Sunday, February 23, 2014

Floating, then crashing

Every year, I get that year's "The Best American Sports Writing" book for Christmas, and I just started reading the 2013 version this morning. Because several of the pieces each year are from Sports Illustrated, I will have read them before I see the book, but there are plenty of other stories I would have never read otherwise, such as "The Most Amazing Bowling Story Ever" by Michael J. Mooney in D Magazine about Bill Fong's pursuit of a perfect 900 bowling series, three 300 games.

(I won't spoil it, although the subhead of the story pretty much does, but it is an amazing story, and only somewhat about bowling. The quotes are from the story.)
"Most people think perfection in bowling is a 300 game, but it isn’t. Any reasonably good recreational bowler can get lucky one night and roll 12 consecutive strikes. If you count all the bowling alleys all over America, somebody somewhere bowls a 300 every night." ... 
... "Timing is everything. When your timing is right, when your arms, legs, and torso all move in rhythm toward the lane, you have better balance. When you’re balanced, you’re also more accurate."
On one night, I was almost that reasonably good recreational bowler.

From the time I first took up the game, I was capable of runs where I bowled brilliantly, dating back to the time I was a preteen and had a great series to help my team win a state Elks tournament. When I was in college, I went out for a night of open bowling with my friends in which I went strike, spare, spare, nine strikes in a row.

After a long time away from the game, I joined a Friday night league thanks to my uncle, who recruited my brother and I. My brother didn't last long, but I bowled in it for three years, until the league disbanded.

I actually wasn't a really good fit. With an average between 160 and 175, I was one of the better bowlers in the league, but it was a league that was more about having fun, and my competitiveness, and temper that often came along with it, made people uncomfortable at times. (That's on me, by the way, not them. They were all nice people, and I could have stood to chill out a bit more.)

On one otherwise unremarkable Friday night, I threw a strike in the first frame of the first game, then another, and another, until I had thrown nine in a row. Time and the tendency to exaggerate that comes with it may have affected my memory, but I don't even think there were any cheap ones in there. As I recall, I rolled the ball cleanly over the first arrow on the left side (I'm left-handed) and the ball took a perfect path to the 1-2 pocket to blow out all the pins.

Everything ... my approach, arm swing, release, follow-through ... was ... well, perfect.

The 10th ball came off my hand like it was going to be another pile-driver, but one lone pin refused to fall. I don't remember if it was a 7 or a 10 pin, but I'm inclined to think it was the 10 because I picked it up (7-pins always gave me trouble) before throwing one last strike for a 279.

Aside from the mild disappointment over not throwing a perfect game -- and really, how disappointed can you be? -- it felt pretty awesome.
"By contrast, if your timing is off, your balance is off, and you don’t hit your targets."
After a few minutes between games, and a lot of high-fives, we started the second game, and I began with two more strikes.

Then something weird happened.

Pretty much anybody can bowl. To be a good once-a-week league bowler, which I was, is a little harder. Being a top league bowler is a lot harder. And being a pro bowler is really, really hard.

I bowled juniors with a guy who was a phenomenal bowler, whose father owned the bowling alley (and once had a nice run on the local televised bowling competition himself) and who was on the lanes constantly. As good as he was, when he made a run at the pro tour, he went nowhere.

At each step along the way, the difference is consistency, the ability to throw the ball the same way and make it do the same thing over and over. A lot of it is practice, which you can't get bowling once a week. For 12 frames, I had stumbled on the difference between the good bowler and the great one.

And in frame 13 it all fell apart. My mechanics failed me for the first time all night, so I missed the mark and didn't even hit the headpin. Weirder still was the cheering after my first poor shot of the night. Just by coincidence, that was the moment they announced my 279 to the rest of the lanes, so everyone was cheering.

It was nice. It was also my last good moment of the night.

For a guy like Bill Fong, an 800 is a really good night. For me, a 600 was. It mean averaging 200 over three games, and while I wasn't nearly consistent enough to throw three 200s, I did have several 600 series, mostly by bowling well two games and going out of my mind in the third.

Yet after a 279, a 600 should have been pretty easy. All I had to do was average 160 (actually 160.5) over the last two games, and my average was 170 or so, meaning two mediocre games would get me to 600.

But I couldn't even do that. My game fell completely apart. What was so easy for a game plus a little more became nearly impossible.

I have no idea where it came from, and I have no idea where it went. But while it was there, it was pretty amazing.





Friday, February 21, 2014

If you tell me not to watch, I won't

Yes, yes and yes from Jeff Gluck on one of NASCAR's standing problems.
"NASCAR can use gimmicks to make for a better show, but what would really get fans' attention is to have drivers racing door-to-door at 200 mph, lap after lap.
After all, isn't that why people plop down on the couch on a Sunday afternoon? It's about seeing the moments that are promoted so often in NASCAR's TV ads and highlight packages. It's about rubbing fenders or making a daring pass for the lead, about tempers and, yes, even the occasional crash." ...
..."To get people to tune in with the same passion they once did, NASCAR has to become appointment viewing again. It has to be must-see TV, not like the NBA where only the last five minutes seem to matter."
Substitute "last 20 laps" for "last five minutes," and you have the essence of the problem, and those last 20 laps aren't always the most-exciting thing in the world, either. I'm hoping the new Chase format helps in that regard, but what about the rest of the race?

Sometime this season, and it won't take long, a driver will be taken out in an early accident. He or she will be released from the infield care center to a waiting interviewer, and will say something along the lines of the following:
"It's really a shame. The (team name/sponsor name/car brand here) was really fast today, it's just too bad that (other driver involved in crash) doesn't realize that there's no need to race that hard this early. You're not going to win the race in lap (number of early lap here)."
He may not have been the first to espouse this philosophy, but I attribute it to Mark Martin, who for years dutifully pulled over if he was challenged at the beginning of the race, because "there's no point holding up the faster car now" and "to finish first, first you must finish."

And now every driver seems to have that attitude.

But I have an idea..

I don't know if you can force drivers to race harder from green to checkers, but you can keep them from telling the viewing public that there's no point in watching 95 percent of the event, especially when it's a four-hour event on a Sunday afternoon when there are a lot of other things people could be doing.

After all, you don't see LeBron James telling Doris Burke "Well, Doris, we're going to go about half-speed for 40 to 45 minutes or so -- gotta make sure you don't pull those hamstrings -- and then we'll go hard at the end" before a Miami Heat game, do you?

So when I become Supreme Ruler of the Sports World (which I swear will be a blog post someday), where I make all the rules by fiat, any driver who complains about someone racing too hard will work for free that weekend. If that's not enough, take points away. If that's not enough, take a win away.

And if it's a Sprint Cup driver dabbling in Nationwide or the trucks who complains that those drivers don't understand how to race ... well, they don't have to be there, and they won't.

Seriously, how stupid is it to tell the people who consume your product that most of it isn't worth consuming?

Almost as stupid as trying to sell a car on the premise that it will rat you out to your wife.


Monday, February 10, 2014

Why Michael Sam being gay matters ... at least for now

In all the talk last night about Michael Sam coming out as gay, I saw this on the Twitter machine last night.
It's entirely possible he's saying "so what" because Sam's sexuality is truly irrelevant to him, and if so, great. As I replied, although I didn't get a response in return.
But I can't help but think that a lot of comments in this vein (and I saw several) were of the "DON'T MAKE ME TALK ABOUT GAY PEOPLE! SHOVED DOWN MY THROAT! AAAAAAHHHH!" variety.

I never heard of Michael Sam until late yesterday afternoon, when I realized that by then it was pointless to try and avoid Olympic spoilers and checked out my Twitter. I read that in spite of his gaudy stats at Missouri, he was a mid- to late-round prospect at best before the announcement, that he could be the classic "tweener" -- too small to play defensive end, not agile enough to play linebacker.

In a perfect world, his sexuality wouldn't matter. If a team thinks he'll help them, they'll draft him. If he's good enough to stick, he'll stick. If he's a good guy in the locker room, his teammates will respect him, even if they don't agree with how he lives his life. (Throw that many people together for that long, and there are going to be lots of disagreements about a lot of things, but things tend to work themselves out most of the time. Why should sexuality be any different?)

But we don't live in a perfect world. We live in a world where:

  • in many parts of the country, you can be fired for being gay. (I'll go with the Snopes definition and not the simple "You can be fired for being gay in 29 states.")
  • same-sex marriage is only legal in 17 states and the District of Columbia, and that has all come within the past 10 years.
  • suspending someone for homophobic remarks is compared to rolling the tanks into Tiananmen Square.
  • because it's still a topic of discussion whether Jason Collins is still unemployed because he's gay or Chris Kluwe doesn't have a job in the NFL because of his gay-right stance, even though it's not unreasonable to think there are other factors.
  • NFL personnel men can say Sam's draft stock has already gone down because presence would "chemically imbalance an NFL locker room and meeting room." Mind you, these are men who could knowingly draft players with positive drug tests or criminal arrests in the hopes that they'll get on the straight-and-narrow and the understanding they may not. Meanwhile, Michael Sam isn't going to get any more gay ... or any less gay, for that matter. He is who he is.
There is going to be a first openly gay NFL player, whether or not Sam sticks. And it will be a big deal with the attendant media circus when it happens ... but it will go away.

And there will always be people who don't like homosexuals, even if there 100 Michael Sams, just like there will always be people who don't like blacks or Hispanics or feminists or whomever.

But eventually, maybe we'll reach the day when being gay is something most people say "so what" over.

Friday, February 7, 2014

Bob Costas vs. Vladimir Putin ... I know who I'm picking

Last night, when NBC decided to kill some time between slopestyle qualifying runs and team figure skating short programs in its day-before-the-Opening-Ceremonies Olympic coverage -- a time clearly chosen for maximum ratings value, no doubt -- by airing a piece and discussion about Russian President Vladimir Putin, I wrote this on the Twitter machine:
 I was not disappointed. Interspersed among the comments about Costas' eye malady, were comments such as these:




Without a doubt, these are Putin's games, a personal showcase for a man who may not be a great friend to the democratic ideals our nation holds dear, as this piece by noted left-wing loon Sen. John McCain reminds us. And let us not forget, regardless of what you think of Edward Snowden, Putin is also letting someone the United States has charged with espionage live in Russia.

But this is the guy Bob Costas isn't allowed to talk about, because he has shown unacceptable signs of liberalism in the past.



Or is Putin OK because on top of everything else, he also appears to be a raging homophobe?
At least someone gets it.