My first Beer Review

To preface my first review, I would just like to note that this isn't going to be pretentious or yuppy. It will be straightforward and hopefully relatable to everyone and not just those special beer aficionados who love to cite a beer's "hint of pecans, coffee, and lavender" etc. They can be awful. I'll touch on the same elements, but it will be more manly. Well, more stylish anyways.

Additionally, I will rate all beers out of 5-Stars. That's it. Enjoy.

GOOSE ISLAND's Belgian style "Matilda" 2009 4-stars: I'm a tough critic, but it's that good.

GLASS: This beer shouldn't be drank from the bottle, or from a pint glass. It's expensive (4-pack is $9.99), so drink it right. It should be in a stout glass with a big opening. A tulip glass preferably, but any kind of snifter that allows the beer to open up. I know the pint glass is the ole standby, but if your going to do that don't buy a Belgian Ale.

TEXTURE and ALCOHOL: True to the style, Matilda has a wonderful texture. The reintroduction of yeast into the bottle makes the bubbles stick to the side of the glass like a rich champagne. Going down, the beer has a light feel, but the 7% alcohol is noticeable post-drink. It's delicious.

VIRGINS: For Belgian Ale virgins Matilda is a great first. It's modern, American, tasty, and it doesn't have the scary sediment that some of the native Belgians do. It will get it eventually, as the beer can age in the bottle for up to 5-years. BUT, trying it now would be an easy transition for any beer lover yet to try the banging Belgian style ale.

WHERE CAN I BUY THIS?

Most grocery stores don't sell many Belgian Ales, a travesty, I know. Specialty liquor/beer stores will have it if they are any good (Pshaw, maybe I am a snob when it comes to beer and what stores should offer, but damn it, this is the United States. I'm not patient and I never will be). I purchased mine in Iowa City at John's Grocery (a cramped corner store with a world renowned beer room: I highly recommend it for local shopping and website orders)

Also, the package isn't the usual Goose Island Honker in a different color. It's identical to the bottle pictured above. I couldn't find it and had to ask for help, sadly it was right in front of me. What can I say, I'm quick.

Orchard Green

"Dining Room:
Tuesday through Saturday 5-10 p.m.
Sunday & Monday 5-9 p.m.
Lounge:
Open at 3 daily.
Serving a late night menu until midnight
Happy Hour everyday from 3-6 p.m.
1/2 off wines by the glass $5 Belgian beer paddles1/2 off appetizers from 4-6 p.m.
News:
*Now booking for the holidaysfor parties from 8-75 people"

Above: Taken from http://www.orchardgreenrestaurant.com/

Here is my review- Originally posted on Yelp.com

First, I'd like to premise by saying that the beer selection is 5-stars. I love Belgian styles and have had the St. Bernardus Abt 12, Piraat, Gulden Draak, and an array of the other beers that the restaurant has to offer prior to dining here (Check out John's Grocery, who is the distributor for the restaurant.) So those were amazing. That aside, years ago I worked with Brian Herzic, the head chef/owner, at Givanni's.

Given that, I expected the food to be just as good as Givanni's and realistically, much much better. I was disappointed. The 2 beers I had at dinner, a St. Bernardus Triple (which was great, creamy, fragrant, light mouth feel) and the Piraat (less good... but still a great beer) were the high light.

Here's a rundown:

Appetizer: Seafood wrapped in Phyllo (puff pastry) with a cream sauce. The presentation was the first mistake. The seafood mixture (with sauce) was rolled in the Phyllo, reminiscent of a burrito, but that was OK. The issue I had was the giant ball of sweet potato strings that were riding on top of the burrito, adding much unneeded frill, but some welcome texture I suppose. It was just too big. As for the "seafood," a few large chunks of shrimp stood out, but the rest blended into the cream sauce. The flavor was reminiscent of a tuna pot pie. Granted, we ordered the dish with high expectations, but it didn't deliver at all, even to my low expectations. It was only $10, but it was an appetizer and that was near the high end of the spectrum. It was an awful, messy dish. Exacerbating its general gooeyness, the bottom of the pastry was raw, doughy and inedible. We told the waitress. She followed with an unhelpful, "that's too bad" and cleared the plate. Overall, I couldn't see the story the chef was trying to tell. The flavors were muddled, and to reiterate, tuna pot pie...

Main Course: I thought this would be some salvation to mitigate my poor feelings after the appetizer. It seemed that the meal could only improve and it did. Just not to the quality I expect for entrees that run at an $18 minimum. My meal: Here is the website description (http://www.yelp.com/redir?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.orchardgreenrestaurant.com): "Leg of Lamb Tagine Braised with kumquats, shallots, dates & sesame; buttery cous cous."

Sounds good right? and Mediterranean so it's true to the restaurant's sort of gastronomical theme, although the atmosphere was more analogous to a church with vaulted ceilings and windows to match the cherry wood and the too loud music, groaning on and on, varying by song and cutting through our conversation.

Back to the lamb: It was tender. That was the best part about it. Pleasantly overcooked in a fall off the bone sort of way (it was served sliced and off the bone). But the flavors in the sauce were not there. They were an amalgamation of sugars from the kumquats and dates lacking the balance that I expected from shallots, sesame, and SALT.

That last, simplest of ingredients, should have been incorporated more thoroughly (through any means, even soy sauce. The sprinkled sesame seeds on top gave it a very Asian feel as did the sauce, which would've been more at home on some sesame chicken).

Anyways, I was shocked. Luckily I hadn't eaten all day so I finished it, so it wasn't inedible. It just didn't have the subtleties I expected. It didn't exemplify a chef who knows technique, who knows flavors.


My date's (girlfriend's) dish:

Website: "Tarragon Chicken Broccoli rabe, string beans & acorn squash wild mushroom cheesecake."

! ! ! Cheesecake ! ! ! should have set off some alarms but I expected subtler flavors. It was reminiscent of a pumpkin pie, and not a good one, the kind made from that orange glop a forelorn home cook scoops from a too cheap can. In small doses with the meat the cheesecake added something, but I mistakenly tried a bite of it alone and immediately gulped some Piraat to wash the "pie" from my mouth.

Adding to this, the chicken was dry. It was so overcooked. I am surprised it was served. Reminded me of chicken that had been braised, taken out of the braising liquid and thrown into a heating pan for a few hours. Like dorm food really.

Blackstone (On Scott Blvd in Iowa City) has a much better version of this dish that is $7 dollars cheaper. It blows my mind that this chicken dish was $18. It wasn't half a rack of chicken, there weren't any truly expensive aspects to it except for the pumpkin pie like cheese cake, which could've been dropped from the dish, I just don't get it.



Dessert:

Didn't happen, see above. Also, none of the desserts sounded good. How do you manage that? My girlfriend loves dessert, she always wants something with chocolate (original right?) But nothing on this menu spoke to her. And she's not even a food nut like me.


Overall....ummm...

Well, it should be easy to deduce my complete opinion of the place. 5-Stars for the beer, 2 for the food.

Change I can believe in

I regret to inform you that tennis will no longer be the subject of my blog. Not. haha. Well, the regret part. I just find that no on wants to read about it. And, my desire to write about it went the way of the Wimbledon. At least for the year I suppose.

Look, I know everyone is disappointed.... But we'll make it through this. I promise.

So onto the new. I think Food is the most likely candidate, but don't count out anything just yet. But keep checking I will be doing some experiments, exploratory blogging if you will.

Think what you will about the part 1. It was just an idea born of Shaq's absurd quotes.

As for the Nike video's, they are just a start. In this final post there will be more video's and pictures pertaining directly to the paper. Enjoy,
Shaq

Photo credit: members.shaw.ca

This is Shaq's magnificent 64,000 square foot house mentioned in the paper. In the paper it says 17,000 but that is taken directly from the source I cited. As the 17,000 square foot home was sold I think the most logical explanation is that he had 2 homes. But I watched this cribs episode and it was insane. And it was the 64,000 squarefoot home I saw, just to be clear.

There are sections of the house that they didn't even use. Shaq said that sometimes he would walk into a room or section of the house and feel like he was somewhere else. The house was so big it was an adventure. Once you get bored with the 2,000 or so square feet you spend all of your time in you don't have to move! Just walk over to another side of the house and voila, a new home.

Clearly the square footage includes the tennis courts, basketball etc. but it's insane. Period.

The embedding option has been "disabled upon request," but here is the link to the Cribs video. Seven minutes long. Skip in 1 minute 40 seconds and it's right on Shaq's entrance. Take notice of the fingerprint scanner to get into his office. Crazy. And according to his wife he's a clean freak. Interesting.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Amq_XWYimmQ

Kobe Bryant




Here is a photo of Kobe Bryant's accuser in the 2003 case if you were curious to see it. Classy as she looks on the front of that dirty tabloid, but what do you expect? Personally I don't believe her for a second, not that he was in the right at all. He has a wife and a child! But I doubt if some young hotel worker would turn down sex with an NBA star of his stature. Call me cynical, or sexist haha. But my answer is guided ourely by logic. It just makes sense.


And Jordan!

As everyone will reiterate, Jordan was the man on the court. I can say, and this could be widely supported by video and just via stats. He was the best player the NBA has ever seen. I couldn't find single youtube videos to break down his dunks. Originally I wanted to have a top 5 list or something along those lines. In hindsight, this is probably better as they are all so good.

He was amazing.

Ignore the music if you want, but these moves are incredible.

I love how it's in top 10 and the announcers are right on. "This is Michael jordan at his best and there are very few people on this planet who can do this.


Here is Jordan's 60 Minute interview. It reveals his sportsmanship and outlook. Especially at the beginning as they discuss baseball. I think it's great to have such a contrast to Shaq's in your face, "I'm the best." "Call me Superman, etc." And I had no idea his father was robbed and murdered. Incredible information. so if you have a few minutes take it all in. He also touches on his gambling problem (or prior problem).

I also agree with the message Jordan wants to give to the public and I will repeat it. 'Look closer to home for your heroes, not just to superstars. "

So remember your stars and take a second to consider the WHY. Why do we watch these stars what is it?

My best guess?

They're human, just like you and me.

PART 2- Some Nike Video

A clear voice and a good quote. Always, Jordan is on top with his class. Even his attire is first class. The delivery, the authority. These are qualities that stars have. Nike saw this in Jordan and exploited it. But their hand was heavy in the deal as well. Surely they picked out the outfit, lighting Jordan in the best light they could. His image is memorable. Walking down that dark street, telling you about the times he's lost. Fans love that angle, take it in for all it's worth.

This is Bo Jackson. Another great athlete who dealt with Nike during his career. Granted he played in the NFL and the MLB with success, but look at the hyperbole that Nike makes of it. He surf's, he races, he does everything. And that catch phrase was born from Nike as well, you don't know Bo. Simplicity seems to be their strongest suit and they play it well.

Final- Because it doesn't always have to be serious

MJ and Shaq
Ever wonder if the biggest names in the game spend their free time together?
I do too and I bet it would go something like this.

So one night Jordan and Shaq are having a sleep over at Shaq’s because he has the biggest bed. The two are incredibly competitive so they decide to play some chess.

/>

***MOST LINES ARE QUOTES FROM THE PLAYERS
**UNDERLINED AND ITALICIZED LINES ARE NOT
Jordan makes a move, slides a pawn out two spaces and the game begins.
Jordan: “Just play. Have fun. Enjoy the game.”


Shaq: “I don’t see us having a problem.”


Shaq moves a pawn and a couple uneventful turns pass. Then Jordan takes Shaq’s queen, laughing.


Jordan: “I didn't really have a choice”


Shaq: “There is no need to talk.”


Jordan: “Accept failure, everyone fails at something. When you think about the consequences you always think of a negative result.” You wanna bet on this? 20,000 to the winner, what do you say?


Shaq: “That’s sort of a trick question, and I don’t have a trick answer. Next question, please.”


Jordan: “I’m a competitor. I wanna play.” I wanna bet.


Shaq: Are you trying to Hustle me? I was in Kazaam. “I know what’s a charade, and I know what’s not a charade. I’ll leave it at that."

Jordan: I just wanna bet. Afraid?

Shaq: “I didn’t say anything. Got nothing to say.” You can’t trick me into betting. I’m Superman. Look at the Logo on my chest.

Jordan: Yeah, you’re Superman. You’re a hero. You can’t lose.

Shaq: "But you know, as the saying goes, a hero ain’t nothing but a sandwich."

Jordan: (Awkwardly) That’s the toughest part. (What is wrong with him??)

Shaq: "I’m a married man; I don’t need a relationship with another man."

Jordan: I just wanted a friendly bet. I didn’t ask you to dinner.

Shaq: “I’ll beat you up right now if you want me to.” “I’m George Bush. I’m the president.”

Jordan: I thought you were Superman?

Shaq looks over at his bed, ignoring Jordan.

Shaq: "I think I’m one of the patches of the quilt here. "

Jordan: Man, umm, what?

Shaq: "I was an earthling last summer. I had to go back to my alien roots. I don’t know how it is for you earthlings, but where I’m from, strength is mental."

Jordan: Alien huh? "I was pretty confident that I could make some kind of contact, and I did.”

Awkward silence. Jordan looks back at the game and takes out one of Shaq’s Rooks.

Shaq: “I knew I was dog meat. [But] I’m the good-quality dog meat. I’m the Alpo.”

Jordan: Rolls his eyes. Looks away.
Shaq looks down at his King, surrounded by a few pawns and lesser pieces.

Shaq: "It’s just like a bunch of worker bees protecting the king bee, because I’m not a queen bee. I’m a king bee.”

Jordan looks back at the board, desperate for some escape from this madness. Thank God. Check.

Jordan: No hard feelings, right?

Shaq: “There is nothing for me to be sour about. What you got to understand is that I’m a military man."

Jordan looks down at the pieces on the board, staring at Shaq’s with disdain. Shaq moves his Knight and takes Kobe’s Bishop.

Jordan: "That was a great move, but I don’t wanna tell you that. But I gotta tell you." Because the game is over man.

Shaq: "but did you ever hear me say anything about it?"

Jordan: "Intelligence wins."

Shaq: Being the best right now doesn’t do anything for my feathers. I’m the Halle Berry of the NBA. Everybody wants this, baby. Everybody wants me. I’m getting older. I’m getting sexier. I’m getting meaner. I can still do what I do."

He speaks the last line to the picture of Halle Berry hanging on his wall. Jordan made an escape sometime ago, even tripping on the tails of his tux. But Shaq didn’t notice. He only had eyes for her.

Photos ascribed to Google Images and the subsequent sites: Hoophypes, NBA.com and IMDB.com

Awesome

BREAKING NEWS: Sort of

The talented 23-year-old from Majorca will return next month in Montreal. Hopefully he's fully recovered. I'd like to see a Federer rematch with both players at the top of their game.

Also, Stacey Allaster is the new CEO for the WTA. Personally, I'm not interested, but for you WTA fans there is the link. I'm not sure how complicated or interesting her job is. Schedule major tournaments and preingrave trophies for the Venus sisters. There. Done.

THESE ARE PRICELESS

These are ridiculous. I don't mind the outfit so much, just the flying jacket and the intense squinty grimace.

Pictures are courtesy of Gototennisblog.com

Sweet- 45

45 shot rally between Federer and Lleyton Hewitt, former Wimbledon champ.. It's not recent, but cool. That's all that matters.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tZhQi8aDcg

News? Maybe

TV ratings are not newsworthy to me.


Yes, it's important that the Federer-Roddick Final is the most viewed since the final of '99. I guess. But the important, most deciding factor that drives me against this as news is this. I don't care. I just don't. Berate me if you will. Tell me it's a slow news day. Tell me they write about everything and this is significant. But don't tell me that you care. I know you don't. No one cares what the TV ratings of a tennis match are compared to a match ten years ago. This belongs in a research paper. TV ratings are not exciting.


They are not important to anyone who doesn't work in TV. And I would bet that the ratings bore them, maybe even more than you and me.

So take your TV ratings and be selfish, keep them to yourselves. We don't want to read about it. We don't care.

Skimming the web

ESPN has a great follow up article on Federer's Wimbledon success. It discusses the celebration and the madness following the win. Also, it is to the point but descriptive, which I like.

One detail that I liked was an image of Federer skimming the web to see the media's reaction to his 15th major. That's awesome. It would be incredible to think, "huh, I wonder what ESPN wrote about me." Or SI, NYtimes, or any major news outlet at all. The feeling would have to be incredible knowing that you would be the headline.

That would be something.

AMAZING-- 15!!!!!!

15th major! I should have posted this yesterday, but I was out of town for the 4th and I didn't feel like mobile blogging. It was a holiday, understandable right?

Anyways, I'll come out and say it. Andy Roddick deserved to win. He played amazingly. He turned around an otherwise fading career and appears to be moving up in the world. He beat everyone including Andy Murray, a favorite from the beginning, to at least play in the finals. Then, when he was playing Federer, he continued to put up a fight. He didn't come into the match expecting to lose. Well, maybe he did and maybe he didn't. I'm guessing everyone else thought it would be 3 sets, maybe 4?

The outcome was unpredictable! One of the announcers stupidly called it a "biblical match." Not that it wasn't epic or grand, but biblical? I don't know, it just rubbed me the wrong way, but he did have to come up with clever commentary for more than 4 hours so I won't be too hard on him. Unlike Roddick, who was very hard on Federer. It was no easy major to attain. That is certain. The most games ever played! Although it wasn't the longest match, which is an oddity. Last years final between Nadal and Federer was 7 and a half hours, incredible.

This was still a great match though! I don't think we could've asked for better. It was great to see an American face in the finals. Roddick has really tightened his game, dropped 15 pounds, gained a ton of athleticism. He plays smarter and harder than ever before. I particularly liked his resentfulness at the end of the match as Federer was speaking. Granted, Federer was trying to make him feel better, but it would've been better if he hadn't said it. Essentially, he told Roddick he knew how he felt after his loss to Nadal the previous year. Knew how he felt? Roddick, who has held the silver runner up plate 3-times? Federer, who had 5 Wimbledon titles before his loss knew how Roddick must've felt? And that, is exactly what Roddick said, through tears mind you.

There's something else to analyze, Roddick was crying afterwords. It is slightly debateable. His eyes were red, lip trembling, and an announcer mentioned it, but debateable. He din't have tears streaming by any means. I for one will not demean him for his emotion. He played hard, endured set after set over the past weeks to get to this point and it came down to the 5th set and he couldn't pull through.

I say let him be. Roddick will be back and I think we will see him at the top of tennis for some time. His transformation is astounding. I actually wanted Federer to win so I was happy with the outcome, but you can't help but feel for Roddick. It seemed like his time. His tournament.

ESPN 360--- NOT FREE

I'm at work trying to watch the Wimbledon, but it's no dice. ESPN 360 is free in some cases but not all. Mainly, your ISP has to be an ESPN affiliate or you have to purchase a subscription. It's also free on college campuses which would be great if I was on campus. Sadly the remote desktop option wouldn't work either as it allows access to the files, not the internet.

Here are the rules that pop up if I click on a match or anything I'd like to watch:


How to Get Access to ESPN360.com
ESPN360.com is available at no charge to fans who receive their high-speed internet connection from an ESPN360.com affiliated internet service provider. ESPN360.com is also available to fans that access the internet from U.S. college campuses and U.S. military bases.
Your current computer network falls outside of these categories. Here’s how you can get access to ESPN360.com.
1. Switch to an ESPN360.com affiliated internet service provider or to contact your internet service provider and request ESPN360.com. Click here to enter your ZIP code and find out which providers in your area carry offer ESPN360.com
2. If you already get ESPN360.com at home and activated remote access, sign in using the myESPN link in the upper right hand corner. In order to activate remote access, you must sign in through your ESPN360.com affiliate Internet Service Provider.
3. For Verizon Customers Only: Sign-in using remote access if you already get ESPN360.com
4. For Comcast Customers Only: Great news! ESPN360.com will be free with your Comcast High-Speed Internet subscription beginning August 1st.Click here to sign up to receive ESPN360.com newsletters and updates

Not Equal

So, as a feeble gesture to the equality of men's and women's sports I suppose I should mention the unsurprising headline that the Williams sisters are facing off. That's the gist of the women's finals. They win everything, exciting. Oh, and I'll attach a photo so I can fail quantitative and qualitative approaches simultaneously.

Ugh

It's not "Andymonium," an Andy day, an Andy affair, Andy and Andy, or any other stultification of the dual Andy's you clever writers can devise. It's not creative. It sucks, plain and simple. So, Andy Roddick and Andy Murray are going to the Semis. That's a headline. Murray and Roddick face off. That's the story. Don't change it to some sort of contest to create the best pun. It's the 3rd seed and the 6th seed and should be an awesome match. Don't play up the names. It's not necessary. These two are interesting enough without it.

3 hours and 50 minutes

Roddick and Hewitt played all 5 sets, but Roddick prevailed. He had an astounding 43 Aces and won the last set 6-4. I believe the 43 aces, if the announcer Patrick Mcenroe is correct, is a career high. And even if it's not it's an amazing feat nonetheless.

Andy Roddick

The American 6th seed is something else. Watching him brings an amalgamation of frustration and awe as 140 mph serves couple with no hustle. Right now he's playing Hewitt who represents Great Britain's prison state of Australia. Well, guess it's a full fledged country now. Hewitt was the Wimbledon champ before Federer and still has some of his old fire. The score, which is in progress, favors Roddick. He is up 2 sets and they are playing the 4th. They've had 2 tie breakers and each player came away with one.

Anyways, back to frustration. Here I am, rooting for Roddick. Not because he's cool or particularly amazing for anything but his serve, but because he's the last American in the "Gentlemen's" singles. That is, men's singles. The Wimbledon site pompously labels everything. Perhaps it's for some sustenance of class, but I don't know, it's just so damn irritating.

Alright, well it looks like a 5th set might be coming up, but I can only speculate as coverage has digressed, technologically speaking. First the sound, now the picture. So, I'll relive a particular interesting part of the match while I wait.

Roddick was down 40-Love. It looked as though Hewitt was about to snatch an easy point in the otherwise tight match. I, with all of my quiet dignity, yelled profanely and vented my feelings on Roddick's flat-footed approach to a few shots that were mere feet away. Granted they were going close to 100 mph and he had split seconds to react, I know, it's hard. But he's a professional. He should be faster. So, Roddick serves again and we see his signature ace change the score to 15-40. Not a huge difference, but it looks better than 0, right? Well, I yelled "damn right, Roddick, now just do 3 more and get it over with." 4 aces in a row? Possible, yes. Probable? Obviously not. Well, to my amazement he did. So sports fans, when in doubt, yell. I think that's the moral anyways....

Picture Courteous of www.InstaBlogImages.com

Whoah

Serbian Novak Djokovic, 4th seed, is losing to Tommy Haas. Haas is the 24th seed playing for Germany. He's 31. So far Haas is winning by 2 sets and the 3rd is underway. The second set went down to a tie break and the score could not ahve been closer. Haas took it with a risky back hand right up on the net. Djokovic, family, and coach all look, well sad. He's not playing his best and it might cost him. Unfortuantely I have to go to class and miss the rest. Oh, and an update said Federer was losing. Oddly, it showed no score and didn't flash to the match... Very helpful ESPN2.

Federer vs Soderling

So, Federer beat Soderling this morning, three straight sets. I watched one before I had to go to work and, despite its outward appearances, it was close. I mean tie breakers going all the way the the last point on two sets? It was intense. In the end, Federer prevailed. 23 Aces. What can you do? He played amazingly, both of them did. But in the end it circled round and all effort and preparation went out the window. It wasn't important. Federer is just a better player.

Federer

Roger Federer just demolished Garcia-Lopez. Danced around him, three straight sets, and made him look like he belonged on a highschool court, JV. Well, maybe he fought back a little...

BIG UPSET

So I forgot to post this yesterdy, but I did watch what ESPN2 chose to show and it was pretty amazing. American Jesse Levine, 22, ranked 133rd, beat Russia's Marat Safin. Safin is ranked 14th and was the clear favorite for the match. Upsets in tennis are rare and this was quite the surprise. But it's great to see an American move up in the ranks! Hopefully he can keep it going but he is quite the underdog, no titles, only 22, ranked 133rd!
















Photo Courtesy of the AELTC

Murray vs Kendrick

So I'm watching this incredible match. Murray and Kendrick are tied at a set a piece and the play is intensifying. ESPN2, in all its absurdity, has decided that this is the perfect moment to flash to one of the women's' matches that I absolutely do not want to watch. It's not that I'm sexist, or a pig, or against sexual equality in sports, but it's round 1. It's 2 players I don't care about, and the Murray-Kendrick match is GOOD.

But, tennis is only on this channel. Shit.

Results

The results of the first day are up and I'd suggest reading them at Wimbledon's website as many newspapers and other sources have merely posted the terrible messes that they had in print.

Djokovic, a top seed (4), did go on to win and will be facing Germany's Simon Greul in the second round. Sweden's Robin Soderling will also advance. He beat Rafa Nadal at the French Open, but lost to Federer in the final. The consensus is that the final round will go down to Soderling and Federer, but we'll have to watch them go through 2 more matches before it's decided. I wonder how it feels to be one of the other players, important enough to be ranked, but not enough to be talked about and foreseen as a winner. I would think it would add a psychological barrier when you go into a match and everyone is expecting you to lose. Anyways, first round continues tomorrow.

Match Update

Benneteau lost his footing and as he's had knee surgery a trainer is checking him out, apparently he's worried about his hip.   Still, Djokovic is leading 3-love this round and is just playing better tennis.  

On an aside, ESPN2 is annoying and surprising me for not airing Federer's match...

Also, play just recommenced, he seems alright.  

The Wimbledon is today! I'm watching Centre Court, J.Benneteau v. N.Djokovic, two players who you likely do not know. It's hard to tell who will win the match, but I'm betting on Djokovic, he's making smart plays and he's reading Benneteau's style and using that knowledge to his advantage. On the other hand, his skill seems to be lacking a bit as his follow through doesn't deliver. Well, at least the though is there. I know these are the least exciting rounds, but there's nothing else to watch so turn it on, ESPN2.

2 men, 28 Majors

So, Federer gave an interesting interview at Wimbledon today. Most of the questions were about his rivals, but the most interesting one equated him and Tiger Woods. Both players have 14 majors and as Roger says, they are the face of their sports. I think this is true, but it also shows you how one person can enamor the crowd and essentially overshadow the sport itself. Look at Tiger For instance, he's not winning so why is that the lead story? My guess is just a guess, but I think it is probable. With either player it is clear that they don't play in the most popular sport. Therefore, it is less likely that anyone would know who they are, but as they've both been breakthrough players with advertisers, TV spots, and general fame they shatter the limitations of their less popular sports. Basically, these sports have a limited range of fans, but these men are so popular that they draw attention of people who would otherwise not care about it at all. The two have also appeared in ads together and seem to be friendly, which I suppose is natural.

photo from

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01203/CONSUMER_Adverts_T_1203733c.jpg

That's the old gillete ad, obviously. I got the image from google so that's the link if you want to check out more of them. It also came up with photos of Federer and Woods together, playing golf, hanging out, polishing majors, you know, regular stuff that guys do together. I know when I'm chilling with my friends we always polish our trophies, don't you? I'm sure they compare headshots too. That would be sweet.

Photo from tennis.com

Oh, and I logged onto ticketmaster to check out the prices of Wimbledon tickets, only 40 pounds, surprisingly low, but I guess it is tennis.

Breaking News and Knees

Seems that Rafael Nadal's knee tendinitis has finally gotten to him and he has withdrawn from the Wimbledon. He is also quoted in saying that the injury is not chronic and in the longterm he will be fine, which is good for him as he is only 23. The decision, again thinking longterm, is good. Playing through an injury is often deemed tough, but it seems to be mixed with a large helping of stupid.

Nadal

So the Spaniard says he will play, unwilling to let his Wimbledon title go without a fight. I think for fans this is great news, not because anyone likes Nadal in particular, but because watching a rematch between him and Federer will be great.

This is the official word from his doctor and is from gototennisblogl.com: After the appropriate tests (MRI, Ultrasound scans and gammagraphy) Mr. Rafael Nadal suffers from insertion tendonitis in the superior end of both kneecaps with a light osseous edema. His treatment will involve oral anti-inflammatories, physiotherapy as well as progressive muscular exercises for both quadriceps’s. Following the 48-hour treatment, Mr. Nadal will gradually get back into training.”Read more: http://www.gototennisblog.com/2009/06/09/rafael-nadal-plans-to-play-wimbledon/#ixzz0IoCJYfQ5&C

It seems that the rematch will favor Federer who loves to play on grass, as opposed to Nadal who I believe prefers clay. Either way, I'm sure it will only fuel the debate as to who the best player is, but I think even if Federer wins it won't be clean. The injury, surely, will be Nadal's scape goat, which is sad. No one has said it yet, but I would be surprised if it doesn't come out. These school yard excuses always do. To top it off, he will be worse off if he loses, sensibly, but I'm sure it will be full of irony. Consider this headline, "GREATEST TENNIS PLAYER ALL TIME? ROGER FEDERER LOSES TO AN INJURED RAFAEL NADAL. Well, or any headline along those lines, but you get the idea.

FAMILY FEUD

Oh, and to qualm all of Nadals fears with his recovering knees and the fast approaching Wimbledon is his coach, Uncle Toni. Apparently, Uncle Toni, who is actually family, stated on a radio station that Rafa (Rafael) is two levels below Federer. He put Federer at the top, named a second group of four guys, then he alloted a level for his nephew. It seems he is saying that his nephew has a lot of room to grow, he is only 23, but the timing could be better to say the least. If I was in the same position I think there might be one less Uncle in the world, but alas, Rafa has made no comment on the matter.

Photo by BERTRAND GUAY/AFP/Getty Images via Daylife.

Straying From Tennis For Class: The Vincent Paper

"Equitable Media Coverage of Female and
Male Athletes: Is there a solution? "

According to Vincent, the media places more value on males than females in its sports coverage. For those of us who consume sports media, the veracity of these words rings clear, whether it’s the smallest story of the day or the biggest headline. I think the most persuasive argument he presents is within the theories. Essentially, that is that newspapers are not proponents of cultural change because they are driven by monetary principal. So, newspapers are not inclined to further women’s portrayal in sports (justifying them socially and equitably) because readers want to hear about their favorite “strong, active, powerful” male athletes (Vincent 2005).
After the theories, an intense elaboration of what makes the coverage unbalanced ensues. Basically, the positioning and prevalence of male athletic photos, the quantity of articles, and the overall coverage of men’s sports overshadows the coverage of female media coverage in all of the same areas. Vincent also elaborates that the “qualitative” coverage of women is greatly lacking. Basically, if there is a picture of a woman than it’s often posed or boring where as men always get action shots.
Women, as he and his three pages of sources see it, are depicted in stereotypical roles that often accentuate beauty, sexual prowess, and other conventional aspects that altogether avoid how the women actually play their respective sport, which should be the most important aspect. This leads coverage away from less attractive women who may even be seen as androgynous. The result is women enjoying a fractional spotlight, approximately 10 percent of the total coverage in fact (Vincent 2005).

Vincent enumerates an array of sources that detail how this is sexist and conforms to society’s standards to berate women etc. To me, the explanation is, as explained in class, Occam’s Razor. Maybe, the media covers men’s sports more than women’s just because that is in fact what the public wants to see. Essentially, it’s more fun to watch men’s sports than women’s. It isn’t that women’s sports are less important, although from a financial standpoint that is sadly, the truth. It is just that men are, even if Vincent’s article cites this sort of talk as sexist, naturally stronger and faster. It isn’t a slur to demean women it is just a fact of nature. Men have, clearly, more testosterone which equates into more muscle. They are also on average taller and in the end this creates a much faster paced sports environment. Clearly, it’s more fun to watch a high-speed sporting event (disagree if you want, but popular opinion will override you). Therefore, we fall back on Occam’s Razor, the simplest prevails. Additionally, looking back on day one when everyone recounted their favorite teams I do not recall,, even from the women in our class, one female team.
So, do I think Vincent is being realistic in his qualitative and quantitative equalization? No. It is not realistic to believe that the masses will suddenly decide that they want to watch a 140 LB women on the defensive line instead of a 300 LB man, or the same sort of switch in a number of other sports. And yes, I think it makes sense that women are portrayed more often in gender appropriate sports than in the inappropriate ones which Vincent lists as “field hockey, softball and rugby” (Vincent 2005). To me, this list itself is asinine. Softball is definitely a gender appropriate sport. It is what female athletes play all through high school and college and I know there are male summer leagues, but the sport is dominated by females. Now, putting that aside, the other two present similar problems, which stray far from gender issues. Possibly, if not probably, Rugby is more popular in say England or a similar country, but I still believe that it hardly gets media coverage anyways. Additionally, considering that Vincent is from Alabama this alternative answer that he is referring to European sports seems unlikely. Now, Field Hockey may be a more appropriately popular sport but it is still far from the top. Honestly, I’m surprised that basketball did not make it into this discussion, especially when you consider the dichotomy between the WNBA and the NBA. I am almost positive that everyone in class could name at least one player in the NBA, but naming one from the WNBA would prove a greater challenge by far. I could not name one myself and I think that this single instance characterizes the difference between men and women’s sports, but yet, I do not agree with Vincent or the incredibly slanted, feminists views he has expounded. I do agree to a certain extent that this could change and the media is to blame. It just seems that the chances of this happening seem slim.

So this month's Sports Illustrated has a fairly long article about the French Open. Essentially, it presents the best players of Tennis through the history of the sport and makes a good case for Roger Federer, but mentions 4 or 5 times that Rafael Nadal may not agree, or other forms of Nadal being better for whatever reason (13-7 Record over Federer, a few embarassing matches for Federer? Well, draw your own conclusions, but I think it's important to mention the players have beaten eachother on different occasions)

It's easy to say Federer is better than past players, specifically Laver and Sampra, but I'm guessing it may be because they aren't around to argue. Looking at the numbers Federer beats them but as the SI article points out the conditions were much different. Courts were made differently, rackets, shoes, you know, basically everything. It was back in the day before the explosion of performance enhancing drugs too, not that I think any of the players take steroids persay, but the advancements of protein powders and other legal substances definitely demarcate new and old. If you go back to the numbers Federer beats Nadal as well, but that was my point about Laver and Sampra, how do you measure the best player by numbers?

Oh, and on a lighter note a deranged, balding man rushed the court in an attempt to give Federer, wait for it, a hat and a flag. His generosity was reciprocated by three guys man handling him. One had a painful hold on the mans forearm, another had the end of one leg, and the third was attempting to pull the man in for a hug as they literally carried him out. Clearly, the fan thought that the flag would really come in handy during the match. And it wasn't like the small memorial day size flag. It was big. Obviously, the idiot hadn't thought this through. I mean really, if you're a fan of an athlete at least bring him something useful. Or, rather, leave him alone. Anyways, the photo is hilarious but I unfortunately cannot can't find a digital version.

Photo from Sportsillustrated.com

This is from gototennisblog.com, just a highlight of the weekend

AEGON CHAMPIONSHIPS - THE QUEEN’S CLUB, LONDON - 2009 TENNIS TV SCHEDULE

All times EASTERN.

Friday, June 12
7:30 am - 3:30 pm: Queen’s Club Quarterfinals - Tennis Channel - LIVE
5:00 pm - 1:00 am: Queen’s Club Quarterfinals - Tennis Channel - repeat

Saturday, June 13
8:30 am - 1:30 pm: Queen’s Club Semifinals - Tennis Channel - LIVE
8:00 pm - 10:30 pm: Queen’s Club Semifinals - Tennis Channel - repeat
11:00 pm - 1:30 am: Queen’s Clube Semifinals - Tennis Channel - repeat

Sunday, June 14
9:00 am - 11:30 am: Queen’s Club Final - Tennis Channel - LIVE
1:00 pm - 3:30 pm: Queen’s Club Final - Tennis Channel - repeat
8:00 pm - 10:30 pm: Queen’s Club Final - Tennis Channel - repeat
11:00 pm - 1:30 am: Queen’s Club Final - Tennis Channel - repeat

Rafael Nadal.... More whining

Oh, and in addition to Federer, Rafael Nadal will likely play at Wimbledon as well, despite his incessant whining about knee pain and the like. He says he will be doing physical therapy in preparation even though he has had this pain for a while and chose to play through many tournaments anyways. But, he did step down from the impending Queen's Club Tournament and will instead be preparing for the more important Wimbledon. I suppose it's likely that his knee pain is real and should be taken care of, but as an unmonitored blogger I feel calling him a whiner is warranted and thankfully, my opinion is the one that matters.

The First of Eighteen

Hey there,

This is my first post.  I'm, as my profile, URL, and blog title state, Kevin Rutan.  This Fall marks the beginning of my last year at the University of Iowa and it has been great, but I am ready to move on.  I am grateful, however, for what I've gained here in every facet of my life, especially in the academic realm thanks to the UIs' writing programs.

Currently, I'm pulling everything together to prep for Graduation and more importantly, for what comes after.  My plans are to take the LSAT in the Fall and hopefully get accepted somewhere.  You know, anywhere that will have me haha.  Ostensibly, that will buy me 3 more years of the limbo between High School and the working world.  With the slew of medical advances that explode every week and the dwindling social security I will probably have to work 60 years before I can retire so i am, for good reason, in no rush to finish.  

Oh, and I am currently employed at Sprint so if anyone needs a phone feel free to ask.  I work for commission only so I'd love to sell you one.  Essentially, you get a good deal and I hopefully get to pay rent : )  Anyways, I'm not trying to make this a plug, just thought it was funny.  I always inundate myself in my work, whatever it is, and cell phones have become a large part of my daily life, especially online.  

This is the phone I want.  It's the new Palm Pre, pretty much blows the Iphone out of the water, but to each his own.  

Now, I suppose I should stop running off on tangents and get to the point.  With the Wimbledon coming up I chose Tennis and essentially any of the hype that will be surrounding it.   I've found a great blog that has the collective TV schedule and an aggregation of everything Tennis along with articles, videos, and a multitude of other great sources for anyone who's interested. 

Right now, the sports news, well the tiny blip allotted to tennis, is a flurry with Roger Federer, obviously.  He's won his 14th major and that is crazy.  Anyways, Nike made a pretty funny video and it's on Youtube so I'll post a link.  It's called "The Roger Federer Equation" and it's, well, you'll see. 

That's all for now.