Can't Believe I'm Doing This

I am now going to do something that I fear imperils my soul: I am going to help the New York Yankees.

Last night, Alex Rodriguez, an admitted steroid user and all-around questionable character, hit the 660th home run of his Major League career.  This ties him with Willie Mays, an indisputably better player and human being, for fourth place on the all-time home-run list.  Whatever.  As Mays himself indicated in a congratulatory message to Rodriguez, records are made to be broken, milestones are made to be passed.

In this story, though, there is an interesting subplot--one that, for a longtime Yankee hater such as YNSHC, is somewhat delicious to observe.  Years ago, when Rodriguez signed his current contract with the Yankees, he was promised large financial bonuses for reaching certain historic numbers.  One of these was, in fact, 660 home runs.  So now, after Rodriguez has served a year's suspension from baseball for violating the league's substance abuse rules, the Yankees have studiously avoided referring to the Mays-tying homer as a milestone--or, as much as they could, referring to it at all.  They will do whatever they can to avoid shelling out a $6-million bonus to Rodriguez.  Rodriguez himself is not really talking about the situation, either.

No one wants to see Rodriguez get this money, but many would also like to see the Yankees fork it over.  Personally, I think if this matter goes to arbitration, the Yankees will lose: They signed a contract, Rodriguez is--like it or not--a player in good standing with the league right now, they have o pay up.  But it seems to me that there's a good, face-saving solution for everyone.

Rodriguez certainly doesn't need the money--his base salary for just this year is something like $25 million.  At the same time, the Yankees can certainly afford to pay: $6-million dollars is couch-cushion money to the Evil Empire from the Bronx.  So both sides should just step up and state that they have reached an agreement to donate the milestone bonus to charity--maybe building little league ballparks or supporting anti-drug programs.  Everybody gets great publicity, a worthwhile cause gets supported, and somebody gets a nice tax write-off to boot.

You're welcome, Yankees.  Now rot in hell.

Check the Crappie's Testicles for Shrinkage

In today's Not-from-The-Onion news, the governing body of the sport of professional ice-fishing (yup) is instituting drug-testing requirements as part of a long-shot campaign to be included in the Olympics.  Think about it: Olympic ice-fishing.  Just when you thought the Olympics had maxed out their capacity for dullness by adding soccer!  (Oh, the majesty of the 0-0 tie!  The thrill of the 1-0 barnburner!)

I don't think this is a great idea--the inclusion of ice-fishing, not the drug-testing.  I mean, curling is bad enough.  Although maybe Olympic officials could combine the two sports: Curlers could slide their teapots (or whatever those things are) along the ice towards the spot where ice-fishers have camped out to await nibbles.  Fishermen earn points by dodging teapots, and curlers earn points by bowling ice-fishers into the frozen lake.  That I would watch.

In all semi-seriousness, though, I think the drug-testing authorities are taking the wrong approach.  I doubt many professional ice-fishers would test positive for performance-enhancing drugs.  After all, steroids, which can increase one's aggression, would seem ill-suited for a "sport" whose key to success is patience and the ability to sit still--on ice--for long periods of time.  On the other hand, since scoring is based on the weight of the fish caught, I would think certain growth hormones could be helpful: My point is, is anyone testing the fish?

One Not for the Record Books

If a tree falls in a forest, with no one around to hear it, it may or may not make a sound.  But there will certainly be one less tree standing in that forest.

Yesterday, the Penn State Nittany Lions football team played their first game since the death of their legendary coach Joe Paterno and the conviction of longtime assistant coach Jerry Sandusky for sexual abuse of numerous children.  They lost.  Paterno's replacement, Bill O'Brien, thus begins his coaching career with a record of 0-1.  He has a long way to go to catch up with his predecessor: Joe Paterno's final won-loss record stands at 409-136, making him the all-time winningest (let's just say that's a real word) coach in college football history.

Except he isn't.

In the wake of the Sandusky scandal, the NCAA imposed numerous appropriate sanctions on Penn State: The college paid significant financial penalties, and the team was barred from post-season play for several years.  As a further punishment--one particularly targeted at Paterno--the university's wins since 1998 were "vacated"; thus, Paterno's official career victory total stands at 298.

Penn State deserves punishment for its role in facilitating Sandusky's heinous behavior.  As far as I'm concerned, the football program could be eliminated entirely.  Joe Paterno, who took insufficient steps to protect children from the predations of his longtime friend and assistant coach, deserves a fair amount of condemnation.  The university has rightly removed a statue of the coach from its place of honor, and I think any time Paterno's name is mentioned, it should be followed by, "co-conspirator in numerous acts of child molestation."

I have a problem, though, with the idea of "vacating" Penn State's victories.  Just because facts come to light that reveal Paterno (co-conspirator in numerous acts of child molestation) to be less of a moral paragon than previously believed does not erase the fact--the fact--that the teams he coached racked up 409 victories.  (I think the fact that the NCAA did not vacate the losses suffered during that time indicates the logical bankruptcy of the whole proceeding.)  I have a similar problem with the decision to strip Lance Armstrong of his Tour de France titles in the wake of his refusal to continue cooperating with anti-doping investigations--but that at least makes a certain amount of sense: One could argue that Armstrong would not have won those races had he not been using illegal performance enhancing drugs.  Of course, since it seems like everybody else was using the same or similar drugs, any advantage Armstrong gained was probably negligible.

There is something more than a little Stalinist in the actions of sports officials rewriting history, airbrushing away accomplishments of those who are later found to have bent the rules in one way or another.  Like it or not, Lance Armstrong won seven Tours de France.  Pete Rose has more base hits than anyone else in baseball, and he belongs in the Hall of Fame--as does Barry Bonds.  As people of my political persuasion have long complained when faced with the distortions or Fox News and its ilk, people are entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts.  Sports history--like all history--depends on scrupulous maintenance of factual records.  And the factual record shows that the record for most wins by a college football coach belongs to Mr. Joe Paterno. Co-conspirator in numerous acts of child molestation.

IOC Admits Defeat, Makes Cheating Olympic Event

Lausanne, Switzerland--International Olympic Committee President Jaques Rogge announced today that, given the futility of policing dozens of corrupt national Olympic teams, the IOC would introduce cheating as a medal event, beginning in London in 2012.

Asked whether this comparatively short lead-time would allow nations to field competitive cheating squads in time for next summer's games, Rogge replied that numerous countries have already put together highly-qualified teams, even in advance of his announcement.

"Already there's great buzz around the Russians and Nigerians.  But I wouldn't be too quick to discount the Americans' chances.  When their backs are against the wall, those Yanks can cheat with the best of them."

Cheating medals will be awarded for illegal performance enhancement, graft, and creativity.

The US is expected to do well in performance enhancement, reuniting former Major Leaguers Mark McGwire and Jose Canseco as co-captains for the London games.  "We've been doing a lot of preliminary work," Canseco told reporters.  "Mark's been giving me regular injections in my butt."

Canseco hastened to clarify that he was talking about steroids.

"We've got some good young juicers on the squad," McGwire confirmed.  "Just take a look at Halstead.  He's going to do some great things next year."

Indeed, Jesse Halstead, a 22-year-old former hammer thrower from Skokie, Illinois, who boasts 54" biceps and has been tasered three times due to sudden rage attacks, feels very confident about his chances:

"GrrrrrrrrrYEEEEEEEEEArrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrghhhhhhhh. . .llllll," Halstead said when asked about his training regimen.

The Russians are heavy favorites in the graft competition.  When asked about the team's chances, noted Russian legitimate businessman Mikhail "The Vivisector" Punchilakov was guardedly optimistic.  "We think team do very well.  We have especially good feelings about French, Latvian, Egyptian, and Peruvian judges.  We think they and their families will find Russian team very persuasive."  The ice-dancing "gold medalists" Yelena Berezhnaya and Anton Sikharulidze will captain the Russian team.

If there is a wildcard event, it is creativity.  "This is the event where some of the smaller countries can truly shine," said Rogge.  He pointed to the recent revelations of cheating in the world of international soccer, where the entire team from Togo was found to be fake.  The German cheating squad is said to be organizing their routine around a massive dose of hallucinogens piped through the Olympic stadium's ventilation systems.

While some despair that these developments will irreparably tarnish the Olympics image.  Mid-level Olympic committee employees, however, are sanguine about the developments.  "Frankly, I'm happy about this," said Michelle von Sneed, an executive assistant in the committee's headquarters.  "I was really getting tired of the weekly urine deliveries."

Spin Cycle

Speaking of Lance Armstrong, we mustn't judge him too harshly for using performance-enhancing drugs. Not that he DID use performance-enhancing drugs. But IF he did, we wouldn't blame him. Can you imagine the pressure he experienced growing up? His name was LANCE ARMSTRONG, for Pete's sake! Was he supposed to NOT become a superstar athlete? Would anyone take seriously, "Lance Armstrong, CPA"? He had to do whatever it took to excel at sports.

Blame the parents.

Altius Citius. . . Senior?

"Frank Levine [age 95] belongs to a generation of track and field athletes who are breaking records for speed, distance and endurance at ages once considered too old for competition. In a sport tarnished by doping scandals, the older athletes raise anew the question of what constitutes a natural body for people who are at an age when drugs are a part of life." ("For Older Athletes, Drug Question Emerges")

We'll try to resist the urge to make some obvious joke about elderly pole-vaulters and Viagra. (OK, so we won't try very hard.)

No, but seriously, aside from the sociological questions about what constitutes a "performance enhancing" drug in for an elderly athlete, this is a feel-good story. You don't have to put aside your gold-medal dreams when you enter your golden years: You can simply take part in the U.S.A. Masters Outdoor Track & Field Championships. Apparently "masters" are the new old.

The Masters program organizes activities for people in 5-year divisions, starting at age 30. We understand that this year's world master's championships drew unprecedentedly huge crowds: Well over 40 people attended the various events.

And no wonder. Competition was fierce. Records collapsed more frequently than the athletes themselves. In the 90-94 year old category, Irv "The Grey Cheetah" Rosenblatt shattered the world record for the 100-Meter Dash in an astonishing 4 hours, 32 minutes, 12.23 seconds. While impressive, his victory in the race was tarnished when his sole competitor, Nicky "Gatling Gun" Robinson, was disqualified for wandering off around the 50-Meter mark to take a nap by the high-jump.

The 85-90 year old marathoners established a blistering pace, completing the first 13 miles in just over a week and a half. The winner is expected to cross the finish line sometime around Labor Day. Mdubeze "Arthritis" Ochekwu of Kenya is still the favorite.

(Digression: It's funny because they're old. EOD)

(Additional digression: WOS says, "You wouldn't write that way about black people. Why is it OK to do it about old people?" We have no good answer. WOS points her finger and yells, "Ageist!" EOAD)

The highlight of the games was the pole-vaulting competition which turned into a fierce battle between Australia's Nigel "The Flying Elderly Crocodile" Simpkins and American Kenny "Kenny" Widlow. Simpkins had seemingly clinched the gold with a vault of two feet, 3 1/4 inches, but then he tested positive for a foreign substance; it seems he was taking Viagra to, uh, add a little springiness to his pole.

All right, so we couldn't resist.

Shock and Outrage! (Yawn!)

The ongoing revelations of drugs in sports long ago lost their power to shock.  Still, the Solipsist was somewhat taken aback to find out that even Alex Rodriguez has dabbled in the juice.  Now, anything that embarrasses the New York Yankees can't be all bad, but this does raise the question of whether ANYONE is clean.

And you know what?  It really doesn't matter.

That's right.  It doesn't matter.  Not just in the sense that sports, inherently, don't matter--they don't, and this is coming from a sports fan.  But the use of steroids just doesn't matter because when you think about it, what's wrong with it?  Are steroids bad for you?  Well, yes, of course they are.  But by now, everyone knows this.  People who choose to use steroids or other performance enhancing drugs with potentially unpleasant side effects are, in fact, making a choice.  And, frankly, a rational one: If the potential payoff for people who can throw a ball a little bit farther, or run a little bit faster, is disproportionate, than why would any reasonable human being not take chances in order to increase his or her productivity?  Plenty of people smoke cigarettes and/or drink and/or partake of  other harmful substances without even the upside of a lucrative sports career.

Are performance enhancing drugs risky?  Well, so is sports itself.  You don't believe me? How many of you would willingly stand 60 feet away from a man throwing a ball at you with lethal force?  How many people have been paralyzed playing football?

But, you say, it's cheating.  In what sense?  If you claim that it gives some people an unfair advantage over others, you only need to point out that it is not merely hitters who use enhancements (see Roger Clemens).  In other words, if a certain percentage of hitters are doping, it is reasonable to assume that a similar percentage of pitchers is doing the same.  If you cheat in order to negate the effects of another person's cheating, are you not merely maintaining the status quo?

It ruins the integrity of sports?  Maybe.  But if you think of the olympic ideal--"Stronger, Higher, Faster"--aren't performance enhancers really just helping athletes attain it?  The Solipsist is no great fan of Barry Bonds, but it must be noted that steroids--while possibly making it easier to reach the home-run record--did not CAUSE him to break the record. Steroids do not enable people to hit home runs.  The Solipsist could treat himself with the cream or the clear or anabolic steroids or plutonium, and he still would not be able to hit a baseball out of the infield: It's a skill that is more or less unrelated to physical strength.

The saddest thing about Barry Bonds (and yes, the assumption here is that he DID use performance enhancers) and Alex Rodriguez is that these are first-ballot hall of famers without the use of any drugs.  No, Bonds may not have broken the record; he would have hit a "mere" 500 or so home runs.  The reports on Alex Rodriguez indicate that he used anabolic steroids in 2003 (before there were any penalties for using them), but one would assume that he has not used them since, even though he continues to put up garish numbers.

The Solipsist feels that people should be allowed to use whatever they want to use to gain an edge, as long as it is done freely and openly.  If people feel the need to use steroids, let them.  And let everyone else know they are using them (that should take care of the integrity issue). 

The truly scandalous drug revelation revolves around Michael Phelps.  Not that he smoked pot: He's 23, why wouldn't he?  The scandal, of course, is in everybody's "Shocked!  Shocked" reaction.

Wouldn't it have been refreshing if, instead of prostrating himself before the gods of sport and commerce, Phelps had just said something like, "I apologize to my fans who may be a bit disillusioned, but I'm a human being, I smoked marijuana, I didn't hurt anybody, and we all need to get over it and mind our own business"?  Maybe it could even have started a long-overdue conversation on legalization.  Probably too much to hope for.

So to recap: Athletes can neither use steroids (which make you perform better) or marijuana (which makes you perform worse).  One wonders if Phelps' competitors would really have complained much if Michael had taken a hit before some of those races.