Originally Posted by bruce goose
Well, even though it looked ominous in length
, I actually appreciated the thoughts you shared from Lewis. You'll be happy to read that I don't consider this to be a MORAL issue
...merely something that I take up as a sports fan.
To ME, there has to be at least some symmetry between the EXTENT of the hype and the person who benefits from it. From the world of basketball, American LeBron James received a huge amount of hype before he'd even laced up his shoes in the NBA; you'd have thought that he had proven himself as a HOF'er. In his defense, though, LeBron was already able to more than hold his own against NBA veterans at the age of 17, so there was reasonable justification for predicting that he WOULD be great(as he has long since established). Likewise, the Williams sisters were already a major threat to WTA veterans when they first arrived on the scene.....
......No such claim can be made by Bouchard...not even CLOSE. We both understand the Eye Candy Element in marketing; I simply feel that the DEGREE of hype for Bouchard far outweighs what she deserves. It's not an empirical fact...only my opinion
......And you'd probably feel the same way if I exhaustedly hyped Duran Duran or Milli Vanilli as the musical equals of your favorite classic artists....OVER and OVER and OVER again as the WTA page shoves "Steffi" Bouchard down our throats......Now if Duran Duran happens to be your all-time favorites, then I hope that your Belgian village gets overrun by Luxembourgian(IF that's even a word) guerrila forces
Well, I agree with your point about the music. But in music it's taken to far bigger extremes than in sports. Is Bouchard 'the best' tennis player? No. But she's top 20, which is very good. No way is Duran Duran a top 20 musical act - not even top 20.000 as far as I'm concerned.
Besides, why should all the attention go to only three or four top players? That's not healthy. In an ideal world the entire top 50 should be 'stars.'