Almost everyone agrees that the best player in golf currently playing is Tiger Woods and that possibly, within a few years, he may go down as the greatest ever, provided he breaks Jack Nicklaus's record in Grand Slam tournament wins.
Tiger Woods' success has been magnified that much more because, on the face of it, he is black. Tiger is, of course, not 100% African American. His father, the late Earl Woods, was African American. His mother, Kultida, is Thai. The Thai people, being more open-minded than most Asians, consider Tiger to be Thai. Americans, on the other hand, are likely to see him as black.
Even as esteemed a writer as Michael Wilbon, who knows about Tiger's heritage, would have to say that it's Tiger's looks combined with his extreme success that has drawn audiences that normally didn't care about golf to watch golf. Tiger was, of course, not the first to break the color barrier. However, he's been the best African American (and by extension, Asian American) player ever.
While the average person focuses a great deal on "African", there is a second component, which is "American", and I argue that this is at least as important to his popularity as anything.
Imagine, if you will, that Tiger is from Australia or England, and is half-black, half-Thai. Would he be revered as much in the US as he is now? I wonder.
Consider Roger Federer. Even after Sampras, who was not nearly as popular as either Connors or McEnroe, had been anointed as the great one, the tennis world is ready to place the new title to Federer. And Federer has yet to disappoint. His biggest rival is not American Andy Roddick, who can hardly be called a rival since he loses to Federer almost always, but Rafael Nadal, and then, only on clay. At one point, Nalbandian gave Federer fits, but no longer.
He's as dominant a player as tennis has produced since, well, Sampras, and perhaps even more so, because Federer can play on clay, a surface Sampras seemed ill-at-ease for nearly his entire career. Despite Sampras's powerful serves, his health was generally questionable, and he would gear himself for the Grand Slams even if this meant subpar performances in other titles. Federer, on the other hand, is more like Borg or Lendl, cranking up wins on big and small occasions alike.
Even as the media has tried to link the superstars together, Federer and Woods, Federer has much less fame and clout compared to Tiger. That's mostly because Federer is white, in a sport that is mostly perceived as white, but also because he's European, so that his fame is far less than Sampras. True, Federer is also fairly mild-mannered, but even so, he's not American, and so we don't seem to care. Even Borg, with his epic battles against Americans, was quite a bit more famous than Federer.
Were it not for Federer, perhaps someone like James Blake would stand out more. Blake is ranked around fifth in the world, and is African American. That, alas, has not piqued American interest that much. Blake and Roddick appear more like A&F coverboys (except A&F has been quite lily white for a long time) than serious tennis players, and that neither seriously challenge Federer make them afterthoughts.
Americans, it seems, likes winners, especially in the world sports market. Consider a fan can root for the Redskins, despite another season with no post-season, but if you're not number 1 in tennis (or not Anna Kournikova), then it doesn't matter, since people don't generally care about tennis. And I say this from the point of view of someone who followed tennis seriously for quite a few years.
Would Federer be much more well-regarded if he were African European, say, like Yannick Noah? I think he would be, again, for the same reason Tiger is regarded well outside the US. This is still a novelty in tennis, much like a dominant white marathoner would be a novelty in a sport that tends to be dominated by Kenyans.
But his popularity in the US would be even greater if he were American. And really, there have been modestly successful African Americans in tennis, not the least of which are the Williams sisters. Serena came back from injury and a lowly rank of 81 to completely dominate world number 1, Maria Sharapova. And let's face it, you'd think the Williams sisters would be well-regarded, but after a while, people in the US think "come on, it's women's sports---who cares?".
American sportscasters will always be more passionate about football, baseball, and basketball than other sports. Far more passionate. Thus, great players in other sports are rarely given their due. I listen to morning sports radio, and someone like Federer barely gets mentioned. Instead, a minor player can get far more airplay because of comments they make, and it can be debated on and on, because it's baseball, basketball, or football.
So as Federer wins yet another Australian Open, ask yourself why so few people seem to care in the US.
Three recent talks
-
Since I’ve slowed down with interesting blogging, I thought I’d do some
lazy self-promotion and share the slides for three recent talks. The first
(hosted ...
4 months ago
No comments:
Post a Comment