sometimes death provides answers, but more than anything, his death just leaves me with questions. were there any signs of depression in his writing? did acclaim and admiration leave him feeling empty? does "genius" mean a higher likelihood of unhappiness? should i be concerned because i identify so closely with some of his work? why did he choose hanging over the other options?

i'm going to spend some time reading and re-reading his work in the coming months, and i am thankful that it exists. but i doubt that i will gain any additional insight into the mindset that led him to his fate. and i don't think that i will suddenly feel like a part of me has gone missing. come to think of it, i may have learned that from reading his work.

Slate did a short piece about this back in 2006, with the explanation that this tradition serves to test whether the medals are real, but gives no history. the practice has become so prevalent that the Olympian Blog has gone so far as to create a "medal biting" label for its entries, while apparently journalists will request that winner bite their medals for photo ops. as the pictures above show, this is not a new phenomenon, and appears to transcend race, gender and national borders (and possibly sexual orientation as well). some people seem serious, while others seem to be joshing around. there are plenty more examples to study. so i guess my question comes down to, is the authenticity of the medals really in any sort of doubt? has anyone ever received a fake medal? has anyone ever chipped a tooth? is this like the kidnappee who is forced to pose with that day's newspaper to prove he is still alive? is it really so interesting to see athletes biting their medals that they need to be asked to do so? does it make me some sort of killjoy that i think this tradition is wholly lame?

OK, back to the gymnastics and the debate over how on earth anyone can believe this girl is 16.

What a disappointment, but what a wild last 20 minutes. Just when it looked like the U.S.'s goose was cooked, they came alive and were within one shot off the crossbar from advancing (thanks for nothing, Japan). Of course, they almost gave up 4 more goals at the end, but that's what happens when desperation forces such a single-minded push forward for a goal. And that desperation was the result of a careless, stupid foul early on that had the U.S. playing short-handed for virtually the entire game. That put them in a defensive mindset early as they packed everyone back and hoped they could withstand the assault. But like the Branch Davidians at Waco, it was only a matter of time before the assailing forces would break through and torch the place, as the Nigerians scored late in the first half and looked to have put it away with a second goal about 80 minutes in (that came on the heels of the kick-in-the-teeth news that the Netherlands had scored on a penalty kick). I seriously considered turning the TV off and going back to bed at that point, but I'm glad that I stuck it out, even if the end result wasn't what I had hoped. If you decided to sleep in, the full video and highlight packages should be up on NBCOlympics.com sometime this morning.

Overall, I am heartened about the prospects for the U.S. team going forward. Yes, there are some deficiencies, but it seems that many of the lapses are more mental than physical and those should be easier to correct. If Adu and Bradley had been in there it may have been a different story today, but playing the "what if" game will only make you crazy (or make me crazy at least). That doesn't mean some of Novak's decisions shouldn't be questioned, or that the players get a pass on bad play. To that end, a player-by-player breakdown follows.

STARTERS

Orozco - The goat for a mindless elbow that had him sent off early (must have gotten that from playing in Mexico). I thought he had played well in the first two games and I hope he will continue to develop for the future.

Guzan - Hung out to dry on both goals, but made some nice saves and looks to continue the strong tradition of U.S. goalkeepers. He'll even get to learn on the job with Brad Friedel at Aston Villa this year.

Parkhurst - Had been rock solid for 2+ games until he got beat along the end line on the first Nigerian goal. Fell down on the second goal as well and didn't get the necessary help from Wynne in time.

Wynne - Strong in defense and some good forays into the offensive zone, including a great run past 2 defenders that resulted in the U.S.'s best scoring chance of the first half. If only he had a little more touch with the ball at his foot, he might have picked out McBride who was wide open for a few seconds. Complicit in the second goal, which came from his side of the field.

Edu - Made the most of his opportunity during the tournament and played well again today. Moves forward well (he drew the foul that led to Kljestan's penalty goal)and becomes a target on some set pieces. I will need to watch some Toronto FC games to see how he plays in MLS.

Rogers - I can't sugarcoat it - he was awful during the first two games - giving away balls all day long and providing no crosses from the left side whatsoever. Even with the U.S. team shorthanded, I thought he should have been benched. Orozco' sending off forced him to play at left back and he had his best game of the tournament as a result. You could tell he was out of his element back there occasionally, but I thought he held his own and when he did move forward, he looked more confident and was able to do better with his possession. He's playing well in MLS and is only 21, so if he can continue to make some incremental gains, he might be a factor for the national team down the road.

Holden - Delivered some nice balls on set pieces and provided needed defensive help before subbing off. If he could have corraled that cross in the 2nd half, the game would have been tied. (If ifs and buts, were candy and nuts, etc. etc.).

Kljestan - Needed to bring it today in Adu's absence and definitely did not. Too many bad touches and giveaways that led to Nigeria moving the other way. I was not impressed with him overall with the exception of the last 30 minutes of the Netherlands game. My pessimistic side thought he would miss the penalty today as well, but he nailed it and set the stage for the exciting finish.

Szetela - I have been wanting to see more of him since the U20 world cup last year and he got a chance today with the absence of Adu and Bradley. Unfortunately, he didn't do much with it, providing no pressure on the defense and no service from the right side. He didn't do anything obviously wrong, he was just sort of there. He's playing in Italy's Serie B, which could be a stepping-stone to a larger stage at some point.

Altidore - Says his ankle is still bothering him, and was asekd to play out of position on the left flank once Orozco was sent off and Rogers moved to the back. Came out at halftime without having made much of an impression in these games (his goal was a lucky deflection). Will be interesting to see how he does in Spain in the upcoming season. He has shown he has a nose for the goal but doesn't create opportunities himself.

McBride - Must have been exhausted after being the only one forward most of the game, chasing the defense. Did not have a good tournament due to a complete lack of service. I can't remember one decent cross into the box from the run of play during the 3 games until the one in the 2nd half today that McBride missed and Holden couldn't control when it fell to his feet. Without that, McBride can't really help you. For reason I'm willing to second guess putting him out there for all 3 games, especially once Davies came on and showed something.

SUBS

Feilhaber - Seemed more interested in bitching to the refs than trying to make something happen, but the U.S. definitely played better with him out there (an effect I've noticed previously). I like him and he's got loads of potential and if he can find his way to some regular playing time with a club team after Derby County soured on him - and it looks like that might happen - then he could become a midfield force in time for the next World Cup. That's hardly a given, however.

Davies - Hat tip to JDB for mentioning Davies to me and saying he would like to see him in there. He plays in Sweden, so I've never really seen him play, but his limited time on field was an eye opener. He created all sorts of problems for the Nigerian defense and his potentially equalizing header off the crossbar was one of those jump-up-off-the-couch-and-then-cover-your-head-with-your-hands moments. So where was he the rest of the tournament?

McCarty - He's like The Little Engine That Could. He doesn't look like much (in fact, he looks like he just came from his junior prom), but he's always moving and thus forcing the opponents to pay attention to him. Given how tired both sides were by the end, his energy could have been the difference. Didn't happen but he's a great option to keep around for situations like this one.

So the U.S. will not be moving on, which is a shame. On the bright side, it means not seeing them possibly get decimated by Argentina in the quarterfinals. And more sleep for me. That's probably a good thing.

Related: Listmaker attempts to parse his feelings about the whole affair.

earlier today, the once and former Hand-washings sent out a link to 23 homemade Hall & Oates videos that are part of some contest their website is running. i kind of wish there was a video of the 7-year old me jumping around. or else video of me and the wife dancing like fools to "I Can't Go For That" at Chris Larry's wedding - something that she just reminded me of. because stuff like that would fit right in with this collection.

H&O always had a certain cheesiness to them and no matter what kind of cheese you like, it's represented here. goofy premises? try #10. cover versions featuring over-emotive closeups? #11 got it in spades. needless distracting visual effects? perhaps they'll keep you from notciing the horrific dancing in #16. deep cuts + puppets? #12 has you covered. unintentional comedy? pretty much everywhere, but #5 seemed to go above and beyond the call of duty with the woman lip synching and then jumping into her PT Cruiser and then giving a kid a ride on the handlebars of a bike and then riding in the back of a pickup truck, all to a really bad song. you really have to watch it. or watch them all, really. it's all there: bad outfits, bad wigs, bad lip synching, women in drag, glorified wedding bands, highbrow, lowbrow, Stew "the man of 1,000 voices" and a whole, whole lot of instrument miming. you'll lose an hour, but it's a fun hour. a lot of it felt like watching a Mr. Show sketch (David Cross seems like he would make an excellent Oates).

of course, then you get to vote for your favorite and for me it came down to #8 vs. #19. 8 featured a non-obvious choice of song ("Head Above Water"), a keytar, and an apartment complex swimming pool. 19 featured two women in ridiculous outfits re-purposing themselves as "The Maneaters" and doing a decent job of singing the song while adding a few new flourishes (harmonies! acoustic guitar solo!) and dancing terribly. in the end i went with #8, so here is your t.s.o.a. approved winner:

in 1993 i returned to college for my sophomore year with a rather mild case by my standards. i was back a few days before most of the rest of campus for reasons that i no longer remember, and by the time my roommate showed up, it was pretty much done with. i don't even remember what i did with those days to myself back in the halcyon days before the internet beckoned at every slack tide in the daily planner. the point of this is that that was the last time that i had poison ivy. after about 12 straight years of affliction, i managed to avoid it. this despite several backcountry camping trips in Shenandoah National Park, hikes in the woods, a summer spent as a counselor at a day camp, etc. for a while i thought that maybe my body had even built up a tolerance to it, learning that it was better to let sleeping histamines lie rather than endure a week or more of itching and furtive scratching.

so it was with some shock when i began scratching at the back of my leg yesterday, thinking that maybe i had become the victim of yet another mosquito bite (they've been particularly fond of me this year) when i started to feel multiple bumps close together in a pattern that was decidedly more regional. upon closer inspection, it appears to be confirmed: looks like i brought something else home from Fire Island besides a sunburn.

but my real point in posting tonight was baseball related because i was incredulous at the news that the Mariners are considering giving Ichiro! a 5-year, $100-million contract extension. i mean, are they on crack? are they that wowed by his performance in an exhibition game? sure, right now he's having his best season (as measured by OPS+), but he's a 33-year old, singles hitting outfielder and there is almost no chance of his being worth $20 million a year at age 35, let alone at age 38. i understand that he's the face of the franchise, but it's unbelievable that some owners in baseball are still willing to ignore all common sense and logic as they piss away money on idiotic contracts.

anyway, now she posts a video on the site to announce the winner, and of course it's a rip-off of the Sopranos finale with Bill (and a cameo by Johnny Sack), and of course it's just stilted and awful. and what ends up winning? Celine Dion! holy flipping Christ can it get any worse? yes it can because the song was not even on the original list of songs put up for vote. which means that either it was suggested as a write-in candidate (leaving yet another escape hatch open!) or that she went off the list thereby showcasing what terrible, terrible judgment she has. Celine mothereffin' Dion? whether it was chosen by Hillary and her staff or by a popular vote of supporters it just sums up everything about her candidacy that has me hoping against hope that someone will find a way to beat her come primary season.

please, Democrats, come to your senses. she is a dead end. a roadblock on the way to Progress. a ticket to a matinee of "More Politics as Usual". i understand the allure of an electable female candidate and i hate to agree with Rush Limbaugh about anything, but Hillary Clinton should not be our next president. and if you're looking for somewhere else to throw your support, might i suggest Bill Richardson? you know, someone who actually wants to get us out of Iraq (or did you forget that's why we elected all those Democrats back in November?).

if i had to choose an album to put on the list, it would have to be "Horses" by Patti Smith. it's been about 15 years since i heard it for the first time and i've only come across it a handful of times since then, but it makes no more sense to me now as a "classic" than it did then. what exactly is supposed to be good about this album? i suppose i can see it in some ways as a counterpoint to to bloatedness and superficiality of a lot of 70s music, but the music itself leaves me totally cold and her voice is completely unappealing. and i like plenty of unappealing voices. meanwhile, 30 years later, did this album really accomplish anything? these days she just shows up at rallies to sing the execrable "People Have the Power" (note to Patti: no, they don't. i believe it was sold for stock options sometime in the mid-90s). i just listened to a snippet of the reggae crap of "Redondo Beach" and i'm wondering who on earth could seriously find that appealing in any way.

as my friend Dave would say it's a broccoli album - you're supposed to like it because you've been told it's good for you but i can't find anything redeeming in it (i actually like broccoli, but you get the point). it makes me feel like i'm at someone's poetry reading or performance art piece and afterward everyone is going up to her and being like "oh my god, that was so powerful. i really got what you were doing there" and i'm hanging toward the back thinking "OK can we all just get a fucking beer now and talk about Knocked Up?"

One can imagine a new pop group deciding cold-bloodedly to concentrate commerically on appealing to one of these age groups [teenagers and young adults]. The creators of the Monkees do not deny having done so and even virtuoso pop musicians are galled by the success of a group that was brought, Frankenstein-fashion, into being without reference to musical talents. Thir songs are carefully modeled on early-Beatles style uncreatively but skillfully manipulated. Their first single, Last Train to Calrksville, flopped in Britain at first, but zoomed up the charts as soon as the Monkees begain to appear in weekly short films on television (the manner of presentation heavily indebted to A Hard Day's Night. Just now, the Monkees are idols of the pre-teenage generation and are not quite despised by those approaching O-Levels. This has been their year in the absence of anything more remarkable, and the showmanship involved has to be admired, if not the musical artistry. I suspect that their songs were written by a computer fed with the first two Beatles L.P.s and The Oxford Book of Nursery Rhymes.

now I was sort of with them at first, because I know that had I been a music lover back then with a similar attitude to my own today, i probably would have hated the existence of the Monkees the way that i loathed O-Town or any of that other "made for the lowest common denominator" stuff. but the last line seemed a bit overboard. certainly it was a much harsher accusation in 1967 when computers were more theoretically mystical than it would be today (when such a thing is probably being done as we speak). i suppose i'm biased because i like the Monkees, and loved watching the reruns of the TV show back when MTV was watchable. their reunion tour in 1987 (taking advantage of the first big 60s nostalgia trip) was the first concert i ever attended. "Weird Al" Yankovic opened and this geeky 12-year old was in heaven. but i digress.

i suppose what i would be interested to know is how the reviewer would feel if the knew that the Monkees have remained popular and that some of their songs (Clarksville, I'm A Believer, Pleasant Valley Sunday) have become "classics", even among the musical literati. i guess probably the same way i feel knowing that Smashmouth will likely be more popular in 40 years than most of the music that i love.

this reminds me of a fun game that Listmaker, Balgavy, ec and i played on the way to our fantasy baseball draft in March. Listmaker would call out a name at random from the Baseball America Prospect Handbook and then we had to guess whether they were black or white. it was pretty hard, though i think Balgavy only missed 1 or 2 total. but we were all thrown off when Joba Chamberlain came up. he's a recent Yankees draftee from the University of Nebraska. and he's a Native American. we didn't see that one coming (and in all honesty, he looks white).

The premise is simple enough. Impregnation happens when sperm travels through a pair of tubes from the testicles to the penis and hence, now carried in a viscous fluid, into a woman who loves Daddy very much. By severing each of these tubes, called a vas deferens (plural: vas deferentia), the sperm is prevented from carrying out its mission, sexual congress is decoupled from reproduction and the Pope cries in his muesli. Another victory for science and reason over nature.

that prompted me to send the link to my brother who underwent the dreaded procedure last year. (side note: his first offspring now has his own blog which can be found here and updated daily so far. proud uncle that i am, i think it's more entertaining than about 98% of what's out there, including what you are now reading.) i hadn't really talked to him about it at all, but he sent along some details. those with strong stomachs can read on after the jump. the squeamish will be better off just reading Flak's review of Domino's Brooklyn-style pizza.

Q: which NYC subway lines serve only 2 boroughs?