Cell Phones

I got a Blackberry through work several months ago, but still use my old cell phone. My two-year plan with Sprint is not up for another few months yet, and we all know how impossible breaking those contracts are. I use the Blackberry to occasionally check work e-mails, but that's about it.

I'm not big on having the latest and greatest in technology, with some exceptions when it is truly beneficial to my hobbies and such. For example, I got a SkyCaddie when they were still this mystery device seen in SkyMall magazines. But I haven't upgraded to one of the "new and improved," in color, and even satellite photo-using models. I've almost lost it on the golf course a few times, but I'm still hanging on to my old SG-2 model as long as it continues to suffice.

I also bought a bat speed meter back around 1990. It was expensive, but extremely useful. After all, how do you know if you're getting better if you can't measure it? It would be like lifting weights without ever keeping track of how heavy they are. I never had to replace that, either. It looks (and feels) like a dinosaur, but functions just fine, even though I'm retired from softball(again). I plan on training my sons with it as soon as I get it back from a friend who borrowed it for his son. I can wait; they're still pre-K.

So even when I get the latest in technology, I'm not looking to replace it just because it comes out in a new model. When my wife and I got our Samsung Instinct phones with our Sprint plan, I was less than enthused. She thought they were awesome - Samsung's version of the iPhone! I found myself wishing I had an old plain cell phone, and a smaller monthly bill to go with it.

But I will give it this: it's durable as heck. I left it on top of my car a couple weeks ago, and you can tell it got run over at least once. A nice Eagan police officer found it. It still works, although when using the touch screen, you have to press the item below the one you want. I've accidentally called (and hung up on) some folks on my speed dial, and it's not even worth trying to text or access the Net with it, but it's impressive nonetheless, and I'll stick with it until our plan expires. Then I'll probably downgrade our plan to one phone, and make the Blackberry my only mobile device.

I might even get it upgraded by my employer from time to time, but I'd be fine if not.

Bowling On TV and Movies

(Note: I originally wrote this entry in December, 2009, and forgot to publish it. Only today did I discover my error. I have added a couple bits about Chris Barnes and Brad Angelo, and Big Bang Theory to make it more timely.)

I just finished watching a lame Saturday Night Live sketch about bowling. As a long-time bowling geek, I appreciate the subject matter. But they've just committed one of my all-time pet peeves of bowling-themed shows, movies, etc., especially when it is supposed to be professional bowling, as in this skit.

It's not the lack of believability in the characters' skills. I get that they are actors and can only do their best. But when they show someone roll the ball, then switch the shot to the pins getting knocked down, and you see a "Brooklyn" strike, followed by the player's reaction of expecting it, it pisses me off.

Brooklyn strikes occasionally happen even among the pros, but whenever they do, the pro always reacts with body language as if to say, "Whew....sure got lucky on that one!" Or perhaps in a satirical cocky manner, clearly not meant to be taken seriously (e.g., Brad Angelo against Chris Barnes in the 2010 Lumber Liquidators Marathon Open, although perhaps Barnes did take it a little too seriously). Next time you watch the movie Kingpin, look for Bill Murray's character to do just what I'm complaining about. You should also see one in the recent Big Bang Theory episode in which bowling was a central theme (also Wil Weaton's second cameo, if that helps you Google or YouTube it).

They even have "bowling consultants" for these programs, which makes it all the more inexcusable. OK, maybe SNL didn't, but I know that a recent CSI episode that featured pro bowlers did. That episode had lame bowling as well, but what really torqued me off about it was the ending: A championship match finishing with one guy (the killer in the story, actually) needing to convert a 7-10 split to win, which he did, acting cocky like he "had it all along."

For you non-bowlers, that's as bad as a movie or show featuring a poker showdown that ends with one guy beating four aces with a royal flush, and then acting like he knew he'd win because he's such a better poker player.

Yeah, sure, happens all the time.

Let's Leave the Sportscasting to Sportscasters

I wasn't at the long-awaited Twins home opener at Target Field today, but I did get goosebumps watching it on TV. I loved the throwback uniforms, too.

You know what I didn't like? The air-headed banter on WCCO news tonight about the game. Like many others I suppose, I hate pretty much all of the news desk chatter cliches:

- The bad segue ("Speaking of baseball, this weather sure hit a home run today!")
- Ending the newscast with stupid remarks and fake laughter
- Non-sports people acting like they're really into it, and hip to sports as well

There's so many more, but let's try a case in point from tonight's broadcast on that third item. Early in the broadcast, Amelia Santaniello remarked, "Professional baseball was played outdoors in Minnesota for the first time since 1982." Or words to that effect. The key words I know I did not get wrong were "Professional baseball," and no, Amelia, this was not the first time since 1982 or in 28 years or however you put it. This was the first time for Major League Baseball outdoors in Minnesota.

OK, fine, that's a minor point. But I can't let this one go: cheaper-than-Paul-Douglas weather guy Chris Shaffer compared this opening day with the last outdoor home opener for the Twins in 1981. The weather was similar, so nothing much to report there (I was waiting for him to say it snowed in 1981). But then Shaffer dropped this beauty (again, I paraphrase): "You might remember a couple guys on the team that opening day: Gary Gaetti and Kent Hrbek."

Wrong again. Gaetti and Hrbek weren't on the 1981 Twins roster until September call-ups. A more interesting tidbit, not to mention accurate, would have been that Sal Butera, father of current Twin Drew Butera, was on the roster that day. Also, Twins bullpen coach Rick Stelmaszek's first year as Twins' coach was...wait for it...1981.

There was also a really bad segue tonight, but I got too worked up to remember it.

Damn Devils

I'm not a Duke hater, although I was a bit peeved over the favoritism they seemed to get at key moments tonight from the officials. What really got my goat (love that phrase) is that I was all set to pick Duke in my bracket selection this year, but went with Kansas at the last second. I changed my mind because of some of the things I had read about Duke being "overrated," and recalling some overpaid ESPN desk-sitters saying Kansas was "clearly" the best team in the tournament.

I usually get into one bracket pool at most every other year, and spend all of five minutes on it. This year I decided to read about ten minutes worth of commentary before filling it out, and despite doing awfully early on (like most), I finished 7th out of 73. Had I gone with Duke, I would have finished third, good enough to cash.

I guess those same experts may have been right that Duke didn't deserve such an "easy" bracket, but that's extremely debatable. Bottom line for me in future pools is to heed some stock market advice I read long ago, from Harvey Mackay (I think): Trust the experts...to be wrong.

I will also not throw away future entries by picking the Gophers in two upsets if I don't really believe they have a chance, now that I know I actually can do all right without the knowledge of the "experts." Those games and a Duke win would have been enough to pay for the golf on my recent trip to Branson.