Sunday, October 28, 2007


So I have realized something about myself. I do not like parity in sports. It's been chronically lauded lately -- how it's great for revenue because more teams have chance to win, or at least stay in the race longer. But not me. I like dynasties. I like it when the older teams thrive. I don't want a squad whose colors are black and purple in the World Series, or a team that wears teal to win the Super Bowl. I pride myself on not falling into camps, buying into orthodoxy or taking one side of a deep divide, but I guess I'm proving my own point by breaking formula here.

There have already been plenty of columns lamenting how big and tough the Sox are now, and how it's not the same as the loveable days of pathetic playoff failures. Even from Sox fans and local writers. I don't really sympathize with this at all. Winning is the best. I'd like to see the Sox score 10 runs again tonight to close out the series, and then win it again next year and the year after that. Say what you want to about drama and learning to appreciate success; if I could go back to the Huskers winning 11 games easily every season and rolling up 500 yards per game, I would.

Some theorists believe sports are the avenue through which a "civilized" society replaces fights in the streets and the general removal of approved violence from the hands of ordinary people. So I suppose I ought not be surprised that uglier tendancies like incredible unfairness and lack of concern for social welfare comes to bear for me in this space.

On a complete non-sequeter, here's a question: what do you actually know about the differences between kinds of red wines, or kinds or beer, or whatever your fancy is? I'm thinking of writing about this. You might know that you prefer Pinot Noir to Merlot, but do know the differences in how they're made? I don't, and I'm thinking a lot of people might not.


Elissa said...

Re. the wine:
I really only know that different wines are made with different types of grapes (I think that's why they call some "varietals"), and since some are sweeter than others, I figure they add more sugar or don't ferment them as long, depending on the final alcohol content they want.

That's it, that's all I got. But it's sure tasty. =)

Anonymous said...

The WIne Bible by Karen McNeil is the way to go. It's super thick. it's organized by region and then variety, so it's really easy to use as a reference more than a cover to cover volume.

but really, just read the first 30-50 pages. it's a great intro to wine appreciating that's sure to knock the argyle off those boston coeds!

this is all about getting girls, right?

Anonymous said...

also, it's almost 1000 pages, less than $20 new, and has a huge font on the binding so it's easily noticed on a bookshelf.

and the double fermentation of champagne is fascinating. did you know there are 56 million bubbles in each bottle?

A.G. said...

Actually, (you might want to sit down for this),it wasn't just with girls in mind. I was just thinking of story ideas today, and then I went to the liquor store, which rekindled in my mind the thought to do something along these lines. I was just curious if my impression (that most people don't know that much about the wine they drink) was actually correct.

But yeah, I might buy the book anyway, since you brought it up.