Why tennis is better than THE IOWA CAUCUSES

Posted by Dave: Here they are. The top 10 reasons that tennis is better than the Iowa caucuses:

10. Tennis players and fans are smart. They head Down Under in January, rather than here to frosty Iowa, where Bess and I both live.

9. Tennis opponents don’t run a zillion smear ads against one another on television. (Though, maybe they should. Could be entertaining.)

8. Color commentary is by folks like Chris Fowler and Mary Joe Fernandez, rather than the likes of Wolf Blitzer and Candy Crowley.

7. Politicians make many promises they can’t keep. Tennis players generally don’t. (Generally, I said.)

6. Role models like Billie Jean King and Andre Agassi fight for the greater good -- equality, education, AIDS research, etc. – without chasing political office.

5. Rising stars like Jack Sock and Melanie Oudin don’t stuff mailboxes, like politicians do, in an attempt to win respect. They simply play their best and let the results speak for themselves.

4. Tennis fans speculate about who has a shot at winning the Slams this year, rather than who might win in Iowa, New Hampshire or South Carolina. (Yawn.)

3. They don’t put six or seven tennis players on court at once, like they do in an early-season political debate, and expect the public to figure out who’s the best. Every step of the way in tennis is a true head-to-head competition.

2. Unlike politics, there are well-defined rules, boundaries and scoring practices in tennis.

1. Imagine if Iowans like Bess and I had sole power (and in early January, no less!) to determine who stays in the running for year-ending ATP or WTA points leader status. Not sure America – or the world – would be happy with our choices.

NOTE: This is a new feature on our blog. What do YOU think tennis is better than? Post your idea here or message us directly via Twitter (@mixdubs) with suggestions for future installments in this series.

He's at it again

Posted by BESS: If you don't know what or who I'm referring to:

• First, check out this post I did during Wimbledon to help set the stage
  

• Second, check out this info about what went down last night

I agree with the author that it's nice to have someone speak their mind and offer honest and interesting quotes. I also agree that this prevents me from having warm and fuzzy feelings toward Roddick. Not that he cares. Clearly!

For the record, Chris Fowler seems to be A-OK with what Roddick said. Fowler Tweeted as much later. But evidently Pam Shriver and Mary Joe Fernandez (who were calling the Sharapova match after this interview occurred) were offended.

Say what you want about Roddick. He keeps it interesting!

We've only just begun

... and already I'm having trouble leaving for work in the morning thanks to breakfast at Wimbledon with my good friends Chris Fowler, Brad Gilbert and now Chris Evert as well. Oh, and this morning Rafa was also invited. Pretty entertaining guest list.

I'm trying to avoid some of the updates during the day, which is tough, but I haven't had anyone pop over the wall yet saying, "Did you hear what happened at Wimbledon today?" so I'm guessing Rafa didn't lose to the American I had never heard of.

I did complete my brackets last night, and although I didn't know Tipsarevic was hurt (Dave is always up on this stuff), I didn't pick him to win the first round against Karlovic. So here's hoping he's really hurt. For the sake of my draw. Not that I wish injury on anyone. How un-Dostoyevskyesque that would be!*

Unsurprisingly, I have chosen Rafa on the men's side. For the women, I went with Sharapova. I made that pick before I knew the oddsmakers favored Sharapova, so I guess it's not as "out there" as I thought it was at the time. Oh well.

Here's my one unsolicited comment on Dave's pick of Djokovic to win because "he deserves it." I say what the Djoker deserves from his "stunning first half of the season" is pretty much what he's gotten--a stunning first half of the season. End of story. It was impressive and noteworthy and interesting. And it ended with a loss at the French. All credit to him for that amazing string of wins, but I have moved on.

Here's the deal. I have admiration for him. But I have very little love for him after some of his behavior the past few years. What with the ripping off of the shirt after wins. With the fist pounding of his heart. With the parents saying classless (and clueless) things about "the king" being dead when Djokovic first beat Federer. With Djoker's on-court war of words with Roddick at the U.S. Open. (The Djoker may have a had a point there, but he handled it so poorly.) With the family wearing his image on their T-shirts every single day. It's alllllllllll a little too egocentric for me.

Perhaps he has matured. I've seen glimmers of hope that some of that behavior is behind him. I just found it all very unattractive. And it's going to take me time to get past it.

So I'm willing to concede that he's had a phenomenal 6-7 months. But I'm doling out admiration sparingly until I can gauge where his sportsmanship is these days.

The fact that he seems to be pretty friendly with Rafa now does bode well for him, I'll tell you that. :-)


*I don't know if that's true or not, because I really am not up on my Dostoyevsky.