True enough, a journalists primary charge is to cover the tournament in its entirety and not just one man. But lets be honest, clear and realistic. Rarely has there been one man like Tiger Woods. Rarely has there been a moment of such potentially historic enormity in terms of golfing achievement. And on and on we could go. If the press zealously seeks to chronicle every step of such an undertaking as they would any other endeavor of magnitude, then it is with good reason.
If other competitors identify themselves, and likely they will, then their stories will undoubtedly be fully revealed.
Again, though, given this particular occasion, until such time that Tiger Woods removes himself from the battle to win, then the spotlight on this grandest of stages remains squarely on him.
The media need not apologize nor be the focal point for what should be a very special week.
And what of Tigers peers in this scenario? Well, they marvel at what hes accomplished. Many of them know how difficult it has been to just win one major, let alone three in a row. But this could be a tough week for them in terms of repeatedly being asked about Tiger Woods. Players no doubt will be respectful, as theyve always been about Tiger. Yet by the same token, we in the press would do well to respect those players not named Tiger, and remember that they, too, are here to win a golf tournament.
If Tiger wins his fouth straight major at the Masters, will you consider it a Grand Slam?
Share your thoughts!
Full Coverage of the 2001 Masters