Pen, what I find interesting is that someone will make the case that people here are not willing to accept the veracity of Haney's tale-telling, which many times he states are his interpretation and that Tiger never "told" him things, while seeming to themselves be all to willing to take Haney's "gossipy little tidbits" as fact.

I'll read the book (from the library - won't purchase) just as I've read other books written by people I don't respect (i.e.:  Marsha Clarke, Mark Furman, etc.) because I'd rather see for myself what they have to say rather than read selected excerpts and other people's opinions of their writing.

HOWEVER, even if every single sleazy story were true and accurate, I still think Hank Haney is a piece of excrement for violating the bond between coach and student as he has.   Interestingly enough, I've been listening to the talk shows on the PGA Serius station and most of those commentators and callers agree - however badly Tiger has behaved, Haney has gone beyond the pale by including text messages about other players, completely out of context, and talking "personally" about Elin.

Hank Haney, if the excerpts already released are typical of the book, has written a Hollywood rag type expose and he should absolutely be ashamed of himself.   But, I think you need to have some honor to feel shame and he obviously has none. 

Thank you Donnakay, I totally agree with you. I guess nothing is sacred and honorable anymore.

i'm sure if you'd ask the subjects of haney's fact-finding mission whether or not what they said was true, if they cared an ounce about tiger, they would flat out say no. i get it. love covers a multitude of sins. obviously there is no love lost between tiger and hank. the sad thing is that if we choose to, we're the ones that have to see this played out although we had no business in it at all.

no expose is going to make me see tiger any differently than i do now. but is tiger capable of the things haney is reporting in the book? i can't say no to that one. can tiger be snide? yes, tiger can be snide. for example, when being interviewed yesterday by gary mccord, mccord obviously made a self-deprecating remark about being elderly. many if not most people would respond to that by saying something to the effect of, 'no you're not.' on the other hand, tiger deadpanned to mccord, 'yes you are elderly.'

now we in club tiger land would find tiger's remark hilarious, even to the point of firing insults at mccord (being a member of the evil media that he is). well, how did mccord respond? he brought up tiger's 38 on the front nine at doral. did he have to? absolutely not. but he responded in kind to tiger's jab. we, in club tiger land, go ballisitic that the media would even hint that tiger would give up on a round, without even acknowledging the context of the conversation. and i actually thought mccord was rather cordial in the way he presented the fact of tiger's 38, going so far as to say that there's no way that he would give up on the round, would he? yet, mccord is the bad guy for even incinuating such a thing, and tiger is just being, well, tiger. expect a 29 at bay hill during nbc's coverage of the tournament, for which mccord will not be a party to.

Tiger was joking and no one said anything about what McCord said as he was merely pointing out it's stupid to think Tiger would withdraw just for playing poorly. Don't know where you read anything McCord here. I don't think Tiger was being snide...he was making a joke. I'm aware you'll probably reply to me with some sarcastic remark but that's my take on the remark. Obviously you can think what you want.

i'm sure you also think it funny tiger refers to darren clarke as 'ff', which doesn't mean family-friendly. there's a fine line between joking and snideness, and imo, tiger crosses that line. of course the people that are on the receiving end are going to take it in stride because he is tiger woods, after all. he can act anyway he wants to. i don't know why you're getting defensive though, i was just making an observation, not stating a fact. and i wouldn't respond to you sarcastically.

ok, Teeth.

lol !!!

sorry i took so long to laugh,

but i can be slow sometimes. 

well.   every now and then at least.

and Beat18 helped me to c  that you

were just joshing.    lol !!!

thanks, 18. 

:-)

thanks, 18.

:-)

You really think I'll learn? From you? Not likely. I think maybe you're the one who needs to learn.
I'm sure the TTF's (or is it TFF's?) resent Haney for "betraying" Tiger with this book. IN the absence of an agreement to not do such a thing, I can't criticize Haney too much for the book. Yes, it does make HH appear to be sleazy, but even if only half of what's in the book is factual, it reflects pretty poorly on Tiger, too.
The incident with Zach Johnson and the adult movie channel really fascinates me. If that's true, it really makes Tiger look bad. My feelings would totally change if Johnson came forward and said it never happened, because I'd have complete faith that he was telling the truth. And knowing what a devout Christian Johnson is, I have no doubt that he would come forward in that event but, since he hasn't spoken up yet, I don't think we'll see that happen.
Ultimately, the fact that Haney might be a sleaze does not change the fact that at least some of his book is accurate about Tiger. Zach, we're waiting.

How do you know what's accurate? As for Zach, he's played in Tiger's tournament for the past 3 years.

I don't claim to know what's accurate in Haney's book. We'll see who all of this plays out. But I use the adult movie channel episode because it involves, if Haney's portrayal is accurate, another player who is identified by name and who, by all accounts, is friendly with Tiger. If Zach were to refute Haney's version of this story, it would probably go a long way to discredit much of what's in the book. I'd like to see someone ask him about it. I'm amazed that no one has.