We're familiar with Tiger's tale, What about Phil?

Golf writers and analysts looking for someone to write or chat about as a follow-up to South Africa's Louis Oosthuizen surprise victory at the British Open Sunday have chosen the usual suspect: Tiger Woods. And they've been asking the same series of questions i.e. ... Why did Woods fall short again? Will he ever win another major title? Will he ever win another PGA Tour event? Will he ever return to the same level of greatness that he enjoyed before his sex-capades were disclosed last Thanksgiving?

Evidently, the sports world still hungers for any Tiger morsel they can get, despite the half-billion dollar man's fall from grace. But there's another intriguing golf story that's been neglected or ignored. And the questioning should begin with this: Why can't Phil Mickelson officially knock Woods from No. 1? He's had his chances.

Since winning the Masters last April, Mickelson's first crack at toppling Tiger came last May at the Colonial, in Fort Worth, TX. He missed the cut. Mickelson and Woods finished tied for fourth at the U.S. Open (won by Graeme McDowell) in Pebble Beach, CA., so he didn't gain any ground there. Two weeks ago, Mickelson missed the cut at the Scottish Open and on Sunday he finished 1-over par at the British Open while Woods finished 3-under.

In PGA Tour rankings released Sunday Woods remains at No. 1 with a 10.14 average point total. Mickelson is second (9.38) and Lee Westwood is third (9.15). Woods, with a game that once included an aura of shots designed by the golf gods, now plays an ordinary game. A new putter didn't help at the British Open and nothing else is likely to help as long as he plays with his soul trapped in purgatory. He thought for sure that he would have won a 15th major title by now.

"It just didn't happen, but we still have one more," Woods said.

With several events left, including the final major - PGA Championships in Kohler, Wisconsin Aug. 12-15 - Woods and Mickelson' s battle for No. 1 is still up for grabs. Expect another chorus of Tiger-can't-do-it-anymore reports if Woods goes 0 for 4 at the majors this year. And if Mickelson still doesn't rise to No. 1... maybe we'll read or hear something about that, too.

A Personal Note --- I drove roundtrip - from Washington, D.C. to Hampton, Va. - last Saturday to say farewell to a childhood friend, Ronald C. Perkins, Sr., at his gravesite services. Our fathers were among several African Americans who owned businesses in Hampton during the 1950s. His father, Andrew Perkins, Sr., owned a convenience store on Armistead Ave.; my father, Samuel R. Smith, Sr., owned the Blue Eagle Cafe, just around the corner on West Queen St.

I was three years older than Ronald, too much of an age difference for us to have become good buddies during our younger years. I knew him mainly as Andrew, Jr.'s younger brother, the kid who wasn't afraid of dead people. To no one's surprised, Ronald finished Virginia Union University in Richmond, Va. and then trained to become a mortician. In 1983 he became the owner and manager of Ronald C. Perkins Funeral Home, until his death July 13. During reflections, every speaker spoke of Ronald's integrity, sensitivity and good heart. One speaker told how Ronald once gave a homeless woman enough money to get food and a hotel room for a week.

I learned first-hand of Ronald's good heart when three of my brothers, Harvey, John and James, died in different years without insurance to cover the cost of their burials. Knowing that we couldn't handle the amount due, Ronald and his wife, Dianne, worked out payment plans with my sister, Geraldine Francis, and me, that were fair and reasonable. He oversaw each of my brothers' funerals, making sure that each of our loved ones received a decent, dignified burial. Thanks again, Ronald, for being you. I will forever be grateful. Read Full Article

Bad Time for Black Superstars in sports or politics

Troubled by a recent surge of negativity directed at one of the nation's most talented superstars? Me too.

But I'm not referring to last week's reaction to Lebron James, the lethal, shot-maker who was recently condemned by Cleveland Cavaliers owner Dan Gilbert and others as a conniving ingrate for relocating to Miami without saying a decent goodbye. I'm talking about the attempt by several Republican senators to taint the memory of the late Thurgood Marshall, the elegant Supreme Court bench-warmer, while opposing Elena Kagan as a Supreme Court justice two weeks ago.

John Kyl of Arizona said Marshall's judicial philosophy, "is not what I consider to be mainstream." Alabama's Jeff Sessions called Marshall, who died 17 years ago, "a well-known activist." Asked if he would have voted to confirm Marshall, Oregon Sen. Orrin Hatch, responded, " Well, it's hard to say."

Even some conservative Republicans questioned the senators' decision to attack Marshall, who helped end an era of racial segregation in America as an NAACP attorney with a landmark victory in the 1954 Brown vs. Board of Education Supreme Court case. “I cannot imagine who mobilized this,” says Michael Greve, an American Enterprise Institute scholar. “It makes your jaw drop."

It's baffling, indeed mind-boggling, how easily so-called 'learned' men will lope around in lunacy. This group of leaders do it, unashamedly, for one reason: to bring down a presidency. Sad to say, the GOPs racially- charged strategy seems to be working.
Consider this:

Six out 10 Americans now say they have lost confidence in President Obama's ability to lead the nation; the job market remains stagnant, and though the Democrats control the White House and Congress, they have yet to muster the votes necessary to extend payments to the nation's unemployed. Top that off with an out-of-control oil spill that already has caused serious ecological damage in the Gulf of Mexico and destroyed sea-life and the livelihoods of thousands of Americans in that area. And though BP says it's close to sealing the leak, the devastation to the area and its inhabitants will linger, probably for decades. Because it happened on Obama's watch, the incumbent shares the blame for all that goes wrong, even for those things he can't control.

Days before Obama became the nation's 44th president, Rush Limbaugh, conservative radio talk show host, gave the Republican Party its marching orders with these words: "I hope Obama fails." He has continuously stoked the flames of hatred and bigotry in his 15-to-20 million listeners and inspired many of them to show openly disdain and disrespect to the man elected to serve and occupy the office of the President.

They wear guns - tied down - at protests/political rallies and display racist caricatures of the president. During a health care protest in Washington, D.C. , they spat on an African American congressman and yelled racial epithets at others, as several Republican congressional members cheered them on. The media's reaction, for the most part, has been restrained. One wonders if such restraint would be shown if groups of blacks attended political rallies with guns wrapped around their waists.

Since Obama's inauguration, Republicans have worked overtime to make Limbaugh's dream a reality. They have voted "NO," on every major proposal presented by Obama solely because they see value in keeping the people disenchanted, angry, frustrated. They want Obama to fail, even if it means the country suffers, the country fails. By following the Limbaugh doctrine, they expect to reap a measure of victory in the mid-term elections and they probably will.

The GOP senators' slap at Marshall was more about pleasing their 'we-want-our-country-back' constituents than it was about whether Kagan is fit to sit on the Supreme Court. They know that if their base is joined by a nice-sized chunk of discontented independent-minded voters, the GOP will rise again.
But any strategy formed in deception and anchored in greed and bigotry is evil. Ultimately, it will fail.

If the economy continues to falter for the next two years and the GOP stays in lockstep with the Limbaugh doctrine, Obama will be a one-term president. The people will let him know well ahead of time if he should step aside in 2012 --- and help prepare President Hillary Clinton to take those 3 a.m. calls for the next eight years. Read Full Article

Questions regarding Woods and Wimbledon

Question No. 1. -- Will the U.S. Open field include a wounded, but dangerous Tiger on the prowl or the docile, disoriented pussy cat that gave subpar efforts in his last two outings?

The sports world probably will get a better feel for the answer to that question Thursday when Tiger Woods, playing with Ernie Els and Lee Westwood, begins a quest for his 15th major title at Pebble Beach, CA, the ocean course that he dominated in 2000, winning by a record 15 strokes.

Most golf analysts don't give Woods much of a chance, but Las Vegas bookies made Woods and Masters champion Phil Mickelson the favorites. Golf's billion-dollar-man hasn't been the same since his family life went in the dumpster after stories of his extra-marital affairs surfaced last November. After a hiatus, Woods finished fourth at the Masters in April , 19th at the Memorial, missed the cut at Quail Hollow and withdrew from the Players Championship with a neck injury.
My bet is that he'll find a way to exorcise the demons within, focus on the task-at-hand and show up Sunday wearing a shade of red, ready for his close-up as he moves a step closer to Jack Nicklaus' record 18 majors.

Question No. 2 --- Will Wimbledon ever again showcase tennis' most artistic and compelling duels: clashes between classic serve-and-volleyers and masters of the return-of-serve? Not likely. Apparently, those charged with developing the last generation of rising junior stars found it more profitable to hook them early and keep them coming by emphasizing the two-fisted backhand. Indeed, that's the only way most pre-teens can hit the ball solidly on the backhand side. If teaching the one-handed backhand continues to be a thing of the past, then the era of the serve-and-volley superstar might be lost forever.

Many of the game's greatest champions were serve-and-volleyers. Rod Laver, the only two-time winner of the Grand Slam (Australian Open, French Open, Wimbledon and U.S. Open in same calendar year, 1962 and 1969), Althea Gibson, Martina Navratilova, Arthur Ashe, John McEnroe, Boris Becker, Stefan Edberg, Pat Rafter are among the best. Pete Sampras, who won 14 major titles, including seven Wimbledon crowns, might be the last of the classic serve-and-volley superstars. Pete Fischer, who coached Sampras when he was a pre-teen, convinced him to switch from the two-handed backhand to one-hand when Sampras was 11. Though he was never a dominant junior, Sampras became one of the game's most dominant pros, holding the No. 1 ranking for six consecutive years (1993-98).

The serve-and-volley superstars not only were great tennis champions but complete tennis players. They knew when to approach the net and when not to. They hit punch volleys, half volleys, drop shots, slice approaches and lobs. And they knew when to hit each shot. Obviously, none of the above is now needed to be a great champion. Yet one wonders how many more major titles Steffi Graf might have won had she learned to approach the net each time she hit that wicked slice down-the-line, or how many more Wimbledon crowns Venus Williams might have won had she learned the serve-and-volley game and kept opponents at bay with her athleticism and strength? Would Rafael Nadal have much of a chance against Roger Federer on grass if the smooth stroking Swiss were a classic serve-and-volleyer?

The absence of superstar serve-and-volleyers at Wimbledon, the tennis world's premier event, certainly dulls its glow. Now that McEnroe has opened a tennis academy in New York, maybe we'll see a resurgence of serve-and-volleyers at Wimbledon down the road. A resurgence of that sort definitely is needed. Read Full Article

Williams sisters' resurgence is good news, bad omen

The good news for U.S. tennis fans is that the top two women tennis players in the world are compatriots No. 1 Serena Williams and No. 2 Venus Williams. They are the top seeds at the French Open, which begins Sunday.

The bad news for U.S. tennis fans is that the sisters, who are pushing 30 and have played sparingly over the last few years, are the top two women tennis players in the world. Unfortunately, their recent resurgence might say more about the quality of play on the women's tour in general and signal the continuance of a decade-long absence of young U.S. pros on the rise.

During my years as a tennis beat reporter, Billie Jean King often reminded us that dominance in tennis on the pro tours tended to move in cycles, from country-to-country. "We'll be right back up there soon," King used to promise. But because there seems to be little, if any, talent in our tennis reservoir, it is unlikely that the U.S. will remain a part of the cycle of successful countries producing great tennis champions.

Here's why.

Other countries have become better at steering a larger number of their gifted young athletes into tennis. Other countries are building better training academies, providing better day-to-day competition for their juniors. And other countries are hosting more tour events, which allow their young players to watch and mimic the world's best at work. Tennis, which never was considered a major sport in this country, has become even less significant in the last 10 years. In women's tennis, only the Williams sisters have given U.S Tennis Association (USTA) supporters something to cheer about at Grand Slam events.

Their continued presence at or near the top, despite their ages (Venus will be 30 in July, Serena will be 29 in September) and history of injuries, leave no doubt that they are the best women pros of this generation. Venus, who turned pro in 1994, has won 43 titles, including seven majors - five Wimbledons and 2 U.S. Opens. Reigning Australian Open champion Serena has won 36 titles, including 12 majors - five Australian Opens, one French Open, three Wimbledons and three U.S. Opens.

Though they only occasionally have played women's doubles at tour events, the sisters have been unstoppable as a doubles team in Grand Slam competition. Indeed, as a tandem, they have won gold medals in doubles at two Olympic Games (2000 and 2008) and are unbeaten (11-0) in Grand Slam doubles competition, notching four Australian Open titles, one French Open, four Wimbledons and two U.S. Opens.
I wrote a similar story about the decline of the nation as a tennis power as an advance to the Australian Open, and I'll probably write another to advance Wimbledon. Perhaps at some point, someone will take note and take the action needed to change the downward spiral.

The good news is that the U.S. Open continues to be one of the nation's premiere sporting events. The bad news is that it is sure to lose its lustre if no young American players come along to fill the void, once the Williams sisters move on. Read Full Article

Will Congress choose public service or politics in Health Care Vote?

Sometime soon, perhaps within the next few days, our congressional representatives will show us - by their vote on health care reform - what matters most to them: politics or public service. Let us hope that the majority will find the courage to once again move away from a history of callousness and indifference and enact legislation that will, among other things, improve the quality of life for millions of Americans, who right now have inadequate or no health care coverage.

Nearly 50 years ago, our lawmakers displayed a high degree of valor that ended an era of blatant, racial injustice. I'm confident they again will rise to the occasion simply because, as President Obama recently said, "It's the right thing to do." Strong resistance is expected, but stronger winds of change once again will help a more civil, caring America to overcome.

Too often during the past year Republicans in the House and Senate have seemed determined to defy and, ultimately, defeat any health care program backed by the White House. How else can one explain their resistance to a proposal that would allow more than 30 million Americans first-time access to health care, something that most of us take for granted?

Instead of working to find a way to provide a health care program for those in desperate need, the Republicans have used a series of bogeyman, scare tactics designed to confuse, mislead, delay and deny. So vividly do I recall similar tactics used by congressional representatives who opposed the Civil Rights legislation in the 1960s. That legislation allowed African Americans access to public facilities, something that had been long denied because of racial bias and gave African Americans the opportunity to pursue careers in politics, business, medicine, law, journalism, also long denied.

Because many southern politicians, including President Lyndon Johnson, finally mustered the courage to see racial segregation for what it was - an immoral way of life - more than 20 million African Americans and their children now truly enjoy this sweet land of liberty. For years Civil Rights foes, referred to the Negroes' demand for equality a "communist plot," concocted by Yankee liberals "meddling in our way of life."

If being a liberal means that I support a proposal that provides 30 million more Americans with health care coverage, then mark me guilty. If being a liberal means I side with those who say the health care industry should not deny or take away coverage from citizens because of so-called pre-existing conditions, call me an agitator. If being a liberal means that you are someone who believes in equality and fairness for all, I would hope that each of us would embrace that notion. That, in my mind, is what every caring, thoughtful American should do.

Even those of us who weren't raised in a Christian environment know what it means to "love thy neighbor as thyself." We know, too, from this country's struggles with other dilemmas involving morality, that we don't always hold fast to what we feel in our hearts to be right. Too many of us too often allow ourselves to travel down a more hateful, divisive road.

A form of the massive resistance to integration that was formed in the 60s now looms as a major obstacle to President Obama's health care package. And once again, health care foes are just as determined to deny to others what they so obviously enjoy.

Congress will pass an appropriate health care bill for the same reason it passed the Civil Rights bill: It's time. And while many - especially Republicans - are expected to rail against it, the forces that count will provide safe passage. Just why it will pass is best expressed by this Sermon on the Mount biblical verse: "Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness; for they shall be filled." Read Full Article

What Tiger Woods could have said

The two questions I wanted Tiger Woods to answer during his highly-anticipated 13 ½ minutes of shame were: (1) Has Elin, his wife, agreed to stay in the marriage? (2) When will you return to golf?

Woods stopped short of providing definitive answers to those questions Friday during his no-questions-please soliloquy at Florida’s TPC Sawgrass, home of the PGA. But he raised other questions that the public wants answered about his scandal-driven, career-damaging accident last November.

The most important of all is two-pronged: if Elin didn’t smack you around with a nine-iron, what caused the accident? Why do you think you can tell us what didn’t happen, and not tell us what did happen? And if you now understand that your fame and fortune shouldn’t exempt you from following the same rules and regulations as regular folks, than why not deliver your mea culpa before an audience that included working press, asking questions? If you think a question is out of bounds, say so and move on. But don’t place yourself above everyone else by skirting the rules. A heart-felt apology can not be effective if delivered in a tone of arrogance.

I’m among the millions who can’t wait to see Tiger back on the prowl on the world’s golf courses. I, too, want him to claim his title as the world’s greatest golfer by surpassing Jack Nicklaus’ record of 18 major titles. But I also want him to deal with his reality, face the music, not as a privileged man, but as a principled man, one who truly understands what he must do to regain his footing as an icon and in his personal life. Read Full Article