 |
April 25, 2000 |
|
I got a mail from my friend Ted today. A
few weeks ago we had talked about double dating one of these days. The
weeks have passed and still we haven't managed to cross paths. He wandered
back into my web site just today, and read my latest article for Material Possessions.
Did I mention that we were very competitive in college? I could go into
intricate detail and examples of this competition, but I think I'll spare
you. Okay, except for this mail which I got from him to day (in its
entirely):
This is three points we're talking about. Three points! Specifically between 100% (mine) and 97% (his). I'm not going to point fingers and say that it's entirely his fault, because obviously it isn't, especially since I outscored him. We were even trying to get George's opinion on whether or not Ted should've been deducted three points. However I should point out that this exam is one that we took in out first or second year of college… in 1987. How is it that we're still having this debate thirteen years later?
From: Ted Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2000 9:57 AM To: Frank Subject: SLANDERER!
I was reading your most recent posting entitled 'Twelve Dollars'. In it, you mention that I once scored 97% on a statics exam, which I do not deny. However, you write that I claim "...the professor should not have deducted points of for [my] reversing the sign on a vector." This clearly would result in an incorrect answer, and should be deducted. In fact, I claimed that the professor should not have deducted points for my CORRECTLY adding two orthogonal vectors into a single resulting vector without 'showing the math' (a procedure which should be trivial at a college level). Your version defames me, and I demand an immediate retraction!
Regards,
Ted
Did I mention that we were very competitive? I'm sure the whole thing is mostly kidding around on both of our parts. I allegedly have an exceptional memory and Ted's is nearly as good as mine. A close second. [Giggle]
Pam thinks I'm an incurable fanatic… about baseball. I'll admit that I track every Braves' game on the net. I had warned her before the season started that I was an enthusiast. Maybe I understated the point.
There was a Braves' baseball game today. Tom Glavine was pitching for the Braves. He is probably my favorite player. I'll admit that there are a number of players more talented, Greg Maddux (also an Atlanta player) included, but there's something about Glavine. There are a number of reasons why I like him For one he has always been a Brave, which in this age of free agency is certainly a rarity. He's also a finesse pitcher; he's not one to overpower batters. He'll nibble at the corners of the strike zone and deceive batters with his changeup. He also seems to find ways to get things done when it counts, it is thougher to bat against him when there are runners in scoring position (.227 vs. .165). He's gritty.
Tonight he would be going up against Kevin Brown, who the Braves have not been able to beat since 1996. Brown is precisely the opposite. He's an overpowering pitcher. He's a fastball pitcher who works on intimidating hitters. And one of the highest paid player in the game. With the exception of the Dodgers, the previous two teams he has been with have made the post-season. You might think of him as a hired gun.
This matchup was similar to David vs. Goliath. Not to say that Glavine is a bad pitcher, after all he has won two Cy Young awards; however, the pitching styles would indicate such differences. Kevin Brown was just coming off the disabled list, since he broke his pinkie. Maybe he would be less effective.
It was a pitcher's duel from beginning to end. Brown pitched a brilliant game; he really did. Glavine pitched a better game; he won it. He pitched a complete game shutout; he even had a no-hitter going through over four innings. It was a 1-0 victory. He also contributed to the run with a sacrifice bunt. This was against the same team who scored thirty-six runs in three games last weekend.
I've missed baseball. Maybe Pam is right?!
April 25, 2000