Robsk II

In your ringer.

You missed me.

Well there's nothing wrong with that way above, I guess, provided it's not full of ads or anything and is free - but there's no reason you can't do something similar with Flash, any video editor, even html.. provided a bit of thought foes into it and it autoruns OK, surely?

tiger woods tiger woods tiger woods Tiger and his bu... erm, best chum St Willy.

I'd love to see his porcine, blubbery form hauled around a pitch. Possibly by crane.

My only real point in the first place was that it's impossible to nail it down to Woods alone or Federer, or whatever. This was for conversation, not "He is it, end of discussion" idiocy. There can be no objective and final answer, that was the basis for my rubbishing these 'definitely the case' claims. Your opinion, particularly, Willy, was extremely biased, and asserted with no consideration for the (vast) gaps in your knowledge outside of golf.

I might strain an intercostal muscle, fnah fnah fnah! For some reason, I think I'm incredibly inteliigent! fnah fnah fnah! Just because I named a specific muscle! Mercy me! And I apparently have met people playing golf with other jobs, like a psychologist! Wowsers in my trousers! Oh Tiger, I've got wood, oh fnah fnah fnah, funny me. In most cases, those who consider themselves 'pro golfers' are in fact only pro in that they instruct. And this being the case, yes, I'd bet there are easily 300,000 people in the world who make some sort of living via instructing etc. It is a tiny majority that play truly professionally. You're a proper moron.

And surely, if you bothered to look at Fox's record, you would have an inkiling of a suspicion of his dominance. I cited him not because I am a kayaker. I did so because I consider him to have been a true great. You can't simply say that i said a kayaker because I once dd the sport, and that you said golfer, despite playing golf, objectively. You reckon you went on statistics and so on, but no - you went on only those you know, and put them into a context of sweeping, stupid generalisations. You're a total, total thick c*nt. I would still say to you that there are thousands of people attempting to do various forms of kayaking 'seriously', and that number can't be dwarfed by those who go beyond 'hobbyist' golfers. You just speak sh*t. Your opinion on Woods might be shared by millions, but if those millions were aware of all the sporting achievments in history, perhaps then they might be considered objective. You claim to be intelligent in various places, or at least imply it by calling others stupid, yet you entirely ignore reality. Why you place so much stock on popularity or money is beyond me. These are cultural manifestations, not a sound basis to judge sport. If I did kayaking, and was in the top 0.1% in the Britain, then the odds are I would have been that had the number been higher as well. if Fox dominated a sport more widely patronised than you understand, and trained and worked at least as hard as the top golfers to get there - how exactly can you claim to KNOW Woods is better? You know nothing. you simply speculate based on your own ridiculous ideas. Penis.

How can anything be more important than a Saints pre season friendly?

I reckon I could, if she wanted it enough.

There were actually LOADS of ways of doing this.

Not a REAL fan.

Typical. Granty OUT.

Sotonjoe clearly isn't a REAL fan.

No, I'm ill.

Can't be awful if captained Marseille to 2nd last season..

Dog got killed, that's hilarious.

Aks Stu Romsey saint, he's an expert.

I'm not sure, I think if you mention Tiger Woods, he'll get his stroke on every time.

I'm not even going to bother with you.

You see? You have no idea, but make sweeping generalisations and statements. You don't KNOW every sport going on in the world right now. Even if there are less competitors, that doesn't mean someone doesn't also happen to be an incredible natural talent who would dominate regardless of numbers. And as discussed already, the number of golfers who are pro or have that aspiration really isn't that high either. maybe the best sportsperson is a kabadi player, but you would have NO IDEA. You have clearly derided other sports. You claim that golf requires mroe skill than some other sports, without having ANY knowledge or experience of them. You mock other sports for not being on TV, oh no! Tiger Woods is great, but saying he could've been the best at anything ever if he wanted demonstrates your total lack of objectivity. Being a natural golfer, who also works hard to capitalise on potential, does not mean you could have won an olympic 400m. The rest of us are not ignorant, we're just more objective than you, and don't masturbate over pictures of Woods. You ****ing pillock.

You really do pro golfers a lot of favours with the continual abuse. The bottom line is that anyone who excels in their field, game or sport, or whatever, should be given plaudits. I never, ever said Woods wasn't excellent, and would never deny his dominance, or ability. The thing is, you apparently WOULD deride the sports of others, and then have a go at everyone else for being ignorant about how you view golf - despite admitting to heavily critique sports you know nothing about yourself. Competitors at the highest levels in other sports, minority, as you see them, or otherwise - must still be excellent. There are sports that work you ahrder all round than golf, but that's not to take it away from golf. It's a different skillset, that's all. Maybe Woods does train his ass off, but you can get to a very good level without doing so in golf. In others, the vast majority of the higher echelons are incredibly conditioned. You can get away with more in golf because it DOES require skill above all else. How you can argue this is beyond me. Anyone in division 2 upwards in my old sport had to be really pretty damn fit. No-one in the premier division can afford to be even slightly out of condition. We trained all winter to reassert our aerobic, anaerobic etc.. AND they are all highly skilled. You can't cut it at a decent level without a good spread across the whole sporting competency field. So don't simply write everything else off. Richard Fox was certainly as dominant as Woods within a different context, and you know nothing about it. If you're going to have strong opinions, I suggest you are willing to be more tolerant of that of others.

I wouldn't argue with that, but I would sugget that high level golf is played by many, many fewer, and that hundreds of thousands of people do canoeing / kayaking. Certainly more than do rowing. This is a fact. Either way - to get to the very top, and beat others who train and work and commit as much as top competitors from any other sport - still means you are special within it. Even if that's tiddlywinks. Richard Fox was a fair few years ago, and he was acutally vaguely known at the time.

Will, I never said I was close to dying, certainly never was in a race. I'm just saying that in some sports it's quite a possibility, and it focuses the mind. Minority sport does not a bad sport make, it just doesn't appeal to the majority - and let's face it, most music, film etc which appeals to the majority does so because it is generic and takes risks. Many of the best films are not commerically succesful or mainstream. As for your sports pyschologist, he WOULD say that about golf, seeing as he was working with a golfer. They do that.. I worked with someone who emigrated to Oz because he was headhunted to be the sp. psych. for the Oz Rugby team. You're genuinely not alone at having competed to a high level, regardless of your perceptions of popularity - even so, thousands and thousands of people do forms of canoeing in this country anyway. I have to say that, regardless of how good an athlete tiger woods is, nothing will change my perception that golf is more skill based than fitness. That's not even a critique, just something I consdier a fact. Just because you like the bloke, that hardly means there aren't other athletes held in similarly hgh esteem. Maybe many others could have excelled in other sports, too. Some have, even. Frankly, trying to decide ONE greatest sportsman or achievement is pretty daft, given that no-one knows all sports or what each athlete is naturally capable of, or their story. All have relative differences - I would never dispute that Woods has a mastery of golf that is only comparable to some of the greatest sporting names, within other fields - but you should be more open minded. If you knew more about other sports, and the patronage other countries give them, you would be surprised, and you would value them more - beyond popularity and money - and you really would understand the mammoth achievements of people like Richard Fox. You can choose not to believe me, but I am telling you as a fan of other sports, what he did was exceptional. Dominating a sport requiring all types of fitness, skill, co-ordination, response, finesse, mental strength, power, speed.. for such a long period, against, in the end, much younger men, more theoretically 'peak' - was an incredible feat. Truly up there with the likes of Woods, in his own way, credit it or not. Global domination of a sport over a long time, to awe the entire sporting world.