Week of September 27, 2005 - October 3, 2005

Playoffs - National League Preview
October 3, 2005

It's not just Yankees and Red Sox this week. Our Midwest correspondent submitted this introduction to the upcoming Cardinals-Padres series:

INTRODUCTION TO THE NATIONAL LEAGUE

You don't know about me, without you have read a blog by the name of Exit, Pursued by a Bear; but that ain't no matter. That blog is made by Mr John Scherrer, and he tells the truth, mainly. There is things which he stretches, but mainly he tells the truth.

I'm gonna tell you 'bout the Divisional Series between the St. Louis Cardinals and San Diego Padres. Both those teams play ball in the National League. First, let me show you where they gonna play the games.

St. Louis will host Games 1 and 2, and they'll be played in a big stadium that sits along the Mighty Mississippi River — reckon they got lights and everything, though I hear all the games gonna be in the afternoon because of some feller named Nielsen. But the park is bona fide — yes, sir. If you have one of those fancy satellite dishes that get 800 channels, you may be able to find the games broadcast on the tube.

There's some real wall bangers gonna be playin'. St. Louis has a feller named Albert Pujols. My daddy told me he's almost as good as Stan the Man himself. And if you like those hurlers, you should watch this San Diego guy named Jake Peavy. Almost as hard to hit as Smoky Joe Wood.

So keep your ears peeled. When I get a chance, I'll tell ya 'bout the games, 'case ya'll don't hear 'bout it out east.

WHY THE PADRES WILL BEAT THE CARDINALS

First, let me point this out: I'm a Cardinals fan. I grew up less than ten minutes from downtown St. Louis, and I've remained a close observer of the Cards regardless of where I've lived. With that said, let me explain why the people picking the Cards to sweep the Padres are on crack. In fact, here's why the Padres will win the Series:

• In a move marked by Bush-esque blind loyalty, Tony LaRussa is starting Matt Morris in Game 3. Basically, the Cardinals are giving away Game 3. Thus, in order to win the series, the Cards will need to win three of the four games. And they won't because...
• Right now, Jake Peavy is the best pitcher on either team and he'll pitch Games 1 and 4. No way the Cards beat him twice. Chris Carpenter peaked in August and appears to have a tired arm. Ditto for Mark Mulder. Jeff Suppan has pitched brilliantly in the last two months, but he won't start in the series because of LaRussa's idiotic faith in Matt Morris;
• The Cards bullpen is vulnerable, and the Padres have a lights-out closer in Trevor Hoffman. Not surprisingly, the Cardinals' most reliable bullpen pitcher, Al Reyes, injured his elbow in a meaningless game on the last day of the season and is out for the next year. This wasn't a surprise because the Cards have been cursed since 1985. Every postseason has been marred by the injury of a key player — and usually in a freak occurrence, such as Vince Coleman, the league leader in stolen bases, getting run over by the tarp, and Mike Matheny cutting his thumb while opening a hunting knife before Game 1 of the divisional playoffs. Oh, and besides Reyes blowing out his elbow, the Cards will be without All-Star and Gold Glove third-basemen Scott Rolen. When Rolen was in the lineup, Albert Pujols actually got pitches to hit. Considering Rolen played less than a third of the season, this especially emphasizes why Pujols is clearly the MVP; and
• The Cardinals are awful during day games. And thanks to the ridiculous obsession with all things Yankees and Red Sox, the Cards will be playing nothing but day games. The last time I saw the splits in July, the Cards' Game 2 starter, Mark Mulder, was 10-1 at night with a 2.14 ERA, and during the day he's 1-3 with a 7.40 ERA.

So that's my case for why the Padres will win in four games. By the way, I noticed that the American League once again enjoys a potentially huge advantage: not only do they have home-field advantage from the All-Star game (which is an absolutely stupid rule), but if both the NLCS and ALCS go seven games, the AL finishes a day sooner. And that's potentially a monumental edge since that team would have an extra day to align their rotation for the World Series, not to mention that they get to stay at home. This happened last season.

There's another NL series taking place between the Braves and the Astros, but nobody cares about it. Okay, maybe not nobody, but Atlanta fans tend to ignore the first round of the playoffs, Houston fans are a litle busy with other concerns, and most everyone else hates both teams. Houston in 4, but nobody notices until the 'Stros arrive in St. Louis (despite Mr. Scherrer's lack of faith) next Wednesday to start the second round.

Also, to A-Rod and Joe Torre — and anyone else on the Yankees who wants to whine about Buck Showalter pulling some of his stars after three innings, and therefore possibly helping the Angels seal home-field advantage for the first round of the playoffs — please shut up now. The Rangers are a mediocre team that lost 14 of 18 games against the Angels this year, including their last 6 meetings. No matter how good a game Michael Young, Mark Teixeira and Hank Blalock might have had, it was unlikely to make up for the Rangers' atrocious pitching.

It would be nice if all the teams played their hardest even when they have no chance left, but it doesn't happen. Teams that are out of contention sometimes mail it in. The Angles beat up on Texas and Seattle after those teams had given up. The Yankees did the same against Baltimore and Toronto. We figure Torre knows that (though we're not sure about A-Rod, who seems to have some personal issues with Showalter), but we also thought he knew better than to take the bait when the press is chasing a non-story like this..

Why Some Parts of the Times Are Still Free Online
October 3, 2005

Having proved time and again that their own reporters can never judge whether something is really a trend or not, the Times has adopted a new standard: if people are blogging about it, it must be noteworthy. Or, as they put it in an article today, "Map thefts are common enough to be monitored by bloggers and are the focus of entire books." But anyone who's read more that three blogs has come across at least one that focuses entirely on obscure and esoteric topics, and would know that attention by bloggers is not proof of anything.

But the Times editors must not read any blogs, since if they did they would never have allowed this sentence by Liesl Schillinger in yesterday's Book Review: "The marvelous, not-to-be-missed Web site Gothamist.com — a crystal ball that reflects everything worth knowing about this city ...." Marvelous?? Not-to-be-missed??? Is Schillinger serious? Gothamist consists mostly of insipid reflections of items on the front pages of the local papers, which is not even close to "everything worth knowing about this city." Also, a mirror reflects. A crystal ball is used to predict the future. Get your analogies right. We know this is only a review of some mediocre chick-lit, but even bad books deserve competent reviews.

In an unrelated story on bad writing in the Times, Broadcasting and Cable examines Alessandra Stanley's "one-woman campaign to popularize the use of 'vein' as a verb." Which is fine, as long as that verb means "to mark or decorate with veins." Or the adjective veined, meaning "having or showing markings that resemble veins." Veined does not mean "containing," or "lined," or "laced with," or "full of," and we don't think it ever will. Please Alessandra, at least try to use the English language correctly.

That story courtesy of Gawker, where one reader comments:

Once the body is on the ground all you can do is try to get a solid kick in before it's all over. Everyone involved with the business of writing needs to team up and pile on this woman until she's finally fired. Go team go!

We couldn't agree more! Except, we think the comment was meant sarcastically.

Books
October 2, 2005

We criticize the Times a lot, but they do do some things right. Like publish book reviews by our very own Ligaya Mishan.

Playoffs
October 2, 2005

"Well, it's that time of year again. Summer turns to autumn, the nights turn cool, the leaves turn color. And, of course, Met fans turn into rabid Red Sox fans."

— Bill Scampoli, Islip, Newsday

Actually, we don't. Oh, some Mets fans would pick the Red Sox as their favorite AL team, but many of us wll root for whoever is playing the Yankees. Which means that this week Met fans will turn into rabid Angels fans. We've tried to root for the Angels before — mostly because owner Arte Moreno's first move after buying the team was to lower the price of beer — but we can't really get excited about them except as an alternative to the Yankees winning.

On the other hand, we often rooted for the White Sox as a kid, since mom was a fan from way back. But even though the Chisox won their last five games, we don't think they're at the same level as the other three teams right now. Especially since those last three wins came against the Indians, who utterly collapsed after an amazing 17-2 run that made them surprise contenders. The Indians' collapse ruined the Yankees-Red Sox series, as the Yanks clinched a spot on Saturday despite not being assured a better record than the Sox, while the Indians' loss on Sunday gave Boston the wild card even though the game at Fenway was still in the fifth inning.

The Red Sox and Yankees finished with the same record, but the Yankees take the division title Based on their head-to-head record. Sox owner John Henry prefers to call the teams "co-division champs," and professes to wish there could be a one-game playoff to settle the title. We suspect he's happy to be the wild card team, and face the White Sox instead of the Angels.

Our predictions, which are worth exactly what you pay for them: Red Sox sweep; Angels in five, in an ugly series.

Turbulent Times
September 29, 2005

So the Times finally went ahead and admitted that Alessandra Stanley was wrong. Well, sort of. Instead of just issuing a correction, the paper printed the following Editor's Note:

The TV Watch column on Sept. 5 discussed broadcast journalists' undisguised outrage at the failings of Hurricane Katrina rescue efforts. It said reporters had helped stranded victims because no police officers or rescue workers were around, and added, "Fox's Geraldo Rivera did his rivals one better: yesterday, he nudged an Air Force rescue worker out of the way so his camera crew could tape him as he helped lift an older woman in a wheelchair to safety."

The editors understood the "nudge" comment as the television critic's figurative reference to Mr. Rivera's flamboyant intervention. Mr. Rivera complained, but after reviewing a tape of his broadcast, The Times declined to publish a correction.

Numerous readers, however - now including the newspaper's public editor, who also scrutinized the tape - read the comment as a factual assertion. The Times acknowledges that no nudge was visible on the broadcast.

Geraldo says he's satisfied enough not to sue, but not exactly happy about it. [He's also not happy about the tone of the Public Editor's column which sided with him and began "One of the real tests of journalistic integrity is being fair to someone who might best be described by a four-letter word." Asks Geraldo: "What four-letter word do they have in mind? Hero?" Um ... no. We're just guessing here, but it probably rhymes with "curd."]

We're not satisfied with the note, either, since the Times hasn't really admitted being wrong. Instead the editors are pretending to be idiots who somehow think "nudge" is a synonym for "flamboyant intervention." Then they try to shift the blame onto any reader who reads at an 8th-grade-level or above, by implying that we were fools to read the sentence in question as a factual assertion simply because it's written as a factual assertion and not, say, an opinion or fantasy.

We hope this will be our last post on Alessandra Stanley for a while, as we've decided to shift our complaints from this page to a letter to the Public Editor, who hasn't responded yet. In the meantime, we've stopped reading anything with Stanley's byline on it, so we won't learn about her next idiocy until it gets picked up by another blog.

That doesn't necessarily mean that we're going to lay off of the Times, however. There's certainly more than enough in the Paper of Record to piss us off. And Kevan Huston, too, who sent this article from the Elmira Star-Gazette criticizing the Times' sloppy reporting on Corning, Inc. The Star-Gazette notes two errors in the first two sentences, and comments:

Not earth-shattering errors, of course. But errors nonetheless that undermine the credibility of the rest of the article for the careful reader.

We wholeheartedly agree, and made a similar point in our letter to the Public Editor. The reason we harp on Stanley so much is not that we're a television geek who can't stand to see the slightest mistake in a review (we rarely watch more that The Daily Show, The Simpsons and sports), but rather because we think all the sections of the paper share one level of credibility. If we know that the arts section is riddled with errors, how much can we trust the news section?

So why don't we pick on the Daily News or the New York Post, which surely have their share of mistakes? Because the News is only good for its comics, and the Post for its Su Doku. We're impressed when either one bothers to cover a real story. But we, like the Star-Gazette, expect more from the Times:

As readers, we deserve better from the New York Times than the "many people think" school of journalism, which allows reporters and others to inject their own opinions, prejudices and hunches into stories.

Unfortunately, that kind of fake journalism appears to be well entrenched at the Gray Lady. Just look at the recent story "Many Women at Elite Colleges Set Career Path to Motherhood." (Then see Jack Shafer at Slate first point out how nearly everything about the article is meaningless and then come back three days later to demolish the rest of the article.) So we'll continue to criticize the stories that really annoy us, or the ones that really annoy you, until the Times starts acting like the paper it's supposed to be again.

And They Wonder Where the Sterotype Comes From
September 30, 2005

We didn't think there could be anything more embarrassing for a communications major than to have his typo ("Communication majors as smart as anyone, stigma is ‘ignorant’ and rediculous") exposed on Gawker, where he will be known just by that one word, and not by the contents of the article. Then we read the article, and we think the unnamed author is better off if nobody else gets past the headline.

Steroids
September 20, 2005

You probably expect us to have some comment on the latest back and forth between the owners and the union over baseball's steroid policy. We don't. We just don't care right now. The current policy is a joke, but everyone has agreed to move to a stricter one. Whether it's the owners' plan, the union's plan, or Congress' plan, there will be improvement, and we have better things to do than get bogged down in a debate over how long a suspension should result from each positive test.

Having said that, we think you should read King Kaufman's thoughts on the subject in Salon. Not just on whether doping boards should have discretion in the length of suspensions rather than mandatory bans (we suspect many people who oppose mandatory minimums in criminal cases as bad policy have no problem with them in sports), but also on whether basing policy rules on baseball rules ("three strikes and you're out") makes any sense.

Week of September 20, 2005 - September 26, 2005

Fifth Avenue Mile
September 25, 2005

Way too many good times yesterday for us to list them all here (go read the results page for that), but there are a few we have to mention. First, of course, is Kate Irvin winning the local elite competition with a PR of 4:50.1. for that she picked up $400; 70,000 frequent flyer miles, and a nice Tiffany plate. In the men's elite competition, Neil Fitzgerald finished fifth, in a PR time of 4:21.8. Not surprisingly, both of those are top CPTC times: Neil's the ninth best, and his first appearance on any list; Kate's the top, moving her up one spot from last year.

Kate wasn't the only money winner yesterday. Alston Brown and Mary Rosado each got $150 for winning the 50-59 age group; Salih Talib $100 for being second M60-69; Stacy Creamer $50, 3rd F40-49; and Sid Howard, $50, 3rd M60-69 (his new bride, Asteria Claure, also picked up $50 as 3rd F50-59). That's a lot of $1 shares going to Coach Devon and Coach Tony.

Best Time Correction
September 25, 2005

while we're updating and correcting the best times list, we have to give special credit to Stuart Calderwood, who created them. And he gets his name back on the 3000m list, with a 1990 time of 9:40 for two miles, which converts to 8:57.0 for the 3000m, and 8th place on the list.

Roll On, Columbia
September 25, 2005

The Columbia Lions are off to their best start (2-0) since 1996 after beating Duquesne yesterday. This guarantees the team a better record than last year, when they went 1-9. Obviously, the good vibes left from CPTC's middle distance workouts at Baker Field has rubbed off on the Lions.

Critical Condition
September 25, 2005

The Times Public Editor chastises his bosses for refusing to issue a correction to Alessandra Stanley's comments on Geraldo Rivera. Executive Editor Bill Keller comes up with the worst reason for this decision:

Mr. Keller's final reason for rejecting a correction was that Ms. Stanley, "who is writing as a critic, with the license that title brings - was within bounds in her judgment." He elaborated: "Ms. Stanley's point was that Mr. Rivera was show-boating - that he was being pushy, if not literally pushing - and I think an impartial viewer of the footage will see it that way."

Got it? Critics don't actually have to accurately report what they are reviewing. At least the Public Editor rejects this logic:

Based on the videotape and outtakes I saw, Ms. Stanley certainly would have been entitled to opine that Mr. Rivera's actions were showboating or pushy. But a "nudge" is a fact, not an opinion. And even critics need to keep facts distinct from opinions.

The Times should issue the correction. It's the right thing to do journalistically, it will deprive Rivera and Bill O'Reilly of their latest issue, and it will save the rest of us from having to defend Geraldo.

Fifth Avenue Mile - Watching
September 22, 2005

If you're not running, join your teammates in a mini Wall of Orange at the race's halfway point, between 70th and 71st Street. We'll be gathering on the West side of Fifth Avenue (the Central Park side) to cheer everyone on. Remember to wear orange!

Schedule of Events

Ages 8-14 - 10:10 a.m.
Women 15-29 - 10:30 a.m
Men 15-29 - 10:45 a.m.
Women 30-39 - 11:00 a.m.
Men 30-34 - 11:15 a.m.
Men 35-39 - 11:30 a.m.
Women 40-49 - 11:45 a.m.
Men 40-49 - Noon
Men and Women 50-59 - 12:15 p.m.

George Sheehan Memorial Mile:
Men and Women 60-69 - 12:35 p.m.
Men and Women 70+ - 12:55 p.m.

NYRR Road Mile Championships:
Women - 1:15 p.m.
Men - 1:25 p.m.

Professional Athletes:
Women - 1:35 p.m.
Men - 1:45 p.m.

Fifth Avenue Mile - Running
September 22, 2005

For those of you running the Fifth Avenue Mile this Saturday, we present, once again, Coach Devon's tips:

FIFTH AVENUE MILE COURSE
0 - 400m slight downhill
400 - 800m slight uphill
800 - 1200m almost flat
1200 - 1600m almost flat

Because the 1st 400m is DOWNHILL, you must be careful not go out too fast. Better to go out too slow for the 1st 400m, then too fast. Inexperienced runners will go out like rabbits, don't get sucked in! You know your mile pace! Stick to it for the 1st 400m.

OVERALL STRATEGY

0 - 400m
Get out, RELAX, let the rabbits go!
Run your own race for the 1st 400m.
(Don't worry about your position, it's the same distance from the middle of the road or the side of the road).

400 - 800m
Now it's time to work!
ATTACK the hill!
Start looking at your competition.

800 - 1200m
Forget the clock, it's time to compete!
COMPETE, COMPETE, COMPETE!
Start picking off runners one by one!
Every runner counts.

1200 - 1600m
Find another gear by competing. Remember those 200s & 300s you have been doing on the track? Go after that runner in front of you! Don't stop before the finish line---Run "through the line" (i.e., pretend the finish line is 10 meters farther)

Frequently Asked Question: What should I do if I run the 1st 400m too fast?
Do NOT slow down (slowing down doesn't work in the mile). You've committed yourself to that pace, stick to it. Don't panic. You still may run a PR. Don't fight the pain---Run through it. Only way to run through the pain is to compete, compete, compete.

NOTE: If you see the clock at the 400m or 800m mark, you are not running that time! You are actually running a few seconds slower. That's because you are seeing the clock BEFORE you actually cross the 400m or 800m mark. So, in other words, IGNORE the clock! If you can, don't look at the clock.

Everyone Hates Alessandra
September 22, 2005

It's been a bad week for the Times television reviewers. First there was Frank Bruni's awful line about chefs inheriting the earth. (In his defense, he's actually a food critic. For his prosecution, well, The Bruni Digest does a better job of mocking his prose than we would ever have time to do.) Then on that same day, an article on the Emmys "referred incorrectly in some copies to the show for which William Shatner won an award," as the correction put it. (A forgivable oversight. The Emmys may be the biggest farce ever, but even we couldn't believe that they'd give Shatner an award.)

And then came Alessandra Stanley, and a review that required this correction:

A television review yesterday about "How I Met Your Mother" and "Out of Practice," on CBS, misstated the name of the popular show, ended last season, that the network is trying to replace with another hit. It is "Everybody Loves Raymond," not "All About Raymond."

We suspect that even those of you who, like us, never watched "Raymond" were still aware of its name. After all, this was the most popular sitcom on television for the last few years, and it's still on in reruns all the time. This alone should be enough to get any television critic fired.

But, wait! There's more! Gawker offers up three corrections to the latest entries in Stanley's oeuvre before even the Times staff can get to them. They may be wrong about Stanley getting the name of Martha Stewart's daughter wrong (or once again the error occurred only "in some copies"), but she definitely cleaned up a quote in her review of "Everybody Hates Chris." The third correction is trickier. The Times never admits that the trends they cite may be bogus, or that their view of the cultural landscape may be a bit blurry. So, while all of the following is true, it's the sort of correction we're not likely to see:

A television review yesterday about "Everybody Hates Chris," on UPN, incorrectly characterized the status of television families in the 1970s and 1980s. It is not the case, as we reported, that, "By the 1970's and 80's, father not only did not know best, he was often dead. On many of the most popular sitcoms, from 'One Day at a Time' to 'Full House,' at least one parent was absent." Our television critic is apparently unaware that "Full House" ran from 1987 to 1995, thus not really fitting into her timeframe. She is further apparently unaware of the existence of "Family Ties," "The Cosby Show," "Growing Pains," "The Wonder Years," and numerous other shows that render her argument nonsensical.

There's a reason a writer in the L.A. Times called her "the Michael D. Brown of TV critics." That, by the way, relates to Stanley's claim that Geraldo Rivera "nudged an Air Force rescue worker out of the way so his camera crew could tape him as he helped lift an older woman in a wheelchair to safety." Unfortunately for Stanley, the video (available here, if you can bear to watch FOX News), doesn't even show Geraldo near the rescue worker, and his colleague who was near the airman does not appear to have done any nudging. So far the Times had defended Stanley by arguing that she described something that happened just off-camera, which is a rather odd thing for a reporter who admits to having seen the incident only on TV to base a claim on. Geraldo is planning a lawsuit, but it's hard to see how this tarnishes his reputation.

Lastly, Ned Martel's review of "E-Ring" reminds us that spelling counts. (Thanks to Paul Frankenstein for this one):

Though the pilot was directed by the accomplished film director Taylor Hackford ("An Officer and a Gentleman," "Ray"), "E-Ring" incorporates the rah-rah quality of last year's movie "Team America," but here it tries to be serious, not satyrical.

We're assuming that last word is a typo, and that Martel is not hoping for a show in which Dennis Hopper chases after assorted ROTC co-eds (though that sounds more entertaining that most of the new fall offerings). Therefore, we present these handy definitions for the Times critics and editors:

sa·tyr
n.

1. often Satyr Greek Mythology. A woodland creature depicted as having the pointed ears, legs, and short horns of a goat and a fondness for unrestrained revelry.
2. A licentious man; a lecher.
3. A man who is affected by satyriasis.
4. Any of various butterflies of the family Satyridae, having brown wings marked with eyelike spots.

satyrical

adj : of or relating to or having the characteristics of a satyr; "this satyric old man pursues young girls" [syn: satyric]

Compare with:

sa·tir·i·cal
adj.

Of, relating to, or characterized by satire. See Synonyms at sarcastic.

satirical

adj : exposing human folly to ridicule; "a persistent campaign of mockery by the satirical fortnightly magazine" [syn: satiric]

For the sake of our sanity and yours, we'll probably skip the rest of the TV reviews this week. We'd like to think they couldn't get any worse, but sadly, that's not true.

Belated Best Time
September 21, 2005

Anyone notice that Jeff Williams ran the best 800m time in club history back in July at the USATF East Regional Open & Club Championships? Obviously we didn't. Luckily a few people pointed it out to us.

Webb-Cast
September 21, 2005

Alan Webb will be interviewd in a live audiocast on Thursday, Sept. 22 at 4:00 pm. This being organized by New York Road Runners, so we're assuming there will be a link to the webcast on their website sometime in the afternoon.

Race Winner
September 20, 2005

We don't think this actually counts for our list of road winners, but Erika Yamazaki finished first at the Fred Lebow Cross Country Youth Run 1.5M on Sunday. She was followed by Joey and Sammy Ruben, giving the Central Park Tykes Club a clean sweep of the awards. Nice to see them all taking after their parents.

Curses
September 20, 2005

For those of you who wish we would stop obsessing about grammar here, we are sorry to inform you that this concern is hard-wired into our body. From "Almost Before We Spoke, We Swore" in the Times:

Other investigators have examined the physiology of cursing, how our senses and reflexes react to the sound or sight of an obscene word. They have determined that hearing a curse elicits a literal rise out of people. When electrodermal wires are placed on people's arms and fingertips to study their skin conductance patterns and the subjects then hear a few obscenities spoken clearly and firmly, participants show signs of instant arousal.

Their skin conductance patterns spike, the hairs on their arms rise, their pulse quickens, and their breathing becomes shallow.

Interestingly, said Kate Burridge, a professor of linguistics at Monash University in Melbourne, Australia, a similar reaction occurs among university students and others who pride themselves on being educated when they listen to bad grammar or slang expressions that they regard as irritating, illiterate or déclassé.

"People can feel very passionate about language," she said, "as though it were a cherished artifact that must be protected at all cost against the depravities of barbarians and lexical aliens."

Week of September 13, 2005 - September 19, 2005

Philadelphia Distance Run
September 19, 2005

Congratulations to everyone who ran the Philadelphia Distance Run yesterday. The men's teams finished third, fifth, sixth and seventh, and the women were second and fourth. We're guessing there were some PRs in there, but we haven't heard yet.

What If...
September 19, 2005

If you've ever gotten into an arcane debate about whether, say, the 1976 Big Red Machine could have beaten the 1989 Oakland A's, they you'll probably love the idea of What If Sports, which lets you match up any two teams from the MLB, NBA, NFL or. NHL. Unfortunately, it doesn't do it very well, as we discovered when we had the 2003 Tampa Bay Devil Rays face off against Sandy Koufax and the 1965 Los Angeles Dodgers. We doubt the Rays could beat Koufax now, and he's almost 70; they'd have no chance again him in his prime, yet the simulator gave them a victory about one-third of the time (and even lifted him for a pinch hitter after only six inning in one game!). We also got a couple of awful teams to beat the 1972 Miami Dolphins, the only team in NFL history to go undefeated. It might be time to tweak the programs on that site a bit.

Grammar Geek
September 19, 2005

Imagine our excitement when we saw a Craig's List Missed Connection titled "To the grammar geek... - w4m" and containg the message " Excellent. I bet you're good at Scrabble, too..." We're proud to be both a grammar geek and good at Scrabble. Alas, this clearly involved people in Williamsburg, a neighborhood we rarely go near. Also, it appeared to be in response to this complaint about a hipster's grammar, which was in response to this hipster's post correcting the grammar of a man complaining about hipsters in general. But it was fun to watch the grammar geek respond, with some helpful grammar advice, followed by more posts debating the proper use of the ellipsis, including one poster who tried to be snotty about grammar but couldn't even spell correctly. Where the Grammar Cop when you need him to sort everything out?

Still, it was nice to learn that there are some women out there who might not be turned off if we correct their use of the English language. Too bad they're all hipsters. Oh, and lest you think we have nothing better to know than spend hours perusing the Missed Connections on Craig's List, we actually spotted this on Gawker. We only devoted about 30 minutes of our own time to finding the start of the thread.

And We Thought Alessandra Stanley Was a Bad Writer
September 19, 2005

From Frank Bruni's review of "Kitchen Confidential" in the Times:

The meek better move to the end of the line. Chefs will inherit the earth.

You Just Know This Kid Is Going To Be on the Indian Version of "Sportskids Moms and Dads" in a Year or Two
September 15, 2005

Budhia Singh runs about 30 miles a day, which is a ridiculous amount even by the standards of some CPTC runners. It's made even more insane by the fact that he's only three and a half years old. Toby thinks the boy might be older than his coach claims, and in any case will be burnt out by the age of 10.

If We Wanted to Put Up With Tourists, We Would Have Stayed in Manhattan
September 15, 2005

The Times ever-useless Escapes section advises on how to spend 36 hours in Brooklyn.

Ashes to Ashes
September 14, 2005

Our entire understanding of the Ashes comes from Life, the Universe and Everything ( the third book in the highly-misnamed Hitchhiker's Guide trilogy). From that we learned that the Ashes are in fact the remains of a cricket stump that was burnt in Melbourne in 1882 to signify the death of English circket. That cricket stump was actually the Wooden Pillar of Nature and Spirituality , one of five components of the Wicket Key which can be used to ulock the Slo-Time envelope around the planet of Krikkit. We're pretty sure Douglas Adams made up one of those two sentences, but we can't decide which one sounds less plausible.

Every two years England and Australia play some long, complicated series of cricket contests (games? matches? tests?), and the winner gets to keep the Ashes for the next two years. Or, at least, a copy of the urn, which may or may not contain a copy of the actual ashes, which may or may not be the original ashes of what was either a stump or a bail. Read the whole story here, if you care.

Why bring this all up? Well, in the past, this site was known for its world-class coverage of cricket in general, and the 2002-2003 Ashes in particular (see just about every entry on this page). That, of course, was during the ancien régime, but out of repsect for our predecessor, we feel compelled to note that England has won the Ashes for the first time since 1987. This has apparenlty led to mass celebrations in England, and perhaps some dejection at the Webmaster Emeritus' house, who admitted two years ago, that "we derived our pleasure in the game because we love to watch the Aussies thrash the pommies over the course of five days of play."

Perhaps he can take some comfort in England's recent loss to Northern Ireland in World Cup qualifying, which leaves England in danger of missing out on next year's tournament in Germany. The U.S., as you all should know, has already qualified. Australia will play two games against a South American team in November to determine whether they'll be playing next year.

Week of September 6, 2005 - September 12, 2005

Road Wins
September 12, 2005

Congratulations to Stuart Calderwood and Margaret Schotte on their wins this Saturday. Stuart won the Paper Mill XC 5K (see below), while Margaret dominated the Pine Barrens Duathlon, recording the fastest splits on all three legs (her bike time was even faster than all the men), beating the second woman by over 11 minutes, and finishing behind only one mand — and that by just two and a half minutes.

Shake Down the Thunder From the Sky
September 12, 2005

John Affleck sends us the important news that Notre Dame beat Michigan 17-10 on Saturday. In Michigan. We'd like to thank him. Not for the score, which we already knew, but rather for the assumption that we had something better to do on a beautiful Saturday afternoon than watch the Notre Dame-Michigan game. And the Yankees-Red Sox. And "Ghostbusters."

Victory Never Tasted So Good
September 12, 2005

From Stuart Calderwood:

Stacy and I entered the Paper Mill Run 5K cross-country race in Philadelphia this past Saturday mostly because it's run on our weekend training course; we know pretty much every chunk of gravel on the trail.  But then we noticed on the entry form that there were really good prizes: a hundred bucks plus a fancy dinner in a local restaurant for 1st, the dinner without the money for 2nd, and a nice lunch for 3rd.  We hoped that this had escaped the notice of the local elites, and indeed, when we showed up, we found a field of only about 150 — although several women did look very fit, and one 26-year-old said she planned to run about 18:00.

After the start, I followed the usual sprinting teenagers for about a half-mile and then took the lead.  Stacy stayed in 2nd behind the 26-year-old until about a mile, but then a woman who was clearly a master edged past her.  Stacy thought, "Okay, third's not bad--I still get lunch."  Then another woman passed her.  "Fourth?  Well, I'll still get dinner with Stuart if he's first or second."  But when yet another tough-looking master-runner came up on her, a spark went off: "Fifth?  NO WAY.  This stops right now."  Whether it was CPTC pride, Philadelphia home-course reputation, or simply the desire for a good lunch, Stacy foot her foot down.  Then she put the other one down, quicker.  She held off the fifth woman by chasing the one in Lunch position.  Just past halfway, she reclaimed Lunch.  Her appetite increased.  She gained on Dinner throughout the final mile and caught her with an uphill quarter-mile to go.  Not known for her climbing skills, Stacy thought about lifting her knees, driving her arms, and asking a waitress, "Do you have high-chairs for kids?" in a really nice restaurant.

She crossed the line in Dinner position by several strides.

I won my dinner and $100 (maybe a movie plus babysitter?) by about 45 seconds — a real cherry-pick of a win.  Stacy, on the other hand, found after the race that the woman she'd passed at the end was her own age — and had been a 1988 Olympic Trials marathoner, which means she broke 2:50 back then.  Masters women ended up in 2nd, 3rd, and 5th, whereas I earned the slightly unsettling distinction of oldest winner in the race's history by beating a bunch of kids in baggy shorts.

The next day, we heard overawed sportscasters treating Andre Agassi like some sort of miracle for losing a tennis match at age 35.  Come on!  I could lose to Federer much faster than that.  I didn't see Agassi win any free dinner.  Well, we did!  And we got breakfast, too: bottled water, some sort of packaged Danish, and little tiny cartons of iced tea.  When Andre actually is a master, maybe he'll figure out where the really good awards are.

As you all know, any member who wins money at a race is supposed to give Coach Tony $1. We're not sure what the rules are when you win a fancy dinner. Maybe an appetizer. Or at least steal a bread roll for him.

Mistakes Were Made
September 12, 2005

We were starting to think that maybe we're a little too harsh on Alessandra Stanley, especially after her last few reviews were merely mediocre, rather than awful. Then we learned that in addition to making specious comparisons, being wrong about cultural trends, and generally betraying a lack of any knowledge about the world, she also makes glaring factual errors on the rate of over one per month. Her articles have required corrections in the Times an astouding 11% of the time since she started writing about television in 2001. She's even gotten worse with time, with errors in 14% of her articles in the last year. And that doesn't include the sorts of errors we complain about (e.g., claiming that Updikean is a commonly-used word, or that the characters on "The O.C." look their age).

What's most impressive about the list of corrections is how many of them relate directly to the shows Stanley was writing about. Not only does she misstate the century that the Protestant Reformation began in, rate "The Day After Tomorrow" as a flop, even though it made half a billion dollars, and claim that John McCain ran for president in 1996, but she routinely assigns quotes and actions to the wrong character in a show, misidentifies casts and crews, confuses networks, and sometimes even gets the name of the show wrong.

We know that television reviews and the random filler that Stanley churns out aren't hard news, but that's no excuse for this kind of slopiness.

Best Times
September 8, 2005

Continuing in our occassional series of best age-graded lists, we present the top 21 age-graded performances from the 2005 outdoor track season. Why the top 21? Because it's no more arbitrary than a top 20 list. And also because Joe Bolster, who did all the work, had the 21st best time this summer.

Place	Name	Age	Distance	Time	AG%	AG Time
1	Sid Howard	66	800m	2:24.61	93.48	1:48.83
2	Steve Burgess	45	800m	2:00.31	93.38	1:48.94
3	Kobie Fuller		200m	21.58	91.38
4	Gladstone Jones	41	800m	1:59.93	90.95	1:51.80
5	Jeff Williams		800m	1:52.06	90.78
6	Neil Fitzgerald	37	800m	1:56.97	90.73	1:52.13
7	Tom Hartshorne	51	800m	2:09.76	90.68	1:52.19
8	Chris Potter	40	800m	1:59.53	90.65	1:52.23
9	Amerigo Rossi		1500m	3:51.8	89.61
10	Frank Handelman	60	800m	2:23.42	88.69	1:54.71
11	Yuri Nosenko		800m	1:54.82	88.60
12	Attila Sabahogulu		5000m	14:44.02	88.05
13	Filip Jagodzinski		800m	1:55.60	88.00
14	Leon Brown	45	800m	2:08.1	87.69	1:56.01
15	Sekou Dilday		400m	49.69	87.12
16	Alan Ruben	48	5000m	16:28.04	86.85	14:56.00
17	Mike Trunkes	43	5000m	15:56.06	86.45	15:00.00
18	Kate Irvin		1500m	4:26.91	86.34
19	Evan Zeisel		200m	22.96	85.85
20	Andrea Haver		5000m	16:56.88	84.94
21	Joe Bolster	51	800m	2:18.6	84.89	1:59.83

We're not surprised to see Sid Howard on the top of that list. We are a bit surprised to see that 12 of the 21 times came in 800m races, especially since some of those results came from runners who specialize in other distances.

Race Winner
September 7, 2005

Congrats to Kate Irvin on winning the XC race up at Van Cortlandt on Saturday. Also to everyone who showed up and helped CPTC win both the men's and women's races.

Mayoral Election
September 7, 2005

While we're on the subject of voting, we'd like to remind everyone that the primary elections are next Tuesday. There's a good chance most of you weren't aware of this, as it seems nobody's been paying any attention this year. For the record, there are four candidates running for the Democratic nomination for mayor, and only one trying to get the Republican spot. As we said below, we don't make endorsements. Our understanding is that it would be against the law for CPTC to make an endorsement, and even though we don't speak for the club we figure it would be best not to take sides in this. Also, none of the candidates are inspiring enough for us to make a public declaration of support, and we'd be embarassed to write anything as half-hearted — backhanded, really — as the Times endorsement of Freddy Ferrer.

So instead we bring you tha major candidates' positions on the one issue that truly concerns this page: getting cars out of the parks. Here's where they stand, courtesy of the Gotham Gazette:

Candidate	Gazette comments
Fernando Ferrer	The former Bronx borough president told the parks forum, "I lean very heavily in favor of car-free parks...There are alternate means to getting around the city."
C. Virginia Fields	The Manhattan borough president has said she would continue to try to balance transportation and the use of parks. She said this has been successful in Central Park and that she would prefer that to an outright ban on cars.
Gifford Miller	Miller says he would be more inclined to not allow cars in parks than to allow them. He has called for more studies of traffic patterns and says he expects that those studies would indicate that closing the parks to auto traffic would not have the dire effects on traffic that some anticipate, although he would keep roadways like the Central Parks transverse open to cars. "My guess is that New Yorkers will find another way and that life will go on and our parks will be safer and people will be able to better enjoy our parks," he said.
Anthony Weiner	No comments
Michael Bloomberg	The administration has extended the hours that cars cannot use the parks but has not banned auto traffic completely.

Those who've watched the debates (Anyone? Didn't think so.) know that the four Democratic candidates (Bloomberg hasn't had to debate so far) are nearly incapable of giving a yes or no answer to any question. Wading through these comments,, we're tentatively marking Ferrer as the most likely to ban cars, followed by Miller, though it doesn't sound like it would be a high priority of either man's administration. So even in the unlikely event that Bloomberg loses in November (we'll take any bets on that), it looks like it will be at least another four years until we get cars out of the parks.

NYRR Election
September 7, 2005

The NYRR annual meeting will take place on September 19, 2005, where they will, among other things, be electing five members of the board of directors. One of the candidates — who is also a current board member — is our own Toby Tanser. We don't make endorsements here, we just remind you folks to vote.

Trade Secrets
September 6, 2005

One reason to join CPTC (or at least, to read this site) is the great tips you can get from our coaches. But now Coach Devon has gone and given away the secrets to running the Fifth Avenue Mile to anyone who bothers to read the New York Road Runners site. She even has some recommended workouts there. Now how are we ever going to get an age group trophy?

We Used to Do That With E-Mails, Too, But For Some Reason Our Friends Didn't Appreciate It
September 6, 2005

Not only has James Blake stolen Andy's Mojo and become the story of this year's U.S. Open, but he's also obsessive about grammar. We knew there was r reason we root for him. From Page 2:

Rachel Nichols is ill-advised by James Blake

EDITOR'S NOTE: On occasion, we all need help. But where to turn? Fortunately, Rachel Nichols is here to bring us the special kind of advice that only the world's greatest athletes can dole out. Whether to take it … well, that's up to you. Today's Ill-Advised expert: pro tennis player James Blake.

...

RACHEL: OK, next up is Mike Henderson from Philadelphia. Mike writes, "My fiancé[e] has atrocious grammar. It doesn't bother me, but I see my mother wince every time she mangles her beloved English. Family is very important to me and I want everyone to respect each other and get along. Any suggestions on how to smooth things over?"

JAMES: That's a tough one. My mom is an English major, so she taught me proper grammar and spelling and all that, and so I have the nasty habit of always correcting people.

RACHEL: Wow, you're fun at parties.

JAMES: Yeah, people get annoyed when I do that. I also correct people's spelling on e-mails.

RACHEL: James, I hate to break this to you, but I'm no longer sure it was the back brace that was chasing people away in high school.

JAMES: Yeah, I know. It's nerdy. But I'm trying to stop. Really.

The Return
September 6, 2005

Yes, we're back. Like we predicted, we were too busy to deal with the site, thanks to things that really weren't any fun. With all that's been happening in New Orleans, we doubt any of you were lacking in things to read last week, although we apologize if you were hoping to find a break from the bad news by reading this page. Anyway, we're working our way through all the results and photos, and will have lots of stuff up here soon.