Why Living in the Mountains Sucks...Especially during the Olympics

Since moving to Colorado, one of life's biggest adjustments has been to watch sports and shows on TV two hours earlier than I used to. Sometimes its not a problem, like when I can watch a "Workaholics" or "Breaking Bad" rerun the same night and be done well before midnight. Then, there's no worries about hitting the sack at a decent time. But catching sporting events before getting off work can be a challenge sometimes. It's been strange, but I've gotten used to it after two months.

Nothing could have prepared me for the Olympics, though. NBC's tape-delay strategy has officially ruined my life. Yes, the tape-delay in general is terrible. I knew that the men's 4x100 freestyle relay had lost to the Frenchies well before I actually got to watch it on TV. Everyone in the states is experiencing that. But NBC is executing such an awful tape delay that those of us in Colorado (and even worse in the pacific zone) aren't even up to date with half the U.S. on getting to see prime-time events.

According to the NBC commercials I've seen, the broadcast begins in the Eastern time zone at 7:30 p.m. (yes, everything is still advertised in terms of the east here). That would mean the broadcast would normally start at 5:30 in Colorado. Not so with the Olympics. After the 7:30 start in the east, every other time zone's broadcast begins at 6:30 p.m. For people in Chicago, this is all normal. They're up to date just like they normally would be. But for everybody further west, we can't even view already-old events with our American peers. They have to get even older.

It's one thing to hear on Twitter that France beat the U.S. in similar fashion to the way it lost in Beijing. It's quite another to hear that, then hear from everyone east of Colorado about how the race looked, and how Ryan Lochte did this, or Michael Phelps was super fast!

This delay nonsense worked out alright in 2008 for NBC. It's been a disaster in 2012. We're a different species than we were then. As the Olympics show us every time they come round, with brand new gymnasts, swimmers struggling to retain what they once had (like Phelps in the 400 individual medley) and even basketball rosters shifting (Kevin Durant wasn't on the 2008 U.S. team!), four years is a long time.

What to do when your team is in freefall

Baseball's second half has begun.

Really, we're past the midway point of the season. Going into the all-star break, the Mets were coming off an embarrassing loss at home to the Cubs, and were 46-40, a full five games past half a season.

That record of 46-40 probably should have been better, with the Mets losing four of six to the Cubs and five of six to the Yankees over the final month leading to the All-Star break. So despite the team's near-unanimous preseason projection of last place, it was hard not to feel optimistic. The team hadn't even played its best baseball lately, and it was still in wild-card contention. The surprise team of the season. "Manager of the year for Terry Collins!" they cried on ESPN.

Not so fast. The second half has begun, and the glaring fault on this Mets team, its bullpen, is making it clear the other boys from New York aren't going anywhere. What was 46-40 is now 46-44, with all four losses coming to the two teams ahead of them in the NL East, and three of the four losses coming due to bullpen inadequacy.

A sweep in Atlanta was tough to stomach, but the Mets have been streaky lately. Tuesday's game in Washington said it all though. An anemic offensive night had New York trailing 1-0 going into the eighth. Jonathon Niese had been excellent, going seven innings with one run and eight strikeouts.

Next came the bullpen, which allowed a run in the eighth to extend the deficit to 2-0. Then something amazing happened. New York scored three runs in the top of the ninth, giving itself a lead. But Mets closer Bobby Parnell, the poster-child of unrealized potential who has for some reason been given extra responsibility even though he's never been reliable, made sure he filled his quota. Three hits, one run. Since Parnell probably doesn't understand baseball, he probably felt like he had done okay. After all, those are the same numbers Niese put up in his innings.

No matter! said the Mets now lively offense, which tacked on another run in the top of the 10th. But as bad as Parnell is, his time was up. It was time to turn it over to the rest of the gang. And it was time for me to look away.

But I couldn't. Instead, it felt smarter to suffer through Tim Byrdak surrendering two hits, a walk and a run, before loading the bases with an intentional walk and handing the reins to Pedro Beato, who made sure his fourth pitch didn't quite make it to Josh Thole. Wild pitch. Ryan Zimmerman crosses the plate. Game over.

New York made it more than halfway. But the writing is on the wall now. Even that last-place projection from everyone and their mother doesn't seem far-fetched. All I can think about is that annoying phrase that sabermetricians harp on and on about, and is usually accurate.

This wasn't sustainable. Regression to the mean.

Andy's Misurray

Andy Murray played well.

He didn't collapse, he didn't choke, he didn't get in his own head and take himself out of the match.

He kept battling despite falling all over the tennis court, despite possibly having ankle and/or back issues, despite definitely being worn out.

Unfortunately for Murray, he was playing against the best of all time at more or less his best. Roger Federer was once again on fire, scorching first serves in play at a high percentage, moving like he was 25 and doing everything right at the net.

So now Federer has won seven Wimbledons, as much as any other man. He's won 17 Grand Slams, adding to his already-record total.

But this day wasn't about Federer's winning, as masterful as it was to watch. It was about Murray being 0-1 in Wimbledon finals, and how that loss led to this.



For those of us that love sports, speeches like Murray's are the second reason we come up with when we explain our love for them. The first we think of, of course, is the elation we see and feel when our favorite teams win. But this emotional response, this ache that comes from losing, but this respect of your opponent and knowledge that you couldn't have done more, is really the best.

Somebody always loses. That never feels good. Losing in a championship is often described as a worse feeling than winning the championship is a good feeling. But to lose with the class Murray does, to care as much as Murray clearly did, is what really makes this great. Where else does that happen than in sports?

My favorite part of the clip: When Murray addresses the crowd, and says this:

And last of all to you guys. Everybody always talks about the pressure of playing at Wimbledon, how tough it is. But it's not the people watching, they make it so much easier to play. The support has been incredible, so thank you.

Everybody knows Britain wants the Wimbledon trophy to stay at home pretty badly. But man, the love those fans gave Murray throughout the match and during and after his speech, even though he failed to accomplish what they wanted, was unbelievable. It was one of the coolest things I've seen in sports in quite awhile.

It was one of the coolest things I've seen in awhile. Period. And that's why sports rule.

"You were sensational today"

http://img.bleacherreport.net/img/images/photos/001/778/666/147828158_crop_exact.jpg?w=650&h=440&q=75
"You were sensational today."

With those words, the British cat doing post-match interviews at Wimbledon summed a match up, and reminded us what we used to see all the time from Roger Federer.

Federer's semifinal match with Novak Djokovic, aside from a thrilling third set, was mostly boring. One of the two players got a break, and was not broken back. For the first time in a long time, it was one of the business-as-usual matches that was routinely seen from Federer in his hay-day, when I got into tennis.

Djokovic perhaps did not play at his top level. He didn't seem to have the willingness to brawl that has made him the No. 1 player in the world Friday morning. But that's also because Federer played such a dominant match, he never could get comfortable.

It's the type of thing that doesn't happen often anymore in men's tennis. Typically when we see a phenomenal individual effort, it's coming from Djokovic or Nadal, and it comes in a form very different than that exhibited this morning. When those two are at their best, it manifests as an unwillingness to break, this sort of invincibility to losing even individual points. With Federer, it is more like total control and comfort with everything happening.

That was there today. Federer's serve was landing, his forehands were crisp, his slice backhand was landing deep and bringing him back into points. His greatness took Djokovic's fight out of the equation.

Whether that will be there Sunday to the same degree is yet to be seen, and is unlikely. But it's good to be reminded every once in awhile what the greatest really can be.