I guess the turn of events toward publication of my new book yesterday wasn't an April 1st "only kidding". Apparently, according to the publisher, printing of the review copy is underway as I sit here and type. So, if all goes according to schedule, I should have it in my hands early next week.
My only hope now is, that Tom Hanks isn't hitching a ride on the FedEx plane carrying my novel. While some reviewer might decide in the future that the work deserves to be "Cast Away" on some remote island, I'd really like to receive my draft copy anyway.
Another event I've mentioned before is soon to arrive. I can't believe how fast time goes by, but next week the Masters Tournament begins. And, though I really don't pay any attention to sports shows at all, while flipping channels one can't help but notice all the attention paid to whom? Tiger of course.
Naturally, every sportscaster in the business has an opinion on how the crowds will react to his re-appearance, and how he will be affected by the stress of it all, and whether what's left of his sponsors and endorsements made the right choice to stay the course with him (no pun intended). Which leads me to a question I've asked time and again, not only about Tiger, but in relation to all kinds of sports.
My question is: What difference does it make what anyone thinks, expert or not about some sports event yet to take place? While there's certainly something to be said about basic probability, a superior team for example playing one that's lesser, or an athlete in one-on-one events who's obviously more talented that the general opposition, but so what. Why not just let these jocks go out and play the game? Why does every event have to be talked to death for what seems an eternity before it's ever played?
And to boot, who does the talking and projecting? Surely there are retired players and coaches whom have great experience in their former sports. These folks certainly know more than the average Joe when they opine. So, I suppose, that's why they seem somewhat conservative when venturing their opinions. They've been there before, know what's involved and usually offer qualified opinions.
On the other hand, though, who makes the loudest predictive noise? Couch potatoes who couldn't walk two blocks without a probable coronary. Uncoordinated experts who have to sit on four pillows to be seen above the top of their "sports" desk spouting about the in's and out's of how seven foot basketball centers should play their game and criticisms of three hundred pound defensive ends not reacting quick enough. The closest most of these talking heads have come to any kind of competition is seeing how fast they can get out of a restaurant to stick someone else with the tab if they sense the waiters bringing the check.
Regardless of anyone's guesses then, educated or not, after Tiger tees it up next week and plays his four rounds (provided he makes the cut) we'll all have found out how well he played or didn't. And that's the time, I think, to really talk about what happened at the Masters, because by then we'll all know who won or didn't.
That's all for today folk.
Adios
No comments:
Post a Comment