an active participant in the goings-on can be tough to write.

 

I just finished reading it. To me, the story was more about the writer than Tiger. Didn't like it.

 

it's all cover up for only getting 10 minutes with tiger

 

When I started reading the story, I had to double check the byline to make sure it wasn't Karl Taro Greenfeld.

I didn't finish it, for the reason that dude just had to insert himself into the story.

 

I did not get that story at all. The editor's note made it sound like he got amazing access to Tiger, but the story had no great quotes from El Tigre and was confusing and bland. It read like it was written by a really bad Gary Smith imitator.

 

Sheer tripe.

Who the fuck cares about any of that?

 

was expecting a lot more ... bored the heck out of me and nothing real new about tiger.

 

I'm relieved to see this thread. I read about half the story this afternoon and I'm still irritated with the story, trying to figure out what I was missing. It was well below SI's standards.

 

Two months ago I wrote on this site about how SI falls all over itself these days doing first-person journalism, interjecting themselves into so many stories, and garrity was one of the culprits then. Now two of these in one week. When will this self-serving reporting end? SI is so full of itself, patting itself on the back, and any reader with half a brain has got to see through this and be nauseated by it. Yes, there still is a fair amount of stuff about SI to like, but this other junk ....