Sunday, June 28, 2015

Wimbledon 1975 . . . A Look Back

This week's post is written in honor of one of the true champions in men's tennis. It was 40 years ago this week that he stood the tennis world on its collective ear by pulling off one of the greatest upsets of all time. But the bigger story was how he used this victory to help achieve an even greater one for tens of millions of people living under an oppressive government.

I began taking a casual interest in tennis when I was about 12 years old. Though it was still a couple of years before I would pick up a racket with any serious intention of playing, I did start following the major tournaments. One of the rising stars in the men’s game at that time was a brash, twenty-two year-old American from Illinois. His name was Jimmy Connors. In 1974, Connors won three of the four grand slam titles, including Wimbledon. At the start of the 1975 season, he stood poised to bump the likes of Rod Laver, John Newcombe and Stan Smith from the top tier of men’s tennis.

There was another player on the men’s tour who had gained notoriety during the mid-1960s and early 1970s. In 1968, he became the first African American to win the U.S. Open. He also won his second of five Davis Cups that year as a member of the U.S. team; something that was a continual source of pride for him. From 1968 to 1975, he was ranked no lower than 5th, and in 1970, he backed up that U.S. Open victory by winning another major – the Australian Open. His name was Arthur Ashe.

Going into the 1975 Wimbledon tournament, Arthur Ashe and Jimmy Connors appeared to be on diverging paths professionally. Connors was the defending champion, ranked #1 in the world, and seeded first in a star-studded field. Ashe’s ranking had dropped to #5 in the world, and he had only managed to earn the sixth seed. The two players also had contrasting styles. Connors was left-handed and played a power game from the baseline. His ground strokes from both the forehand and backhand sides were punishing, and he was one of a growing number of men who had adopted a two fisted backhand. Connors also possessed one of the best returns of serve in men's tennis at that time. Ashe, on the other hand, was an aggressive serve and volley player. He had a strong serve that he used to get opponents out of position, and then he hit accurate, well-angled volleys to put away the points. Grass was his favorite surface, and although he had reached the semifinals twice in 1968 & 1969, he had never made it to the finals at the All England Club. At age 32, his chance to win the most prestigious tournament in tennis appeared to be slipping away. But Ashe was able to fight through his side of the draw, upsetting the #3 seed Bjorn Borg in four tough sets in the quarterfinals and then surviving a marathon five set semi-final match against Australian Tony Roche. Waiting for him in the final was one James Scott Connors, who had cruised through the entire tournament without dropping a single set.

Connors was an overwhelming favorite to defend his title. In fact, few people gave Ashe any chance of even taking a set from him. And as if this match needed any more build up, these two men simply did not like each other. Ashe was a perennial Davis Cup competitor. Nothing made him more proud than competing for his country against other nations to win the most coveted international team trophy in tennis. Connors had no interest in playing on the Davis Cup team. Ashe, seeing it as somewhat of an obligation for top American players to represent their country, criticized him in public by calling him unpatriotic. Connors responded by filing a $5,000,000 libel suit against him. He also refused to join the Association of Tennis Professionals (the union that represented the players) and had several lawsuits outstanding against them as well. Ashe was the president of the ATP at the time.  So the stage was set; the irreverent and seemingly invincible upstart against the quiet African American who, despite the long odds, had a chance to make tennis history.

We lived on the east coast in 1975, so I had to remember that the match would begin in the morning due to the five hour time difference. NBC was broadcasting it, and referred to their coverage of the Men's Final as “Breakfast at Wimbledon.” Frankly, I was too nervous to eat breakfast. I wanted Arthur Ashe to win so badly, my stomach was twisted up into more knots than I could possibly count. As he and Connors made their way to Center Court, I noticed that Ashe was wearing his Davis Cup warm up jacket. It was dark blue with the letters “USA” emblazoned across the front. This was a metaphorical poke in Connors’ eye. I think Arthur knew how much it would get under his skin, and that's why he did it. But I was also superstitious and wasn’t sure it was such a good idea to stir things up like that.

From the moment the match began, it was clear that Ashe had a specific plan to try and beat the hard-hitting Connors. It seemed like the ball was travelling at two dramatically different speeds on each exchange. When Connors hit the ball, it came rocketing back to Ashe with all kinds of pace. Then he hit it back using a variation of slices and spins that took all of the pace off the ball. Connors would crush it back, but he was having to generate his own power. It also threw off his rhythm and timing. Incredibly, Ashe won the first set by a score of 6-1. Not only had Connors dropped his first set of the tournament, but he had gotten positively smoked in the process. I was pretty fired up, but it was far from over. I had a sense that Connors would finally figure out a way to overcome Ashe's strategy. After all, he was the #1 player in the world.

The second set practically mirrored the first. Connors hit forehand after forehand into the net. And they weren’t just clipping the tape and falling back either. They were being smacked right into the middle of the net. This was a sign of a player who had clearly been thrown off his game. Ashe was relentless in his attack, and Connors was back on his heels. In what seemed like a matter of minutes, Ashe had put away the second set by an identical 6-1 score. Now he had a two sets to none lead. That’s when I began to think he might have a chance.

It was the third set that brought me back to earth. Connors managed to find his game and broke Ashe’s serve for the first time. He hung on to win the set 7-5, and I instantly became worried. It was my feeling that if he was going to win the match, Ashe was going to have to do it by taking the fourth set. Having played a long five setter against Roche two days previously, I just wasn’t sure he would have enough left in the tank to win if the final match went the distance.

The fourth set was tightly contested. Ashe stuck to his strategy by hitting a dizzying array of chip shots, lobs, and low slices designed to frustrate Connors. After eight games the set was knotted at four all. Then Connors' serve was broken in the 9th game after he hit a weak cross court forehand that landed wide, giving Ashe a chance to close out the match on his serve. After splitting the first two points of the game, two unforced errors by Connors (a forehand and backhand into the net that weren’t even close) brought the score to 40-15. Now, Arthur had two points to win the championship sitting on his racket.

He only needed one of them. A big, slicing serve to Connors’ backhand pulled him wide of the court. He managed to get a racket on it, but there was no power on the return at all. Ashe closed to the net and buried the volley into the open court, winning the match and securing his place as the first (and still only) African American male to win the Wimbledon Championship. When he put away that last point, I went absolutely crazy. I couldn’t believe that he had taken down the #1 player in the world so convincingly. To this day, Ashe’s win over Connors remains the biggest upset in the history of the Men’s Wimbledon Final.


Image result for Arthur Ashe
Ashe - The Athlete (lecoqsportif.com)
That was the last major title that Arthur Ashe won as a professional tennis player. It solidified his legacy as one of the greats in the game. But outside of tennis, the victory was worth a great deal more. This leads me to one last difference between Jimmy Connors and Arthur Ashe. Connors also went on to have a hall of fame career. He won 109 singles titles and several more major championships. But Connors was known only as a tennis player. Arthur Ashe was a civil rights activist who happened to be an exceptional tennis player. From early in his career, he recognized that he could use his status as one of the best tennis players in the world to increase public awareness to society’s ills. In addition to fighting social injustice in the United States, Ashe was intent on ridding the world of the scourge of apartheid in South Africa. Apartheid was the country's government sponsored policy of political, social and economic discrimination against blacks and other people of color. It enabled the white population, which at the time represented less than 20% of all the South African people, to oppress the remaining 80% consisting of African Blacks, Indians, and other non-whites. South Africa had not been allowed to participate in the Olympics since 1963 because of this policy, but they still enjoyed the freedom to compete internationally in other sports as a team, including tennis. Due in part to Ashe’s efforts, South Africa was banned from Davis Cup play in 1970. He continued to use his position as a top ranked player and president of the ATP to further pressure the South African government to change their policies. In 1973, he was able to finally obtain a visa and broke the sports color barrier by competing in the South African Open. He made it to the men’s singles final and then teamed with Dutchman Tom Okker to win the men’s doubles championship. After his victory over Connors at Wimbledon, Ashe was able to use the win to create even more leverage in his fight against apartheid. He made three more trips to South Africa, each time exposing the world to a society in which over 80% of the population lived in complete subjugation.

In 1979, Ashe suffered a heart attack at the age of thirty-six. It ended his playing career. After he had recovered, his fight against apartheid continued. Eventually, the world community began to bring enormous pressure on South Africa to change their policies. In 1990, the end finally came. Nelson Mandela, the former head of the African National Congress, was released in February after being imprisoned for 27 years. The ban on the ANC was lifted later that year. Though there was some resistance to change, apartheid was dead for all intents and purposes. Negotiations took place over the next few years to effect a smooth transition. This culminated with the election of Mandela as President in 1994.

Image result for Arthur Ashe
Ashe-The Activist (lecoqsportif.com)

Unfortunately, Arthur Ashe did not live to see that day. After having a second heart attack in 1983, he contracted the AIDS virus from a tainted blood transfusion. Even though his health continued to worsen, he stayed focused on his humanitarian efforts. Here in the United States, he co-founded National Junior Tennis Leagues all over the country. He also wrote a comprehensive history of the African American athlete and earned an Emmy Award for co-writing the television adaptation. In 1992, Ashe’s health took a major turn for the worse. On February 6th, 1993, he passed away at the age of 49 due to AIDS-related pneumonia. Later that year, President Clinton posthumously awarded him the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

I am not one for hero worship. But when I look at the life Arthur Ashe led, I can’t help but be inspired. Here is a man who found a way to take advantage of his considerable athletic talent in such a way as to fight against social injustice on a global scale. When I turned on our television 40 years ago to watch that Wimbledon final between Arthur Ashe and Jimmy Connors, I thought I would just be witnessing a potentially historic tennis victory. It was definitely an unforgettable triumph, but what that win helped Ashe accomplish in the years that followed was even more unforgettable.

Until, next time . . . 

Karl

If you would like to learn more about this remarkable man please visit:
http://www.arthurashe.org.



Saturday, June 20, 2015

Greatness . . . How Do You Measure It?



I have spent the past two weeks watching a player who many consider to be the greatest in the world nearly pull off the impossible. LeBron James put a totally depleted Cleveland Cavaliers team on his back and got them within two games of winning the NBA Championship. In the end, the Golden State Warriors walked off basketball's biggest stage holding the trophy. They put away James and the Cavs in six games to win their first championship in forty years.

Almost immediately, the discussions began on what another finals loss (the fourth in six appearances) means for LeBron James' legacy; his greatness. And as I heard the pundits go back and forth on national sports talk radio about James' performance and how he stacks up against  past NBA legends, I kept coming back to the question, "What is the best way to measure this greatness?" Essentially, you have the athlete's body of work, but there are so many different ways to look at it. That's what makes these "greatest ever"conversations so interesting to me.

Do you want to create a little more excitement in your life? Walk into a sports bar in Chicago with Bulls memorabilia covering the walls and say to anyone who will listen, "Michael Jordan was a great player, but LeBron James is so much better." Depending on the level of civility in the bar, your fate probably lies somewhere between enduring an onslaught of verbal insults and being run out of there by an angry mob of Jordan supporters. In any case, that's not the discussion I want to have right now. I am more interested in focusing on how people arrive at their conclusions when they say that someone is the greatest of all time in his/her sport. There are so many factors to consider, so here are some I would like to put out there to see how much importance you place on them.

1. Individual Sport vs. Team Sport
Clearly, someone like a golfer or tennis player has far more control over the final outcome when a championship is on the line. This makes it possible to whittle down the field of the greatest ever faster, but there will still be serious debate over who is actually the greatest. With team sports, things become even more challenging. Winning championships means having to depend on other teammates. How often do the great ones have enough of a supporting cast to get the job done? I think this is where criticism can be a little over the top sometimes when trying to judge the greatness of athletes playing sports like football, basketball, baseball, or hockey. Since the NBA Finals just wrapped up, let's use basketball for our working example as we look at the next three factors.

2. Number of Opportunities to Win A Championship

This is something that I don't hear discussed all that often, and I find that surprising.  Considering how difficult it is in professional sports to become a champion, I would think it would get little more play. But that usually doesn't happen unless the player in question loses and the pundits chalk it up to another failed effort. Here is a partial list of Hall of Fame players and the number of NBA Finals appearances they have made compared to the number of years they played in the league (all numbers come from the nba.com website):


Playoff Appearances
# of Years Played
Bill Russell (Celtics)
12
13
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (Bucks/Lakers)
10
20
Magic Johnson (Lakers)
9
13
Michael Jordan (Bulls)
6
15
Larry Bird (Celtics)
5
13

Bill Russell spent practically his whole career playing in the NBA Finals. Twelve appearances in thirteen years is pretty impressive.  The others spent roughly a third of their careers or more competing for a championship. Does that make Russell the greatest? Not necessarily. This is just one piece of the puzzle. Let's look at another one.

3.  Number of Championships Won

This is the one we hear about the most. After all, we sports fans are all about results aren't we? So let's look at the same players and compare their records in the finals.


NBA Finals Record
Russell
11 - 1
Jabbar
6 - 4
Johnson
5 - 4
Jordan
6 - 0
Bird
3 - 2

Again, Russell leads the way with 11 rings. Some would argue that the competition level wasn't the same in his era due to the fewer number of teams. I don't disagree, but you have to admit, it's a pretty remarkable accomplishment. Jordan clearly made the most of his appearances to the finals, having never lost in six trips. Many feel it's this fact that cements his place as the greatest player ever. Then you have Jabbar, who has just as many rings as MJ and also got his teams in a position to win four more. Likewise, Magic was a solid 5 for 9. What kind of consideration is given to that kind of consistency, especially when they may have led an overachieving team into the finals only to lose to a one that was clearly better? As good as some of these Hall of Fame players were, some things were just beyond their control. Now let's see what they can control directly.

4. Career Statistics

On its face, this seems like the most clear cut way to determine the greatest player. In the case of basketball, we fans look at things like like total points, rebounds, assists and scoring average over the course of a career including the playoffs. In this modern age of analytics, there are also new metrics such as winning share (an estimate of the number of wins a player produces for his team) to consider. But even among the greats, there can be a significant amount of variance in their statistics. For example, Jabbar and Russell were both centers. Jabbar was a prolific scorer, and he still ranks first in career points. Russell is a distant 143rd. On the other hand Russell is widely recognized as the best defensive center ever to play the game due to his incredible  rebounding skills and shot blocking ability.

Jordan ranks 4th overall in points scored. Magic Johnson comes in at number 72. Johnson, who revolutionized the point guard position, is 5th overall in assists. Jordan is 42nd. Magic is ranked 2nd with 138 triple doubles (number of games achieving double figures in three of the following statistical categories - points, rebounds, assists, steals, and blocked shots). Jordan's 28 triple doubles places him at 10th. Larry Bird ranks 31st in overall points and is slightly ahead of Jordan in assists. He also has over 2,000 more rebounds than both Magic and Jordan.

It doesn't take a genius to see my point. If we look hard enough (and we fans always do), we will eventually come up with the combination of numbers that strengthens our position when making our case for the best player ever.  This leads me to what is probably the single most important factor in determining a player's greatness.

5.  Pure, Unadulterated Fan Bias

Ah, yes . . . fan bias; the foundation upon which virtually every sports debate is based. Fan bias trumps all logical and rational thinking. Fan bias is king! We've all played the fan bias card at one time or another. Anyone who tells you different is lying to you. Here's my quick story. In 1982, Washington defeated Miami 27-17 in Super Bowl XVII. The Dolphins were my favorite team, and I was not a big fan of  Wahsington's quarterback, Joe Theismann. In short, I was pretty ticked off. So, I just went into my fan bias arsenal and came up with this little gem to get over my hurt feelings: Washingtion's Super Bowl win doesn't matter as much because they won it during a strike shortened football season.  They didn't have to endure the grueling 16 game schedule. Therefore, their Super Bowl win is far less meaningful." Yeah, that sounded good. So that's what I kept telling myself. I may even have expressed that thought whenever the subject of Super Bowl winners came up.

Now let's jump to 1999. The San Antonio Spurs had just won their first NBA Championship. A couple of days later, Phil Jackson, who had recently left the Bulls after winning his 6th championship was asked his opinion on the Spurs' win.  The Zen Master was quoted as saying that San Antonio's title should have an asterisk next to it because they won it playing a truncated 50 game regular season due to the NBA lockout. Now, I happen to like the Spurs, especially since David Robinson (who graduated three years after me at the Naval Academy) was one of the team's stars.  I was very happy that he had finally gotten his ring. When I heard Jackson's comments, I went absolutely bananas. I called him a jerk (among other things), then went on to point out that all the teams can do is play the schedule in front of them. The last one standing when all the dust settles has earned the championship, regardless of the circumstances. What a moronic thing for Jackson to say.

Isn't it interesting how fan bias works? You can feel perfectly justified taking a particular position to support your favorite team. Then when someone uses the same argument to devalue one of your team's accomplishments, you practically lose your mind. My position in '82 was just as ridiculous as Jackson's was 17 years later. When I came to that realization, I felt like I had taken a giant leap forward in my evolution as a sports fan. I am happy to say that I am in a better place now.

So what's the big takeaway here?  For the record, I like engaging in these "greatest ever" conversations, if for nothing else just to play devil's advocate. But with rare exception, it is really hard for me to acknowledge one athlete as being the greatest ever in a team sport. There are just way too many variables to consider. I prefer to think in slightly broader terms. Since we are going with a basketball theme for this post, here are the players that to me, represent the best ones at their position during my lifetime. All the players are in the Hall of Fame with one exception. I'll explain that one in a minute. I will also provide some justification based on the criteria above. And yes, there will be some fan bias that figures into this. I also wanted to recognize and credit the sources for the player images. They are noted in the captions.  Here goes:

Image result for Magic Johnson Images
Magic Johnson (Basketballphoto.com)
1. Point Guard - Magic Johnson.  Magic Johnson brought a completely new dimension to the point guard position. His court vision was unmatched, as was his ability to deliver a pass to a teammate from virtually anywhere on the court. The first three-quarter court bounce pass I ever saw was one Magic threw to James Worthy that split two defenders over 30 feet away.  He could make the most difficult pass look routine. Johnson was also an underrated shooter, especially in the clutch. I was surprised to find out that his career field goal percentage was over 53%. He carried the Lakers to an upset of the top seeded Portland Trailblazers in the Western Conference Finals before losing the 1991 championship to a stronger Chicago Bulls team. So he gets a few points for consistently getting his teams in a position to win it all, even if they came up short at times.

Image result for michael jordan
Michael Jordan (AllExpress.com)
2. Shooting Guard - Michael Jordan. MJ was as tough a competitor as you will ever find. Many of us knew he was capable of going off for 50 - 60 points every time he took the court. Jordan's ability to get to the rim gave defenses nightmares. And if teams tried to beat the crap out of him whenever he got into the paint (like Boston and Detroit did early on),  he killed them with a consistent mid-range jump shot. MJ was at his best in the playoffs. He is still ranked first in playoff scoring average, and he was pretty deadly in the clutch.  Jordan shot a rather pedestrian 32% from the three point line, but his teams had several sharpshooters to carry that load. Besides, he wouldn't need to shoot three pointers that much on my team because of this next guy.

Image result for Larry Bird
Larry Bird (CBSSports.com/Getty Images)
3.) Small Forward - Larry Bird. As a Lakers fan, Bird scared the living daylights out of me. You want to talk about impact? The year before the Celtics drafted him, they lost over 60 games. During his rookie year, they won 60 games. Bird wasn't blessed with a lot of speed, but he had uncanny quickness and terrific footwork. And there weren't many players that could get their shot off faster than he could. Larry Legend was a threat from practically anywhere on the court. He was also the best passing small forward I have ever seen.  He shot nearly 40% from the three point line. That was impressive enough, but at crunch time, it seemed more like 95%.

Image result for Tim Duncan
Tim Duncan (Ronald Martinez/Getty Images)
4.) Power Forward - Tim Duncan. Sorry, but I just had to make an exception to my Hall of Fame rule here. Duncan's resume is a model of consistency. He has achieved such a high level of excellence that it can't be ignored. Since Duncan has been with the Spurs, they have won at least 50 games every year except 1999 when the season was only 50 games long.  They even won 50 during the 2012 lockout season when it was only a 66 game schedule. He also has five championships in six trips to the finals. Statistically, Duncan ranks 14th overall in total points and 8th in rebounds. And he is still not finished playing.

Image result for kareem abdul jabbar
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (nba.com)
5.) Center - Kareem Abdul-Jabbar.  This one was a little tough. Wilt Chamberlain and Russell had more rebounds (Jabbar was 3rd behind them). Russell was also a better defender. However, Jabbar was ranked higher than either of the other two in assists. He's also going to be the career scoring leader for the foreseeable future. I went with Jabbar because he was more of an offensive threat than Russell, and he helped his team win more championships than Chamberlain. I am not going to deny that my fan bias played into this to some degree. If you want to throw rocks at me, give me a second to don my protective gear.

So that's my five. Just so you all know, as some of today's stars retire, I reserve the right to amend this list. How does it square with  your best five? What factors did you consider when making your choices?  Heavily weighted fan bias is more than welcome as long as a reasonable case can be made. I look forward to reading what you all think.

Until next time . . .

Karl

Saturday, June 13, 2015

Welcome To My Little Corner of the Sports World . . .

Hi Everyone,

As I kick off this new project, I thought it would make sense to answer a few questions up front just to give you all an idea of who I am and why I decided to start this sports blog. There are a ton of them out there, and I certainly am not delusional enough to think that I can make a living doing this. The truth of the matter is starting this blog was the logical alternative to some of my insanely long posts on FaceBook. You will see what I mean when you read my answer to the second question below. So, here are three questions to help get the ball rolling.

1.) Who am I?

My name is Karl Darden. Like most of you, I am a sports fan. I am not a sports journalist. I have a lot of respect for what they do. Michael Wilbon and Bill Simmons are two of the best. However, my journalistic experience does not extend beyond two years on the high school yearbook staff writing about a variety of things, including sports. My sport growing up was baseball (all the way through high school). I also enjoyed playing a ton of intramural basketball, tennis, volleyball, and lacrosse over the years. About eight years ago I added distance running to the mix and have run a variety of races from 5Ks to marathons. I graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy and served nine years on active duty, then joined the corporate world while remaining in the Navy Reserves for another eleven years. I have lived in Phoenix, Arizona for the last ten years with my wife and two kids after spending most of my adult life on the east coast. I will be sharing relevant stories about my family as time goes on. So that should pretty much bring you all up to speed.

2.) Why a sports blog, and why now?

The decision to do a sports blog was an easy one. I've enjoyed reading about most sports since I was a kid. And even though I can't remember where I put my car keys from one minute to the next, I'm betting that at least 80% of what I hear and read in the sports world sticks in my brain. I couldn't get the information out  even if I tried; unless I got flashed with one of those neuralyzers from Men In Black. So I figured I would put it to good use and expand my knowledge base by connecting with others that share a similar passion for sports.

Regarding why I chose to start this blog now, there are two factors that played into that.  As I was looking back through my FaceBook posts, I noticed that a very high percentage of them were sports related, and most of those were pretty lengthy. This is especially true during college football season when I like to recap Navy's football games with my classmates on our FaceBook page. Other postings covered men's and women's college basketball, the NBA and NFL, Major League Baseball, college lacrosse, and the Olympics (winter and summer) just to name a few.  After reading several of my observations, one of my old college roommates asked me if I had ever thought about starting a sports blog. I told him that it had crossed my mind several years ago, but I hadn't followed up on it. Over the last couple weeks, I decided it was high time I did.  That brings us to today.

3.) What's are the expectations?

The truth is I don't have many.  I'm not doing this to make money. I'm just in it for fun. There's nothing I enjoy more than sharing my perspective on different sports and reading what other people think.  Whether they share my view or not, I figure I can probably walk away having learned a little more from the conversation.  That brings me to the one concrete expectation that I do have for this blog, and that has to do with the overall tone. I am looking forward to exchanging views with anyone who chooses to visit this site. I am also a big believer in civility. One reason I don't often participate in conversations on other blogs is that many of them can get pretty vicious, and I don't want to deal with any of that. There are those out there who will lash out at other people commenting by engaging in some pretty inappropriate and personal attacks. They do it because they know they have no fear of reprisals. That's probably the one thing I dislike most about the internet. If you want to share a point of view here, you are perfectly welcome. My only rule is that you keep the San Antonio Spurs in mind whenever you participate. Win or lose, that organization does things with class. That's the environment I want to establish here. I totally expect anyone who shares an opinion to support and defend it enthusiastically. After all, that is why we are called fan(atic)s. Humor is more than welcome. Clever sarcasm is entertaining also. But I'm drawing a pretty bright line at the name calling and blatant disrespect. There are plenty of ways to get your point across without resorting to that. I just want this to be a place where people can embrace being a fan without having to deal with the equivalent of those who have had too much to drink. That's all I am going to say about that.

Finally, if you are around my age, you will probably recognize that the title of this blog represents a tip of the cap to a program I used to watch all the time when I was growing up: ABC's Wide World of Sports. Who can forget Jim McKay's classic introduction?

"Spanning the globe to bring you the constant variety of sports . . . The human drama of athletic competition . . . The thrill of victory . . . and the agony of defeat."

I don't know that I will be nearly as entertaining as I found that show to be, but I will do my best. There will be lots of things to discuss next week. By then, the NBA and Stanley Cup Finals will have been decided, and we will be in the latter stages of the  FIFA Women's World Cup.

Until next time . . .


Karl