Analyzing The Marathon

Analyzing this piece from Grantland I first noticed the date the piece was published, only one day following the bombing at the marathon. I thought this would be important in reading the rest of the article, knowing that the event was still very fresh in the memory of everyone around the country and especially anyone at the marathon when the bombs went off. Knowing that I thought it was courageous of Pierce, the author, to start the piece off with how melancholy the marathon had been in the past. To Bostontonians they loved the event but they almost took just as much pleasure making fun of it for “monumental inconvenience, its occasionally towering self-regard, and the annual attempts by Boston-area television stations to use it to win another shelf full of local Emmy’s”. It would have been easy for Pierce to, like most of the general media, just discuss the sheer devastation that was felt at the event especially since he was at the marathon when this all occurred. This context really works well by the time we get to the end of the article.

Using the personal stories from runners and the family members of the runners at the event gave the story a face, it made it easier to picture someone at the event at the time of the bombing. Also since all the people he interviewed where at different areas at the time of the bombing which really told the whole story, not just the people who were at ground zero but also runners who had yet to reach the finish. Starting with Kathy Hynes and Harry Smith who were the farthest away from the bombing out of all the people interviewed, you get a sense for the confusion of what had happened only a couple of miles away. Since police couldn’t speculate on the sheer magnitude of what had happened all they could tell the runners was the race is cancelled to do an incident. But in the world of social media and instant messaging it didn’t take long for word to reach around the entire Boston area, and even the entire world, of what had happened. This is where the article really started to take a serious turn, when it starts talking about the deaths and the countless people injured, some permanently.

Calling back in the article to probably the most infamous bombing in American history, 9/11, was an important comparison to have. While it may have been from someone he interviewed it helped describe the cautious that happened with so many people on the street not knowing what was going on and the panic that ensued.

The article in general to me tried to stay away from the overall story line of what happened on that day, but instead tried to find the human aspect. This is why he interviewed such a wide spread amount of people who had very different viewpoints of the bombing. All of these different experiences and different viewpoints of the same event is something that still to this day I haven’t seen done this well. We've seen the interviews and stories of the victims of the bombing, but not from the countless others who were lucky enough to be at the right place at the right time. It also showed the courage of the volunteers who were at the scene, example being the tent that was originally setup for runners who were dehydrated or just too physically drained from the marathon was quickly turned into a medical ward for all the on lookers who were injured. Without having to be asked or told they gave up their seats for the people who truly needed it at that time, it might have been an easy decision for those involved but still seeing little acts like that after such a devastating event is what needs to be looked at almost as much as what happened.

Going back to what Pierce said at the beginning of the article about how the marathon had been treated as a joke to most people from Boston we come full circle at the end of the article. He believes that someday the event may again become lighter harded and something people can joke about. But now and for a while when people come to the Boston Marathon or watch the coverage on T.V. they will go back to that day on April 15^th, 2013. When three people lost their lives, other were mutilated causing them to lose limbs, there pain and the pain of anyone who was there will live on forever and even worse every year the marathon comes back to Boston. But part of the healing process is time, and time and patience is what is needed for Boston to rally and strengthen after this event. With the hindsight we have now we know that’s exactly what the people of Boston did, and while they wish the bombing never happened they are better and stronger for it. They will always stay Boston Strong. 

The Hall of Fame flaw

The Hall of Fame for any sport is considered as the end goal for most professional athletes. This honor justifies everything that the player had to sacrifice during his career, the time put in, the sleepless night preparing for the season.

The Marathon: An Analysis of Grantland's piece

            There are several aspects to The Marathon by Grantland.com that gives different accounts of the Boston Marathon bombing, but it also feels like it is all from the author’s vision. After looking up the author, Charles Pierce, I was surprised to find out it wasn’t Bill Simmons. Pierce does a beautiful job explaining the scene going from all the different points of the horror: after, during and different accounts of the tragedy.

Tiger's Effect on Golf

This year, the crowd and the 14 million television viewers watching on the final day of the Masters witnessed the rise of the next generation of golfers. Of the Top Five finishers, three of the golfers were 25 years old or younger including the eventual Champion Jordan Spieth, who is 21. This Masters victory not only signifies his arrival but it announces the arrival of a younger generation. This rise can be attributed to Tiger Woods.

Regardless if he reaches the all-time majors record or not, Tiger Woods will go down as one of the greatest golfers of all time. More importantly, he will be the most influential figure in the history of the sport. The legends like Jack Nicklaus, Sam Snead, and Arnold Palmer will all take a back seat to him on being the most influential person in golf history.

Who is a golfer that inspired a younger generation to play at a higher level? Have you ever thought about it? An argument could be made that Tiger Woods is the one and only golfer who exceeded at this.

Jack Nicklaus or any other golfers did not have the same effect on golf as Tiger did when he first entered the 1997 Masters. The reason was because Tiger Woods was so young when he won his first. If you go back into golf history, Jack Nicklaus, Arnold Palmer, and other major winners were competing and winning Major tournaments were winning in their twenties but they were not dominating the field. Aside from Nicklaus, it was uncommon for an amateur or even a young pro in his twenties to win one of the four major tournaments, let alone dominant. This is what made Tiger special.

He broke the mold. As a 21-year old golfer, Woods won the 1997 Masters while setting the tournament record. All of these old-time records were set by men in their thirties or forties. In fact, that was the case for most of the tournaments. Golf before Tiger Woods was generally an older profession. Woods' victory was so rare and unheard of that it inspired younger golfers to put forth the effort and work ethic to become as good as Woods.

This Nike commercial that aired before the Masters illustrates how every current young golfer felt when watching Tiger Woods play. The young golfer in the commercial evolved into Rory McIlroy. McIlroy symbolizes a lot of golfers of this generation. As Tiger began his torrid 1999-2009 golf years, this younger generation watched and continued to work hard to one day reach that level.

Almost 18 years after Woods' first Masters win, look at the amount of young golfers playing professionally and winning major tournaments in their twenties. McIlroy has four major wins. The recent Masters winner Spieth is only 21. Webb Simpson won the 2012 U.S. Open at 27 years old. Keagan Bradley won the 2011 PGA Championship at 25 years old. The list goes on and on about the young, talented golfers.

Woods understands the influence he had on the younger generation of golfers like McIlroy. However,  he does not realize that he has affected more golfers than just McIlroy. This younger generation grew up watching and wanting to play like Woods in a similar way to how Woods wanted to be like Nicklaus when Woods was younger. The only difference is Woods had a much larger affect because of his success at young age.

"Golf used to treated as a leisurely pastime," Woods said in the interview. "Now it is considered a sport."

This change within golf is directly related to Tiger Woods. The way Woods was winning tournaments especially when he was in his twenties was astounding. He won 8 majors before turning 30 years old. He was beating the field by numerous strokes. As Woods was doing this, these younger golfers like McIlroy and Spieth would practice and play with the intention of one day playing better than Tiger Woods when they reached 21 years old.

Nicklaus certainly was a terrific golfer in his twenties but much of his accolades came in his thirties. Woods was different. He received immediate attention by being the youngest major winner and dominating the tournament field.

People commented on how Woods would change the game for black golfers and would lead the charge in the influx of black golfers. It has not happened yet, but if the real trend was how Woods changed the perception of golf. Woods not only proved he was a rare talent like Nicklaus. He also proved any hard working young golfer could make the PGA Tour and be a dominant player. It is this drive that has elevated the play of the new young generation of golfers, and it is this drive that has made golf more than just a "leisurely pastime."

Damian Lillard: Others before Self

How long does it take to become an overnight national sensation?

Zimmer Live Tweet Masters

Here are my tweets from covering the 2015 Masters with #Com475