Creating Character(s)

All of this character talk makes my gears shift, my wheels turn, and my head crave diesel so I can get as much out of each fill-up as possible. There are quite a few situations out there that cause wonderment and raise the question: can a character have character and does character cause character? Confused? Me, too.

John Wooden said that sports do not build character -- they reveal it. Others believe losing in sports reveals character… and then may proceed to help build it. And, others state that winning reveals it as well, whether one is empathetic and congratulatory to the losing side or finds success construed with semi-illegal videotaping of opponents.

The Patriots built a franchise with the mindset that putting the right individuals (or characters) together creates an overwhelming character-istic that is necessary for a championship team – proof that an outlandish or hard-to-figure character can be pulled into a scene of mutual respect, dignity, and glory without disrupting the foundation that was built. (e.g. Corey Dillon – check. Randy Moss – check.) And then the team is tainted with the taping allegations. Oops. Is the character of the franchise intact, leaving one of the characters a bit frayed around the edges like his sweatshirts?

The Red Sox patterned the same character theory. Bring in players that will fit the mold of the already established character-types. I supposed Manny was a character for a long time, then stopped being so much of one for a short time, and then couldn’t really maintain the desired sports definition and blew up his newly-found image faster than a Tyson Gay sprint. Solution: ship him out to LA where he can be near another character, one who was fresh, then frazzled, then forgotten, then fake, and then formed.

All of a sudden, Kobe Bryant is a great guy as well as the best basketball player on earth (unless you’re a Lebron fan). Did you catch the halftime “family” show during one of the NBA finals late-nights? Kobe with his loving wife and kids on a couch in their living room (actually, and not surprisingly, it looked like a familiar Jordan scene in his Rare Air book). Most recently, Kobe was interviewed about the Olympics redemption squad and its chances of winning back the gold. And his response as well as various teammates’ featured all-too-familiar chemistry terms. Is his reincarnated character shining through? (By the way, I wish Fran Fraschilla would explain the FIBA officials’ “three or four times a game you’ll scratch your head with bad calls” commentary – are they characters officiating with less than 100% character or do they have something against the US characters?).

Kevin Garnett seems to have great character. His flagrant f-bombs aside, he cares about winning, his teammates, the staff, the fans, and his friends. Didn’t he buy all of the Celtics players gifts (suits) during training camp as a token of his humanity and inner self?

I recently finished The Assist, the book about Jack O’Brien and his championship Charlestown teams in Boston. O’Brien, although a character in his own right, had a knack for not only building character out of characters, but also teaching them how to reveal it.

By definition, character entails the mental and moral qualities distinctive to an individual. We often think of someone with character as good, people who do right by others and are positive role models. Conversely, we may think of characters as people who don’t necessarily conform. When we recruit at MIT, we look for student-athletes that demonstrate character in the former realm – upstanding citizens who are coachable. Yet, I also envy the character who will take his role seriously with a bit of flavor, as long as its bearable and regularly controllable rather than distracting and perplexing (see Dennis Rodman as a “Bad Boy”, as a Spur, as a tamed Bull, and then as a, well, I’m not sure). We refer to the latter as personality and creativity, and maybe even as leadership if molded in the right way.

The bottom line: I believe that playing, coaching, and watching sports helps to develop character and build characters, all the while teaching us how to reveal our character to other characters.

Characterize that.

Tiger has a Secret?

After cruising the UK’s version of the Times online, I came across the secret to Tiger Woods’ success – confidence. Really? Could it be? It’s not his supermodel wife? The Tiger toy he totes on his driver? His firing of Fluff? His friendship with Michael Jordan? Well, maybe. Times writer Peter Dixon reviewed renowned sports shrink’s Bob Rotella’s latest book (one that sounds similar to his other gaggle of mind-tip texts) and explained that Tiger ticks with a certain arrogance that sets him up as a clutch performer. No kidding.

The question that I want an answer to is: how did Tiger DEVELOP his mental game? We know he is confident in himself, his caddy, his clubs, his life. One can see that on first strut, his focused face and straight shoulders barreling swiftly across the finest of fairways. But, when was that skill born? And what goes on in his mind during his clutch performances? Better yet, what happens when he is off? Surely, he doesn’t maintain positive thoughts 24/7. I’ve witnessed his vulgar barrages in front of fans, with the camera zoomed in on his mouth, F-bombs exploding like he just got off the phone with KG. The looks of frustration and aggression directed towards the idiot who yells “Get in the hole!” as Woods prepares to settle into his tee shot. The hammering of a club into the ground after a shank. Or the tossing of an iron as if he has no care for the fact that it will be handled as he bolts like a predator to the crappy lie.

My point is, it’s not always good, what he does during the outing. He beats himself up, if only for a few seconds - but he comes right back to smack the next shot, the next playing foe, the next course. And this is the resiliency, the confidence with which he (and Rotella) speaks and shouts - how he shines in the masterful moments. People talk of his work ethic, how he can’t put a club down – even in his living room – his drive to be the best who ever played with a constant angel - or devil - on his shoulder. And his crazed cerebral state that could be listed in the DSM when it comes to learning about the game and coming up with creative shots that may someday be of use.

The most impressive part of Tiger’s toughness has nothing to do with him internally, at least not anymore – there are instead external forces at work. Nobody consistently challenges him year to year, perhaps because they are so enthralled with his ways as we are. There exist turning points of No. 1’s in tennis, changing of the guards in team sports, and even scattered boxing champs. But Tiger has really been the best for more than a decade. As long as his confidence doesn’t take a detour (and I, like Rotella and Dixon, have a feeling it won’t), then we have another decade coming … and another book.

Advantage Nadal

Rafael Nadal versus Roger Federer. It was the greatest tennis match in history. I watched it and believe it. More importantly, John McEnroe said it. The longest match ever at Wimbledon, eclipsing the 4 hour 17 minute mark that McEnroe himself set in 1982 against Jimmy Connors. Fittingly, Mac was there to witness this one – an epic battle on the greatest grass in the world and one that dramatically crowned a winner at the last possible moment. The elements were creeping in the players’ minds all day – and evening – as they had to endure not one, but two, elongated rain delays and a flirtation with darkness that tested mental capacities of the two best male players in the world (and assuredly two of the supreme ever).

Merely a few break points separated Nadal and Federer, the former claiming more than the five-time champion’s one. After Nadal showed his Spanish muscle (6-4, 6-4) thanks to an all-around improved game that featured a sensational serve, powerful backhands, and a fresh and feisty forehand, the rains came in and twisted the tournament momentum. Federer regrouped (not to imply that he was crushed, only squeezed a bit by his ultimate foe) and took care of business with his sweet service game in the third and fourth sets, 7-6, 7-6.

The second of the temporary halts in play came in the fifth set when the players were at two games each. The natural question – who was to break first? Would it be the young and intense Nadal, who took Federer to the final round last year only to eventually succumb to Roger’s rule in London? Or would it be the man, the machine, that would hiccup and just miss his date with destiny and his sixth title at the All England Club?

Alas, Rafa made history, finding a way to hold the volatile door open with his fourth championship point on the line. Was it his youthfulness, his dozen swooshes perfectly aligned on his all-white gear, his patience and pesky time between points that allowed him to breakthrough and win the French and now Wimbledon in the same year – a feat, by the way, that had not been accomplished in more than two decades?! According to the soon-to-be new number one in the world, it was a new confidence, a sustained focus, and an ability to stay positive that separated him from the Nadal of last year. And it was also a decidedly frustrated Federer (between scarce points) that impacted the Swissman’s performance, not a sight that we are used to witnessing from the usually calm and emotionally unmoved champ.

What winners. Their respect for each other is refreshing. They are proof that a competitor can be aggressive and yearn for more titles, yet still maintain a maturity and dignity that forces even the fans and family of the loser to applaud the victor. When Nadal performed his “Lambeau Leap” into the mostly civil and serene stands, he was sincerely congratulated by both Federer’s father and longtime girlfriend in choice fashion. It was a breath of fresh air to feel that competition can continue between ultimate rivals and their camps. As McEnroe alluded to at the end of the engagement, maybe this will add to the popularity and admiration of these great athletes and their sport. It was surely a day that will go unmatched for some time.

June's Phenomenal Finishes

This month was filled with last minute, end-of-the-event drama and, quite simply, great games. Take a look at these, in no particular order -- other than the fact that Tiger's tournament takes out anyone else's performance in the psychological picture...

Tiger Woods

"Putt" it this way -- many mortals with a torn ACL don’t (or can’t) even walk. Woods waddled through a grueling four days of golf, and then took the US Open to extra innings with a Monday playoff where he survived after a lost lead. Oh – he also scampered to what he calls his greatest victory of all time with a double stress fracture in his tibia. The post-tournament surgery marked the end of his golf season. The win cemented his immortal status in sports history and downright ridiculous mental toughness. When he was told before the Open that he needed medical attention to his leg, he replied that he was going to play and he was going to win.

Boston Celtics

The C’s that played in Game 6 of the NBA Finals were the picture of perfection. They dominated with defense, offensive firepower, teamwork, energy, and focus. A thrill to watch and good for the game – defense (and offense) wins championships… and thank you to Randy Hill for his analysis. Finally, a writer who can actually breakdown a basketball game efficiently and with illuminating illustrations.

Fresno State

I don’t normally pay much attention to college baseball, but the Bulldogs deserve more attention than Shaq’s distasteful freestyle rhymes about Kobe and O'Neal's behind. Fresno St. won the CWS as the lowest seeded team in history to qualify. If they were playing in the NCAA basketball tournament, they would have been seeded 89th – so, not at all.

Rafa Nadal

Like his own blog, not much else to say at this point. He won the French and is well on his way to advancing in Wimbledon -- as long as his matches don't interfere with the Euro Cup times.

Ana Ivanovic

Good for her for dealing with the pressure of being No. 1 in the world (at least for two rounds). She shook off a horrible second go-of-it in Wimbledon and found a way to win despite her inconsistencies. Too bad she couldn’t maintain any momentum or good fortune in the next round.

Spain-Italy

I couldn’t take my eyes away from this one, partly because the soccer field looks magnificent in HD, but mostly because the match was incredible and ended in PK’s.

Germany-Turkey

The encore of the aforementioned shootout culminated with a score in the last minute to clinch the triumph.

Chicago Bulls

It wasn’t a game on the court, but in the war room and in the weeks leading up to the draft. It became more evident the Bulls would take the homegrown Rose as the day drew nearer. With his drive to be great, team-oriented mindset, his ties to the Windy City, and his exceptional explosiveness and athletic ability for a point guard, the Bulls win, the Bulls win, the Bulls win!

Now Playing: Dominance

The parallels between Rafael Nadal’s thrashing of Roger Federer and the Boston Celtics assault on the LA Lakers made me wonder…what four factors account for dominance on the grandest stage?

A. Homing device – Nadal lost ZERO sets at the French Open this year. He also completed the second most lopsided French Open Championship ever, dropping only four games to the world No. 1 and a player who I always thought of as, well, a machine. Poor Roger met his match and appeared merely mortal on Rafa’s home, his beloved clay that seems to pump up his muscles, increase his speed, and supply the Spaniard with a unrivaled level of confidence. Meanwhile, the Celtics energy in the Garden is so stimulating that despite the blown 20+ lead, they still had enough to close out game two, thanks to great shooting and sharing of the ball. They shot over 50 percent and had 31 assists on 36 field goals.

B. Halting the run – As mentioned, the C’s were able to eradicate the biggest turnaround in NBA Finals history in the fourth quarter. They also squashed a Laker run mid-way through the game and then trounced LA with a blitzkrieg of their own. And Nadal, who was nearly perfect in the first set 6-1, was able to hold off Federer in the second set 6-3, just when it looked as though the Machine was getting into his regular rhythm.

C. Holding on to the ball – Simply put, Nadal recorded only 7 unforced errors. Federer had 35. And that helped Rafa cruise to a 6-0 third set victory. The Celtics’ primary ball-handlers totaled 24 assists (Rondo had 16) and just 7 turnovers. And Rondo did not have one turnover going into the final quarter.

D. Hitting the best where it counts – Not that 2008 MVP Kobe Bryant says he and his team are going to beat Boston and not that Federer has ever guaranteed his first French finish, but look out – maybe the motivation to beat the best in the game is what is necessary for near perfect play. Both Boston and Rafa played better this time around than the last, in energy and execution. The game two Celtics would have beaten the game one team while the ’08 Nadal would have taken out the ’07 version.

By the way, new No. 1 Ana Ivanovic’s performance in Saturday’s women’s French Final should also be highlighted. She was a different player this year than last, demonstrating focus, calmness, and skill as she won in straight sets. Her conclusion: she stayed in the moment instead of thinking about results.