Harvard Law

I used to watch a lot of televised golf. The Masters, the U.S. Open, the twee British one, that other last one. All the big tournaments, I watched. And I watched because Tiger Woods laid waste to an entire generation of golfers. Previously, golf had been an impenetrable bore to me. I was aware of who the best golfers were and I was also aware that every time I tuned in, they probably weren’t going to win. Golf was random like that, too difficult a sport for one man to dominate. Nicklaus had been the previous generational talent, but even his dominance meant that he won well less than half the tournaments he entered. Something inside of me hated this.

I don’t watch golf as much anymore because it’s reverted back to its random, boring self. Who wins this week will be a total crapshoot. Crapshoot, by the way, was an ancient sport that pit one white guy versus another white guy and each white guy had to defecate into a small white hole hundreds of yards away from his anus. Crapshoot. It was like golf and it was totally impossible to play and/or watch. Anyway.

I mention all of this because crime in the sports world has often resembled Tiger-less golf in its randomness. There has never been any way to predict who would rape whom and who would murder whom else. Total crapshoot. This week has brought us a bit of a referendum on this topic with one athlete dominating his field while another preaches randomness.

In one corner, Aaron Hernandez, who am become death, destroyer of worlds. In the other, Darren Sharper…

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Aaron Hernandez, Televised Golf, and Randomness”