Thoughts on Serena and the changes in sport

The changes in life are magnified in sport, where someone new inevitably moves in while the one we knew and recognized — if not idolized — departs.

Maybe, as in the case of Serena Williams, making us consider our own impermanence as much as hers.

Wasn’t it only yesterday that Serena was the kid straight out of Compton, the younger of two wildly talented sisters? Now, with a kid of her own and well aware her best days as a tennis player are in the past, she has made a decision that may be any sporting heroine’s most difficult.

To say goodbye to the game that has been so much a part of her existence.

At least she made it herself. As opposed to Jed Lowrie. His career as a major league ballplayer may not have been as spectacular as Serena’s in tennis, but it was long, 11 years, and solid, particularly in various seasons with the Oakland Athletics.

Apropos of nothing but pertinent to so much, on Thursday the A’s designated Lowrie for assignment, in effect telling him he no longer could do what was required — less than a week since Serena, in an article for Vogue, told us the same thing about herself.

At 40 and after months recovering from a hamstring injury, Williams sensed she never would get another Grand Slam, much less any other victory. She spoke of a light at the end of the tunnel. What could be called the greatest career in women’s tennis will come to a halt at the upcoming U.S. Open.

Lowrie’s career surely already is at the end, although someone might pick him up as an emergency backup. Lowrie was hitting .180 in 50 games this season.

“It’s just the nature of the game,” said Lowrie, a consummate professional. “I kind of figured it was coming. So yeah, it wasn’t based on some conversations I’ve had. So yeah, it wasn’t a surprise.”

Is anything a surprise anymore?

The last couple of months seem to have been particularly depressing with the deaths of two icons, Bill Russell and Vin Scully, and now the retirement of another, Serena Williams. So much so quickly.

We are the victims and the beneficiaries of the modern world, of television and the internet. We saw Russell make history, heard Scully describe it. These people were not merely champions or announcers, they became family.

As the years pass, all we can do is appreciate the chance to realize what we had — and to hope there might be another Serena (or Bill Russell or Vin Scully) in the future.

For Scully, there were no borders on baseball broadcasts

Red Barber, who made one of the more memorable calls — describing Al Gionfriddo robbing a frustrated  Joe DiMaggio, “back, back, back” — often said there was something special about listening to a baseball game on the radio.

The nature of the sport, with its dimensions — 90 feet between bases is the closest man has come to perfection, it was written — allowed us to perceive what we couldn’t literally see.

So the men who announced the games became an integral part of our sporting lives. Go back, back, back to the Pacific Coast League, to Don Klein and Bud Foster, and those who sat in front of microphones always seemed as much a part of the game as those who stepped to the plate.

A familiar voice in the evening hours, relishing a great catch, lamenting a regrettable strikeout, was just what we needed before the lights were turned off.

The virtually unprecedented response to the passing of Vin Scullly, who died Tuesday at 94, is hardly a surprise.

He was employed by the Dodgers, from the 1950s, when he left Fordham and joined Red Barber. Yet there are no borders on airwaves. Or on respect.

It was 1958 when baseball changed, the New York Giants moving to San Francisco, the Brooklyn Dodgers shifting to Los Angeles. There was nothing at all wrong with the Giants’ announcer, Russ Hodges.

There was something fortunately right with Scully, who teamed with Jerry Doggett.

It was my junior year in college at UCLA, and for a summer job I sold concessions at the L.A. Coliseum, hardly the old ballpark but a 90,000-seat football stadium converted to baseball, where the left field screen was 250 feet away and the right field fence was 400 feet away.

Blithely I scrambled through the Coliseum, the cries for my wares — “Ice cream here” — all but drowned out by the classic voice of Vin Scully.

Did the good folks in Los Angeles not have enough confidence in their ability to watch a major league ball game without being told what they just saw? This was the new age of transistor radios, and those little babies were everywhere.

Finally Dodgers management succumbed to reality, erecting small loudspeakers in right field. No, it wouldn’t have worked in Boston, but this wasn’t Boston.

Up in the Bay Area, we’ve had Lon Simmons, Hank Greenwald and Jon Miller, clever and astute. But lacking the elements that contributed to the attractiveness of Scully — a base population in the millions, a then clear-channel radio network and an audience trapped in southern California traffic.

In L.A., you grew up listening to Scully almost more than you did idolizing Sandy Koufax. Northern Cal didn’t have that sort of problem. There was only Willie Mays.

It’s hard to say which was a better baseball area, Los Angeles or San Francisco. For sure, the Bay Area never set up speakers to hear what you were watching.

The sudden and explosive acquisition of Juan Soto by the Padres brings to mind the Jim Murray line about the troubles of a baseball team in San Diego: “the Pacific to the west, Mexico to the south and Vin Scully to the north.”

The man was great, even if his calls overwhelmed my yells to sell ice cream. Baseball will miss you.

Since days at USF, Bill Russell was his own man

When I arrived in the Bay Area in the mid-1960s, it was notably provincial. Joe DiMaggio remained the region’s favorite ballplayer over Willie Mays, which was a mistake.

Not that Joe wasn’t great. It’s just because Willie was greater but unappreciated by the newer generation.

And Bill Russell, who had grown up in Oakland and led the University of San Francisco to championships, seemed to be the only basketball player who mattered.

That, we learned in retrospect, was not a mistake.

Russell, who died Sunday at 88, was a man apart, on the court and off. He changed the sport. In time, he also would change social viewpoints.

Choices remain subjective. How we judge remains no less a factor than who we judge. Michael Jordan invariably gets the votes as the best in history. There was nothing he couldn’t do.

Which brings us to Russell. All he could do was win. Everywhere and anywhere.

The boy who in the late 1940s moved with his family from Louisiana was gangly and unskilled. But tall enough, so he earned a place, or at least a temporary one, on the McClymonds High basketball squad.

Maybe William Felton Russell couldn’t shoot, but he would keep others from scoring, especially in time at USF, where he teamed with a kid from San Francisco’s Commerce High, K.C. Jones.

The Dons would win back-to-back NCAA championships (1955 and ’56) and a record 60 straight games. At UCLA, a young coach named John Wooden kept getting asked why he couldn’t get past USF in the regionals. The brief answer: Because of Bill Russell.

Genius is a misused word in sports. But it is appropriate in the case of Arnold (Red) Auerbach, who as coach and GM of the Celtics understood what Russell could provide and maneuvered to get him in the ’56 draft.

Former Senator Bill Bradley, who faced Russell with the Knicks in the 1960s, viewed him as “the smartest player ever to play the game and the epitome of a team leader.”

“At his core, Russell knew that he was different from other players — that he was an innovator and that his very identity depended on dominating the game,” Bradley wrote in reviewing Russell’s remembrances of Auerbach in “Red and Me: My Coach, My Lifelong Friend” (2009) for The New York Times.

Until near the end, Russell was involved in a series of confrontations. In 2007, Russell returned to the USF campus. According to Jerry Crowe of the Los Angeles Times, Russell “stormed off after being told he would  have to pay his own way because his scholarship had expired.

“Dominating the game, indeed. Whatever was the source of Russell’s frustration in any phase of his life is part of what pushed him to excel, if not satisfy himself.”

Russell’s allegiance was to his teammates, not to the city of Boston or to the fans. He refused to sign autographs for fans or even as keepsakes for his teammates. When the Celtics retired his No. 6 in March 1972, the event, at his insistence, was a private ceremony in Boston Garden. He ignored his election to the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame — situated squarely in Celtics country, in Springfield, Mass. — and refused to attend the induction.

“In each case, my intention was to separate myself from the star’s idea about fans, and fans’ ideas about stars,” Russell said in “Second Wind: The Memoirs of an Opinionated Man”, written with Taylor Branch and published in 1979. “I have very little faith in cheers, what they mean and how long they will last, compared with the faith I have in my own love for the game.”

The faith placed in Bill Russell from his days at McClymonds and USF was well deserved.

A man named Smith makes history

ST. ANDREWS, Scotland — The words rolled down the 18th fairway of this famous course on a particularly historic occasion.

It was Martin Slumbers, chairman of the Royal and Ancient Golf Club, with the annual presentation of the Open winner, “the Champion golfer of the year.” Enlightening words for Cam Smith.

Depressing words for Rory McIlroy. Rory had gone eight years without winning a major championship, and he thought — everybody thought — he had this one, holding the lead until the final 18. But golf can be nothing but sorrow.

Smith, the 28-year-old Australian, did what champions do. He came from off the pace and shot an 8-under-par 64. His playing partner, Cameron Young, shot a 65. McIlroy, the presumptive winner, and certainly from the cheers, the fans’ choice, shot a 2-under 70.

“I didn’t make any putts today” said McIlroy, which is one of the reasons he has had his drought in trying to get his fifth major.

“I’ll be back,” he told SKY Sports, a bit grimly. McIlroy finished second in the Masters and has played well all year, but couldn’t get over the mountain.

Smith is not exactly a surprise. He has won several tournaments including The Players — if that is not a major, and it isn’t, the golfers consider it the next best thing.

Perhaps, because this Open with all the fanfare was at The Home of Golf, there were expectations for a notably exciting champion.

Indeed Smith, with his floppy hat and Australian savoir faire, may be one of the coming greats. On a day that began with light showers and then changed to typical Scottish gloom, Smith showed his talent and persistence.

He has been a comer for a couple of years, and now he can be considered to be a full force. Any Open gives one cachet, and taking the 150th at St. Andrews unquestionably gives the golfer a special place in the game.

The strength of Smith’s game is in his putting. Anybody who can get the ball into the cup is going to be a factor.

“All the hard work we’ve done the last couple years is really starting to pay off,” Smith said to his team, with the trophy in his grip and the tears starting to come. “And this one definitely makes it worth it.”

But Smith, after recomposing himself, made it clear that he intended to put the claret jug to good use, although not at the moment for claret.

“I’m definitely going to find out how many beers fit in this thing, that’s for sure,” he said.

How come Australia, a wine country, drinks so much beer?

Not a good ending for Tiger

ST. ANDREWS, Scotland — This is the way it too often ends, not with a bang or a whimper but a farewell that couldn’t come too soon.

Tiger Woods entered this landmark British Open with the belief — or was it merely the hope? — that a return to the Old Course, where he had won the Open, where he emphatically reminded us of his greatness, would be a step back in time.

But others own pro golf now, and surely this will be Woods’ final Open, except perhaps in a ceremonial role. It is not quite a passing of the torch — no one out there can carry the flame and the game as Woods did — but a sad concession to reality.

The thinking was that a flat links land course, where the ball rolls and rolls, would give a 46-year-old a chance against the 26-year-olds. But Tiger began with a double-bogey on the first hole after hitting into the burn that fronts the green and finished with a 6-over 78.

Woods was unable to take advantage of the favorable conditions, overcast and almost no wind. The tone was set right away on that first hole, leading to the first of five bogeys.

He finally made his only birdie of the day at the par-5 14th, but he'll go to the second round a daunting 11 shots behind the clubhouse leader, Dustin Johnson.

In other words, Woods' main priority on Friday will be making the cut. That's a far cry from his previous performances at St. Andrews, where he won the claret jug in 2000 and 2005.

Woods walked off the course tied for 133rd, having bested only two other players to complete their rounds. He was tied with 65-year-old Tom Watson, who had a 76 in his final British Open. It is a trifle ironic that Rory  McIlroy, who is supposed to be the next Tiger, shot a 4-under 66, 12 shots lower than Woods.

"Guys have been shooting good numbers," Woods said. "Unfortunately, I did not do that." Instead, he was headed for a missed cut for the third time in his last four majors.

At least after his ultimate putt, Woods displayed class and respect, doffing his white hat with the familiar TW logo to the fans who stayed the course, after 9 p.m.

The celebrated start Thursday of the 150th British Open gave way to Cameron Young making his debut with an 8-under 64 for a two-shot lead over McIlroy, and Tiger Woods making what could be his last competitive appearance at St. Andrews a short one.

His score would indicate as much. Woods ended his round by taking three putts through the Valley of Sin for a par and a 78, his second-worst score in his Open career.

Woods will try to avoid leaving early from St. Andrews for the second straight time.

The Old Course gets Tiger talking

ST. ANDREWS, Scotland — This was a golfer of our time embracing the game and the course for all time, a man aware of his past and, as all of us, uncertain of the future. But for once seemingly delighted to tell us what he feels.

Tiger Woods and the Old Course, so much history and a perhaps a wee bit of mystery, coming together for the 150th Open Championship.

It was as if Babe Ruth had emerged for a World Series game at Yankee Stadium, a man of the past unworried about the future, regaling us with nostalgia of the good times and the great rounds.

You know he’s ready for the Open, which he won twice here — and even at age 46, and after the injuries from the car crash, has an outside chance to win again.

We didn’t know he was so willing to be part of golf’s past, an aging player who grew up idolizing the names and locations that make golf the beautiful and compelling activity it has become.

“This is where it all began for me as an amateur,” said Woods. “My first chance to play in The Open Championship was here. I'll never forget I played with Ernie Els and Peter Jacobsen the first two days. We had a chance to play with some greats in practice rounds — Freddie Couples, Raymond Floyd, Ollie, (Jose Maria Olazabal), Bernhard Langer.

“I had a great time as a young little kid, and they showed me the ropes of how to play this golf course and how many different options there were. It was eye-opening how this golf course can play as easily as it can be played and also as difficult it can play just by the wind changing.”

Maybe no Scot ever said “Nay wind, nay rain, nay golf,” but those challenges of nature are so much a part of the game along the restless North Sea, the weather cannot be ignored.

Nor can that final walk on the bridge that spans Swilcan Burn on the Old Course’s final fairway.

Every great has stopped there to pose for a minute or so before finishing what he knew would be his last round at St. Andrews. For Tiger, it’s only speculation. He could return. He probably won’t.

“I have a photo in my office when I first played my first practice round, me sitting there, and it means a lot,” he said. “I mean, the history and the people that have walked over that bridge.

“(Monday) to have Lee (Trevino) and Rory (McIlroy) and Jack (Nicklaus) and just stand there with them, that's history right there. The telecast would come on at 5 a.m. on the West Coast to get a chance to watch them play and to see them hit the shots, and listen to Lee Buck talking about the small ball playing over here and what he used to do with it. These are things that makes it so special.”

Woods was asked about the LIV tour, and he dismissed the idea. He remains loyal to the PGA tour, which has enabled him to become a billionaire.

Having shown his appreciation for golf’s history, Tiger was asked if he knew that the new kids, now in their 20s and 30s, would now be as enthusiastic as they went along.

“In what way?” Woods wondered. “I'm trying to understand. The fact that you love the history of the game, and the modern kid probably couldn't tell you the first thing about who won what before Tiger Woods. Well, I think it's different. I guess nowadays you can just look it up on your phone. And you don't have to go to the library and try and figure out who won what. The world has changed dramatically. The history of the game is certainly something that I've taken to the challenge.”

There is not much to challenge when it comes to Tiger Woods.

Djokovic gets a another at Wimbledon

WIMBLEDON,  England—Maybe Novak Djokovic should be recognized as the superior tennis player he has become. Maybe he already is.

But his stubbornness against being vaccinated and subsequent expulsion from Australia over the issue  made many ignore the game he plays and instead concentrate on his viewpoint.

When on a gloriously warm Sunday, Djokovic defeated Nick Kyrgios, 4-6, 6-3. 6-4, 7-6 (7-3) he became the fourth man to win Wimbledon at least seven times.

Two of the others you probably know-- Roger Federer—with eight-- and Pete Sampras. The other. William Renshaw was back in the 1800’s. Yes. They had racquets back then.

What Djokovic, 35-year-old Serb, has along with a forehand and backhand, is remarkable mental toughness.

How many other Grand Slam tournament winners ever have  been deported as was the man known as the Joker?

Or have the fine relationship with an opponent he defeated?.

Kyrgios, a loose cannon at times, was a heavy underdog to pal Djokovic in his first Slam tournament final.

“I was just happy with the results,” said  Kyrgios. “With any luck at all I’ll be back here again.

Djokovic, properly magnanimous after his 21st  win in a Slam tournament, one fewer than Rafael Nadal, followed that with “You’ll be back. You showed you deserved to be here. You’ve been called a talent, now you’ve lived up to that.”

Kyrgios, the 27 year-old Australian more famous (infamous?) for stunts he pulled than victories produced, seemed stunned by Djokovic’s comments

Then, as the Serb stood alongside Kyrgios, and with the Duchess of Windsor not far away in the  Royal Box, Djokovic—by now everyone should know the “D” is silent—went on.

What he didn’t say, however. or more accurately, didn’t ask, was  How many other Grand Slam tournament winners ever have been deported?

He went Down Under and never got see a kangaroo or a practice court.

Remember the Aussies chased him away at the border, which is international rudeness which no matter whether an individual has received Covid-19 vaccine or Or have the fine relationship with an  opponent he defeated?.

Kyrgios, a loose cannon at times, was a heavy underdog to pal Djokovic who was in a Slam tournament final.

“ I was just happy with the results,” he  told the Centre Court crowd. Djokovic was even happier. He lost the first set, but then swiftly and surgically, demonstrated qualities that made him one of the game’s all time best.

Djokovic,’  you showed you deserved to be here. Your talent is great. Oh, I said too many nice things about you. I better stop because I don’t want to ruin our relationship.

“When I was a boy in 2002, I watched Pete Sampras in Wimbledon and I asked my dad to buy me a racquet. And I learned to play on grass courts. I love this place. And Wimbledon certainly has returned the affection.

“He did everything so easy,’ said Kyrgios. “It was so impressive.

 As Wimbledon wins are supposed to be.’

Wimbledon: from one Boris to another

WIMBLEDON, England—Wasn’t that just like a British male politician to try and steal the attention from the women? You hear during Wimbledon a guy named Boris is making news you presume it is Boris Becker.

Becker won Wimbledon three times (and six Grand Slam tournaments overall) in the 1980s, but right now he’s in prison, having been sentenced in April to two years for violating United Kingdom bankruptcy laws.

Which is a bit more serious than a double fault at match point. The other Boris, British prime minister Boris Johnson, merely was chased from office, as had been duly predicted. The unfortunate part, if one cares about tradition, and what arguably is the world’s most important tennis event, is the ouster that took place Thursday, a few hours before the Wimbledon ladies semifinals. 

Ons Jabeur of Tunisia, who’s been playing well for awhile now, defeated Tatiana Maria of Germany,  6-2, 3-6, 6-1, while Elena Rybakina of Kazakhstan, beat former  champ Simona Halep of Romania, 6-3. 6-3.  The finals are Saturday.

Before that in this wild, Wimby another individual often in trouble for lesser things, such as creating laughs, Nick Kyrgios,  the Aussie, is accused of assault in his home country, a story even bigger in the land of Oz than Kyrgios heading to his first Slam semifinal.

Quarterfinal showdown with Cristian Garín of Chile that he is favored to win, and less than 24 hours after he survived a five-set challenge from the American Brandon Nakashima on Monday.  

That match was largely uneventful by Kyrgios standards, mostly lacking the battles with umpires, the racket smashing and even the spitting in the direction of fans that often occur when Kyrgios signs up for a tournament.

After the 4-6, 6-4, 7-6 (2), 3-6, 6-2 win Monday, Kyrgios spoke of how good he felt, how he had reached a kind of equilibrium in his life after years of turmoil and how he has been able to enjoy moments on the tennis court in a way he rarely has in the past.

“That’s probably the first time in my career where I wasn’t playing well, regardless of playing Centre Court Wimbledon, fully packed crowd, I was able to just say, ‘Wow, look how far I’ve come,’ to myself,” he said. “I was bouncing the ball before I served. I really just smiled to myself. I was like, ‘We’re here, we’re competing at Wimbledon, putting in a good performance mentally.’”

Hours later, news broke in Australia that Kyrgios had been charged with one count of common assault related to an incident with an ex-girlfriend, Chiara Passari, according to The Canberra Times and a statement from the police. Kyrgios is scheduled to appear in court on Aug. 2.

“While Mr. Kyrgios is committed to addressing any and all allegations once clear, taking the matter seriously does not warrant any misreading of the process Mr. Kyrgios is required to follow,” Pierre Johannessen, a lawyer for Kyrgios, said in a statement Tuesday evening.

As they used to ask, “tennis anyone?”

Rafa concedes to his body, withdraws

WIMBLEDON, England—Rafa Nadal kept beating everyone this spring and summer as he chased wins at the Grand Slams—even hinting he might hit the jackpot, a true Grand Slam, victorious in all four majors in a calendar year.

But one opponent proved unbeatable. His own body.

Just before dusk descended on the All England Club on what was a surprising Thursday, Nadal withdrew from Friday’s Wimbledom semifinal against Nick Kyrgios.

It is an unimaginable blow to the tournament and to Nadal.  Also a great break to Kyrgios, who was in the headline this week for another reason, charged with assault in Australia.

“I have a tear in the stomach muscle,” Nadal told the media in a hastily called conference in the Wimbledon interview room. As everybody saw (Wednesday), I have been suffering from a pain in the abdomen. I think it is obvious if I kept going it is going to get worse.”

Nadal, 36, has struggled with injuries throughout his magnificent career in which he became the all-time leader with 22 Slam titles.

Doubtful as it may have appeared, Nadal had the opportunity to become the first male to win the Grand Slam, taking all four in a calendar year. That last was accomplished in 1969 by Rod Laver, who watched at Centre Court, Wednesday night when Rafa outlasted Taylor Fritz in five sets.

During that quarter-final, Nadal’s family and advisors, aware of his condition, kept yelling and waving at him to quit the match. Courageously, he kept playing..

Thursday, after trying to hit serves in a practice session it became apparnent Nadal would have to step aisde. He said he realiized he could not play two more rounds this tournament, if needed, and the U.S. Open in August with any chance of winning.

His departure is yet another shock to Wimbledon, missing some stars because of Covid-19 quarantining.  

  “I always said, for me the most important thing is happiness more than any title. Everybody knows how much effort  I put in to be here. But I can’t risk that.”.  Not at his age. Not at any age.

“I believe I can’t win two matches under these circumstances."

No one could remember a major tennis championship coming to such a strange—and as Nadal said—sad conclusion.

In the morning Boris Johnson, prime minster of Great Britrain was forced to resign. A few hours later, one of the all-time stars of tennis conceeded to his battered body.  

Where he or the sport goes from here we only can guess.

Rafa leaves Fritz crying

WIMBLEDON, England—On an historic afternoon in the 100th year of Wimbledon’s famed Centre Court, the young Southern Californian and the not-so-young guy from past and present played a match for the ages.  And for the opportunity to reach the semi-finals of a tennis tournament whose very name, Wimbledon implies the greatness on display Wednesday.

The older guy, Rafael Nadal, once more showed the courage and consistency which has awed everyone and now at age 37 3-6, 7-5, 8-6 z91—4 under the new tiebreak system for majors.

The quarterfinal lasted 4 hours, 21 minutes and kept intact Nadal’s chance to expand his record to 23 and 0, remained unbeaten in 23 grand slam tournaments this year..  Rafa has the opportunity to win the  Grand Slam championships and even—less realistically perhaps—to win the actual Grand Slam, all four majors in a calendar year.

That last was accomplished in 1969 by Rod Laver, who Wednesday, wearing one of those huge straw hats was in a seat at Centre Court.

Fritz, 25, who has been been described as one of the future US  tennis greats, beat Nadal in the Indian Wells final in March.

Rafa was injured. He apparently was hurt Wednesday but refused calls to leave the match . 

A doctor gave Nadal some pills; the trainer tried to relax the muscle.

“They can’t do much,” Nadal said. “Nothing can be fixed when you have a thing like this.”

When action resumed, Nadal clearly was compromised. It was hard not to think: Might he give up?

Nadal acknowledged that went through his mind. Fritz did, too.

“It definitely made me kind of think. I kind of stopped being as aggressive,”  said Fritz. “I feel like I let it kind of get to me a little bit. It left me crying.”

Tennis thrives on oddballs, not bullies

WIMBLEDON, England — You want a sport of oddballs, characters, there’s baseball, Jim Piersall running the bases backwards. Or there’s tennis. Ilie Nastase was known as “Nasty” for more reasons than his given name.

Both games are virtually timeless. And what is tennis but hitting a ball back and forth across a net? Yawn.

Which is where Nick Kyrgios enters, and apparently from the comments, also entered Stefanos Tsitsipas’ head.

There was history the past 24 hours, although maybe not the sort you would expect at the All England Lawn Tennis and Croquet Club.

Alas, it was the official termination or Middle Sunday. Yes, there have been rounds on four other Sundays since the club was created in the 1870s (and I was here for all four), but they were makeup calls, as it were, replacements for rainouts.

The Middle Sunday break gives a day off to both the grass courts, already turning a bit yellow, and the residents of Wimbledon, Borough of Merton, who live full-time in the area. It was a glorious tradition. But as is the case with so many other traditions, it fell victim to television revenue.

On this Sunday, Frances Tiafoe, the 24-year-old from Maryland, fell victim to the Belgian David Goffin, 7-6 (3), 5-7, 5-7, 6-4, 7-5.

The match went 4 hours, 36 minutes, the first set 70 minutes. Unlike Kyrgios’ win over Tsitsipas 24 hours earlier, there was respect and high praise from both sides.

“It was an unbelievable match,” said Tiafoe. “We both definitely left it out there.”

Contrast those comments with those from Tsitsipas, who condemned his opponent as a bully.

Wow. We’ve heard Kyrgios described as a jokester. As a goofball. As an entertainer. Even as a pest. But a bully? What did he do to take a couple of backhand swipes at his Greek foe, rather than the ball?

“It’s constant bullying,” was the Tsitspas contention. That sounds like something you’d hear in a third-grade class, not from a first-class tennis player.

He said Kyrgios had an evil side. “He was probably the bully in school. I don’t like bullies.”

He doesn’t like losing either, and a third-round defeat in what some say is the biggest tournament of any year must have been particularly disappointing. But griping is unneeded.

“I’m not sure how I bullied him,” said Kyrgios. “He was the one hitting balls at me.”

That’s a longtime tactic in tennis. But it goes with the territory, doesn’t it? You have to place shots where the other guy can’t handle them.

Tennis thrives on controversy. John McEnroe, Jimmy Connors, Serena Williams hollered and played their way into our thoughts. Serena’s blowup with the chair umpire in the 2018 U.S. Open lives on. Of course, screaming doesn’t equal or surpass winning.

That’s part of the reason for the outbursts from McEnroe.

Connors and Serena received so much attention. They won Grand Slam tournaments, Williams all four. Kyrgios still is trying to win one. But if nothing else, he did outlast Tsitsipas.

“Apart from me just going back and forth to the umpire,” Kyrgios said, “I did nothing against Steph.

“But I’d be pretty upset too if I lost to someone two weeks in a row. Maybe he should figure out how to beat me a couple more times and then we can talk.”

Bully that.

The making of an American tennis star

WIMBLEDON, England—The story may have been told, but it never gets old. Or less fascinating. His imigrant father helped build a tennis complex. Now Frances Tiafoe has built himself a game.

That’s the so-called American way, isn’t it?  Just keep plugging away—or in tennis, hitting away—and who knows what will happen.  You might advance to the third round of The Champioships which everyone from Chelsea to Cornwall knows is the very brief and British way to refer to Wimbledon.

For a few years,  Tiafoe and Taylor Fritz, both 24, have been called the great hopes of U.S men’s tennis (everybody who remembers Pete Sampras, Andre Agassi, Michael Chang, Jim Courier and Andy Roddick. Please wave).  They ain’t Rafa, Roger or Novak, and never will be, but they’ve been winning at Wimbledon this summer, and that’s progress of a sort.  On Saturday, Fritz defeated Alex Molcan, 6-4.6-1, 7-6. A day earlier, Tjafoe beat Alexander Bublik,  3-6, 7-6. 7-6, 6-4. You might expect Fritz to be a tennis star. His mother and father were champions.  But not Tiafoe, whose parents came to America to escape a civil war in Sierra Leone. 

Tiafoe’s dad needed work after arriving in the U.S.  He took a job as a day laborer building the National Junior Tennis Center in Maryland. Frances, allowed to play when construction was done, had an an opportunity.  He already had the talent.

The early years were difficult. Frances developed quick enough in high school, winnng titles, but he struggled as a young pro, and there was added pressure because of his background. Finally, success—confidence and yes arrogance.

 “I could have lost,”  he said, “but I wanted to win. Yeah there is always a bit of pressure in the Slams.”

For an American man it’s more than a bit. The nation, the networks would love a U.S. winner at Wimbledon  Or the U.S Open. A country of 350 million and we can’t  now and then win either of the two biggest tournaments on the globe? Please.

The danger is the young (top) guns will force the issue.  But if they can win at Indian Wells and Miami, why can’t they win at the All England Club or Flushing Meadows.

Apparently, Tiafoe thinks the same way. “I mean I liked grass when I played juniors here,” said Tiafoe.

So it’s not the surface that stops hm (or maybe the other Americans) it’s the competition.  Does one Spaniard who tugs at his wrist and headbands have more firepower than thousands of Americans?. It looks that way. 

Tiafoe was asked if at last year’s U.S. Open he said “There is no Nadal here, (injury,  no Federer here (retirement) the guys in the locker room are thinking, ‘Why not me?’ Is there that same sensibility here this year?”

Tiafoe said  there was although true Nadal is here, and Rafa can win any time anywhere, even on grass, his least favorite court. 

“There are opportunities to be had,” agreed Tiafoe. ”Guys are –I mean the game is shifting.  Even with those (veterans) playing, guys are beating them. You saw what  (Carlos) Alcaraz and Fritz did at Indian Wells.

“We are damn good.” insisted Tiafoe about the American men. “Playing great tennis.We feed off each other.  I think we believe can do even even better.”

Until one of them wins Wimbledon or the U.S. Open the words don’t mean a thing.

A Rafa Slam would be great for sports

WIMBLEDON, England—A third-round match against a player who already won two matches. Could Rafael been more concise about his next opponent at Wimbledon?

Or more understated?

But Lorenzo Sonego is special. . He’s a barrier, a blockage on a possible pathway to history—the man next in line to derail a rare chance for that most mystical of tennis achievements, the Grand Slam.

Only a year ago Novak Djokovic stood at the gate. He had won the Australian Open, the French Open (or if you choose Roland Garros) and Wimbledon. He was the top seed in the U.S. He was favored. Hew lost to Daniil Medvedev.

Grand Slam. Two words reflecting success in three sports, baseball, golf and tennis, if in varying degrees; home runs with the bases loaded are hardly unique, especially in this era when everyone swings for the fences (and too often strike out).

There have been a few in tennis the first in the men’s game in 1938 by Don Budge, who grew up in Oakland and for whom the courts  in Bushrod Park now are named; the last in by Rod Laver ln 1969.

The term comes from cards, contract bridge, winning all the tricks. It transitioned to sports when golfer Bobby Jones in 1930 won the U.S. and British Opens and U..S. and British Amateurs. Then apparently Allison Danzig of the New York Times applied it  to a aweep of the tennis titles.

In the days before their publications demanded frequent Twitter and Facebook updates, sports writers had time for plenty of bridge or poker.

The issue here, or course, is how Nadal and the men he faces in this Wimbledon—Djokovic won again Friday—play tennis. So far Rafa has been effective if not  impressive.

 As you know, Nadal is 37  coming off a foot injury and has won more of the tournaments comprising the Grand Slam, 22, than anyone else.  Yet, he remains noncommittal about maybe taking all four in this calendar year. Properly so.

The fact he won in Australia ln February on a hard court, in  Paris ln June on  a clay court might not mean much when he’s on a grass court in England in July.

Or it could mean everything. The hope is to adapt to the change in surfaces  and opponents.

The second week of this Wimbledon could be a particular joy,  assuming Nadal makes it that far—and with his skill and the vocal support of a crowd lacking the semi-retired Roger Federe, Nadal should, Rafa  can use it. sportrs can use it.  We just had the jolt of Steph Curry. How about a nudge from Nadal?

Part of our fascination with Wimbledon is it fills a gap. The NBA and NHL seasons are finished. The NFL is yet to begin. Baseball is trapped in its mid-summer ennui. 

Nadal might not seem up to the task, But he has surprised before. He was reluctant for a while to compete at Wimbledon,  conceding he never could adjust the surface.

Then at last he entered—and beat Federer in one the classic finai matches.

Nadal is mentally tough (not that the others are not. He was hurting at Roland Garros, and the doubterd wondered if he would make it to the end. It turned out he was the end. But he’s not thinking of reaching the end.

“It’s normasl that folks talk abour retirement of great athletes." Nadal.”told a gathering of media unconcerned with his serve or forehand.

“My philosophy is that a  couple weeks ago I was close to it. Now I don’t feel that way. I mean. Personally  what I love to see is

Tiger Woods.  Now I’m not seeing Tiger Woods.”

 We’re stlll seeing Rafael Nadal, and it would be great to see him continue his run for the Grand Slam.

Plaque still at Wimbledon, and so is Isner

WIMBLEDON, England — The plaque remains at Wimbledon, and three rounds into this year’s tournament so does John Isner. Not that he won’t always have a presence here, as much in myth as memory.

He is 37 now. Isner, nearing the end of a career that has produced highlights — that plaque? Wimbledon doesn’t celebrate the ordinary — but never a Grand Slam championship.

That glorious reward remained a possibility, albeit a distant one. But if you’re in the draw, and Isner definitely is, facing the young Italian Jannik Sinner on Friday, anything can happen.

After all, on Wednesday Isner, as always his billed cap turned backwards like he was a baseball catcher, stunned both Andy Murray and an almost obnoxiously but understandably one-sided crowd at Centre Court with a 6-4, 7-6, 6-7, 6-4 victory.

“I did some good things,” Isner said in summary. One of those was defeating Murray for the first time in nine matches.

As pointed out, in a sport where it’s one person against another head to head and shots that normally clear the net miss it by inches, anything can happen.

So much of life is timing. As is so much of tennis. Isner is 6-foot-9, as one might suppose able to angle and power serves (as much as 157 mph, they say) out of sight.

If he had arrived at Wimbledon in the early 1980s, when grass court tennis was a serve-and-volley competition, when Boris Becker and Stefan Edberg were boring and impressing us, who knows how many titles he might have won?

But the pooh-bahs decided there had to be an ace and a reason for ground strokes. So the famed lawns at Wimbledon and the balls both were redone. Sure, there still are aces, but there also are drop shots, and when the guy on the other side of the net is as tall as an NBA center, you hit low and keep your hopes high.

Isner, who grew up in North Carolina where basketball reigns, went to Georgia to play tennis, and could hit the serves and overheads, if never the jackpot, although he was a Wimbledon semifinalist in 2018.

Not that his victory over Murray wasn’t important. Isner called it the top of the list. Murray achieved godlike status in 2012 when he became the first Brit (Murray is a Scot) to win Wimbledon in 77 years. Then he won it again.

“I’m not the player he is,” Isner said of Murray. Whatever, he was enough of a player against Murray, who admittedly has been fighting his way back after hip surgery.

“Yeah, I played in my mind incredibly well,” said Isner. “Of course I served well, but I was thinking outside of my serve I did some good things. Of course, I didn’t win many baseline rallies with Andy, but I think I did what I needed to get a (service) break in the first and fourth set.

“My serve carried me from there.”

It was the 2010 Wimbledon in which Isner had his greatest effect on the game and event in an affair of fate, fable and exhaustion. He faced Nicolas Mahut, another spectacular server.

Play started on a Monday (opening day) and ended on Wednesday. Serve. Ace. Serve. No return. Ad infinitum. But fascinating and historical. A 6-4, 3-6, 6-7, 7-6, 70-68 win. A plaque on the brick wall, “The longest match was played on court 18…”

A plaque removed and replaced. A revision in the rules of fifth-set tie-breakers. A disenchantment.

“That’s all I ever get asked about,” said Isner.

Of course.

A young man from old England wins the Open in New England

BROOKLINE, Mass. — In New England on Sunday, the golf story once more was about a young man from old England.

At the same historic place, The Country Club, where after crossing the sea nine years earlier he took the U.S. Amateur championship, Matthew Fitzpatrick won the U.S. Open.

On an unseasonably cold afternoon in the suburbs of Boston, on a course of long rough and short tempers, Fitzpatrick held on and hung in.

He shot an impressive 2-under-par 68 for a 274 total, which was 6-under but more significantly was one shot lower than both Will Zalatoris — whose 14-foot birdie attempt at the final hole, agonizingly, just missed — and Scottie Scheffler.

On a leader board loaded with stars, 2021 Masters champ Hideki Matsuyama came in another two shots back for third after the low round of the tournament, a 65, while British Open winner Collin Morikawa (66) and four-time major winner Rory McIlroy (69) tied for fifth at 278.

Thls Open had tough situations and great shots, but not the midsummer heat that’s normally a part of the nation’s championship, with golfers (and shivering spectators bundled in sweaters and jackets.

The competition, however, was hot.

At times, Scheffler, the Masters champ and top-ranked player, and Zalatoris, the San Francisco native, toyed with the lead. But Fitzpatrick moved in front for good with a birdie at 15 and was on his sort-of-merry way to not only his biggest win but his first on the PGA Tour.

“For me,” he said about people waiting for the breakthrough, “the expectations were for me to play well, but I feel having won the U.S. Amateur here I feel so comfortable around the place. I knew where to hit it.”

Knowing this is one thing, but playing is even more important. You have to swing fearlessly, if not effortlessly. Any little mistake becomes a very big mistake, as Scheffler understands — he was 6-under Saturday, then fell to 1-under. He edged back to 6-under Sunday but bogied 10 and 11.

That’s a U.S. Open. There’s no place to relax, especially at The Country Club. “I knew it was hard,” said Joel Dahmen. “I didn’t know it was this hard.“ He went from a tie for first on Friday to a tie for 10th.

Scheffler figured to have the best chance. He stumbled.

“I played well,” he said. “I was just one shot short.”

One shot is all the differential you need.

The relief here is the talent and a great course helps produce a great tournament.  And a great winner.

Fitzpatrick has been on the radar since he came over and won the 2013 U.S. Amateur. He was given a golf scholarship to Northwestern, following the path of another English star, Luke Donald, but the talent and the temptations (numerous sponsorship offers) were too great. So he left the classroom for the tee.

His attire is covered with the names of sponsors — including Workday, which for a long while used Phil Mickelson as its prime spokesman. Now Fitzpatrick's career is covered with glory.

Not that it came easily in the weeks leading up to the Open and in the tournament itself. But after bogies at 10 and 11 he played the rest of the back nine 2-under.

The drive on 15 went far right, but he found the ball.  

“It’s funny,” he said. “I've had moments like that all year where I’ve caught a break. Then I hit one of the best shots I hit all day.

“I don’t like to compare myself to a football (soccer) team, but I feel I wasn’t expected to do well, wasn’t expected to succeed. But I’ve won a major.”

Maybe the biggest of them all.

Zalatoris has his chance for a major

BROOKLINE, Mass. — He’s been ready for this, and so has golf. Will Zalatoris has the game — he already finished second in two majors.

Now all he needs is the victory and the nickname.

Like “the Big Z” or maybe “the Z Man.”

In another day, you may be able to call him something more elegant: U.S. Open champion.

But let’s not rush the issue. After all, early on Saturday, it looked as if the guy holding the third round lead of this U.S. Open would be Scottie Scheffler.

Wasn’t Scheffler two strokes ahead after 10 holes? Wasn’t Scheffler leading the season-long Fed-Ex Cup standings?

Ah, but golf can be the meanest of games.

Especially on a day when the wind off the Atlantic is gusting, and when one swing can cost too many shots and a lifetime of agony.

Scheffler double-bogied 11. Then bogied 12.Then bogied 13. Then bogied 14.

He went from minus 6 to minus 1, and even if he would birdie 17 and shoot 71, he would tumble to a tie for third at 208, two strokes behind Zalatoris (67) and Mathew Fitzpatrick (68). Defending champ Jon Rahm double-boogied 18 for 71 and 207.
    

Yes, anything can happen at anytime, especially when the weather is nasty and the rough at the famed Country Club is deep and heavy.

Zalatoris has avoided any real mishaps through three rounds. He showed up confident and prepared, and why not after a second place in the recent PGA Championship at Southern Hills and a second in the 2021 Masters?

“On top of the belief that I belong in the situations,” said Zalatoris, “when I’m off, I’m not that far off.”

Zalatoris, 25, was born in San Francisco and started golf in the Bay Area, even getting a few bits of advice from the late Ken Venturi, who won the 1964 U.S. Open.

Zalatoris’s father, an architect, was spending so much time flying to work in Dallas he chose to move the family to Texas. It was there he played in junior tournaments with Scheffler and Jordan Spieth.

After a year at Wake Forest, Zalatoris turned pro and following a brief stay on the Korn Ferry Tour qualified for the PGA Tour. He’s always had the “sky’s the limit” attitude, in effect asking “Why not me?”

He didn’t have to ask why Scheffler had problems on the back nine. Zalatoris knew.  

“That wind was brutal,” confirmed Zalatoris. “But when I made a mistake I was on the far side of the green or having room where maybe I could at least chip one up. When I played here during the (U.S. Amateur) in 2013, I thought it was the hardest course I’ve ever played.”

And now, for what amounts to the national golfing championship, it’s even more difficult. There only have been Opens at the Country Club, in the suburbs of Boston, and as far as the egos of the golfers are concerned that’s three too many. They hate to be embarrassed.

“I think the biggest thing for me (Sunday),” said Zalatoris, understanding he’s so close to a title and yet still so far, “there are a ton of major champions on the leaderboards, and by no means is the job done.”

In a way, it is just about to start.

An Open of smiling gods and shots off carpets

BROOKLINE, Mass. — Back in the 1950s, when gasoline was 25 cents a gallon and wood golf clubs were really made of wood and not metal, somebody said, “You don’t win a U.S. Open, it wins you.”

Meaning when the golfing gods smile and you don’t double-bogey the first hole in the second round as, alas, Justin Thomas did Friday at The Country Club, you might end up holding the trophy.

Like Scott Simpson. Or Jack Fleck. Or Jack Nicklaus or Tiger Woods.

After two rounds of shuffling and surprises, Collin Morikawa and Joel Dahmen got the smiles Friday, ending up in a tie for first at 5-under.

Defending champ Jon Rahm, Rory McIlroy, Hayden Buckley and Beau Hossler were at 6-under.

As you’ve heard, in an Open, with all those weeds and dastardly quick greens you’ve got to be patient, not to mention accurate, and understand the tournament and the course are designed both to make you miss and make you miserable.

There’s a great quote from the late Tony Lema about the difference between the Masters and the U.S. Open, something like the Masters, with its wide fairways, is fun while the U.S. Open can be agony.

Not so far this Open for Scottie Scheffler, who in April won the Masters, and 36 holes into this Open is one of the leaders.

Golf may be a long walk (spoiled, according to Mark Twain), but things in a tournament can change in short order.

As in the 1966 Open at San Francisco's Olympic Club when Billy Casper picked up four shots on Arnold Palmer in two holes, or Gil Morgan’s unfortunate collapse in 1992 at Pebble Beach, when he went from a record under par to a disaster at the eighth hole.

Here in the suburbs of Boston, where people already were trying to come to terms with the Celtics losing the NBA Finals to the Warriors, the mystery was what happened to a golfer named A.J. Dauffe.

He was in the sole lead after the front nine, and then he wasn’t even one of the 14 names on the board when he finished the round — although momentarily his name kept appearing and disappearing.

He went from 6-under-par at the 10th tee to even par after the final hole, closing with a double-bogey for 32-40–72 on a par-70 course.

Dauffe (pronounced Duffy) is a South African who, after brief stays at a couple of small American universities, joined the Korn Ferry Tour, from which a couple weeks ago he earned a place on the PGA Tour.

Friday he earned a place in golfing lore.

He hit his tee shot on the 14th onto the deck of a hospitality area. Instead of taking a drop, he chose to play the ball where it landed.

“I’m coming over you,” he shouted at spectators below. Later he explained, “I had 278 uphill, and if I drop I’m in the rough. I didn’t want to hit a 7-iron blind. I had a 4-wood in the bag, and the lie is so good on the hospitality carpet.”

He knew where he stood during the round. His name was ahead of everyone else’s. Then he watched it being moved down.

“An up and down round,” agreed Dauffe. “Executed really well, There were some moments when I had to scramble.

“Back nine was disappointing. Did the simple really bad. But you know, if you told me (Thursday) I would be 1-under-par in the top 15 finishing my round (Friday), I would have said yes. Taking everything out of the equation.”

And taking a shot off a carpet.

Rory a leader in more than one way

BROOKLINE, Mass. — Not all that long ago, Rory McIlroy was described as the next Tiger Woods. Now he’s being called the moral compass of golf.

It may be hard to say which label is more complimentary.

Rory’s ability to make birdies — and save an occasional par — remains prevalent and relevant as verified Thursday in the opening round of the U.S. Open.

McIlroy’s 3-under-par 67 had him tied for the early lead. Yet these days, he seems more famous for taking the lead in the PGA Tour’s battle to suppress the new Saudi-controlled LIV Tour.

As a kid in Holywood, Northern Ireland (yes, one “L” but same pronunciation), McIlroy was thrashing adult opponents. After turning pro, Rory matched two guys named Tiger Woods and Jack Nicklaus by winning three majors before reaching age 25, the first of which was the 2011 U.S. Open, when he was 22.

No less compelling was McIlroy’s willingness to speak openly about golf and his successes and even failures, the latter subject being one that players fear. He goes blithely ahead, filling journalists’ notebooks. What an attitude.

Following his fine, if occasionally distressing round Thursday — that rough at The Country Club got him on the fifth hole before he escaped — McIlroy was asked, of course, about the Saudi tour.

And why he’s been so adamant in support of the PGA Tour, the establishment, as it were, against the “we’ll buy you out” rebels of the LIV Tour.

“I'm just being me,” said McIlroy. “I’m living my life. I’m doing what I think is right and trying to play the best golf that I possibly can. I wasn't asked to be put here. I wasn't trying to be in this position. I'm just being me.”

Golf needs heroes, if not villains, although they fit well in the plan. Who would have imagined the villains would not be other players who knock off the stars — majors seem more major when the big guys win — but financiers?

The U.S. Open, as the name implies, is open, so anybody from anywhere who meets qualifying standards gets in, but PGA Tour defectors like Dustin Johnson — the anti-Rory? — won’t be allowed into events such as the Players or the AT&T Pebble Beach Pro-Am.

McIlroy’s presence as the standard bearer seems part of a renaissance. No, he hasn’t won all four majors (he lacks only the Masters), but he did finish second in this most recent Masters, followed by an eighth-place finish in the PGA Championship. He appears destined for a high finish in this Open.

“Yeah, a really solid start,” said McIlroy. “You’d take 67 around this golf course any day. Even though I'm standing up here slightly frustrated that I bogeyed the last, it's a great start to the tournament.

“I felt like I did most things well today. I certainly putted well, and I hit the ball in the right spots, and I hit a lot of greens, gave myself plenty of chances. Just basically did everything that you need to do at a U.S. Open.”

Meaning staying on the fairways and not getting frustrated by the speed of the greens. As everyone knows, this is the nation’s championship, and you’ll be tested as much emotionally as physically.

Traditionally, the course gets more difficult, with harder greens and length of rough, as the week goes along.

Asked if after the statements he made on behalf of the PGA Tour he was trying to make one on behalf of his golf, McIlroy said, “Not really. It’s been eight years since I won a major, and I want to get my hands on one again.”

Who wouldn’t?

Phil never afraid to take a shot or a chance

BROOKLINE, Mass. — So he’s back again, back in competition, back at the U.S. Open, which he’s never won — and, after a period of silence some thought was too short and others believed was too lengthy, back in the headlines.

Good old Phil Mickelson has taken the challenge and taken the podium, enmeshed in a controversy of his own creation — that Saudi golf situation — and having as much fun trying to be right as he does swinging a golf club from the left.

At his age Mickelson, who turns 52 Thursday during the opening round, doesn’t have a legit chance for the championship of this 122nd Open, but that hardly matters.

Phil is by far the most interesting player in the field, never afraid to make any shot or until recently any observation. Play it as lies is the essence of golf, and when it comes to Mickelson and his remarks, all interpretations are allowed.

Mickelson’s near misses in the Open — he has six seconds overall — would normally be a primary storyline, but not this time. Phil was one of the people who persuaded the wealthy Saudi princes to pony up (camel up?) hundreds of millions for what is called the LIV Tour, stealing pros from the PGA Tour.

Phil and others who opted for the LIV have been handed lifetime suspensions by the PGA Tour, but the Open (and the British Open) are not controlled by the PGA Tour so Mickelson is here without restrictions. Or regrets. Although not without criticism.

Osama bin Laden, responsible for the 9/11 attacks, was Saudi. Relatives of 9/11 victims have expressed their outrage to Mickelson and other golfers willing to play for Saudi money. Mickelson could only say he has a deep sense of empathy for the families and loved ones. But earlier he had admitted the Saudis killed the journalist Jamal Khashoggi and had a miserable record on human rights.

Surely these were not the sort of conversations heard on an Open course, this time at The Country Club near Boston, but golf is in a state of flux.    

Mickelson has a strange relationship with other pros, admired by many for his play and relationship with spectators, willing to step into crowds. But he’s disliked by others who see him as a bit of a phony.

For the most part, he was a fan favorite — at the U.S. Open at Bethpage in New York, they chanted “Philly Mick” — and he was asked how they might treat him after he deserts the PGA Tour.

“If fans would leave or whatnot,” said Mickelson, “I respect and understand their opinion and I understand they have strong emotions regarding this choice.”

Mickelson said he has worked to curtail what has been both an expensive and, according to rumored threats demanding payoffs, a sometimes anguished gambling habit. One of the reasons he got involved with the Saudis was to pay off millions in wagers.

Phil’s game reflects his personality. And vice versa. He was never a guy to play it safe. That cost him the 2016 Open at Winged Foot ,when he double-bogeyed the 72nd hole and maybe cost him large hunks of the millions he won playing golf.

Still he became arguably the second most popular American golfer next to Tiger Woods.

He won more than 40 tournaments. Won five majors. He did what he felt he needed to do. But that Saudi thing was a sad twist to the tale.

Steph and Rory hit Boston at the same time

BROOKLINE, Mass. — Rory McIlroy arrived on Monday. After a victory. Steph Curry will be arriving Wednesday. After a victory. OK, different sports and technically different cities — Boston literally is next door — but who cares?

We’re dealing with champions here, one involving the U.S. Golf Association, the other with the National Basketball Association, and with two of the biggest names in sports.

Both, through their own brilliance and the good fortune of timing, on course and on court within a few miles of each other in a small patch of New England.

This is always the week of the U.S. Open, golf’s moveable feast, which now will be at The Country Club — when the place opened in the 1890s, no other label was needed.

And it’s usually the week of the NBA finals, now shifting from San Francisco to Boston, where with the Warriors up 3-2, Game 6 will be played Thursday night.

A few hours after the opening round of the 122nd Open.

Without Tiger Woods, still worn out from his struggle last month in the PGA, and with Phil Mickelson more a controversy than a competitor, McIlroy becomes a focus for the Open, and for any major really, especially after his victory in the Canadian Open. Curry is the focus any time the Warriors play, especially since Game 5, when for the first time in his playoff career he did not make a single 3-point basket.

No parallel with McIlroy, although as any golfer he’s had his misses.

It did not take long for an interview with McIlroy, known for his opinions as much as for his success — he has won three of the four majors, other than the Masters — to be asked about the Saudi involvement in golf.

McIlroy stayed loyal to the PGA Tour, which announced those who choose to play the LIV Tour, financed by the Saudis, would be banned by the PGA Tour.

That has no effect on the U.S. Open, organized by the USGA, so people such as Dustin Johnson and Mickelson, who have gone for the Saudi money,  whatever the human rights record, are able to compete in the Open.

“I don’t want to rub your nose in it,” a journalist told McIlroy, “but in February you said this thing was dead in water.” Rory responded, “The U.S. Open?” and the room filled with laughter.

When the questioner stammered, “No, no, no,” McIlroy came back with full force. “Oh,” said Rory, “I thought we were at the U.S. Open.”

Where golf is at is anyone’s guess — well, right now it’s in Massachusetts — but the reference is to the game’s future.

“I took a lot of players’ statements at face value,” said McIlroy, about mistaking how many would remain with the PGA. “You had people committed to the PGA Tour. People went back on that. That’s where I was wrong.”

The way he plays golf, the way he represents himself, McIlroy rarely is wrong. His confidence is tempered with just enough humility to come across as someone with a sense of fairness as much as a sense of self.

He’s been there, done that and would relish doing it again.

The talk had turned from the people who turned from the PGA Tour to the very real idea of winning. Someone wondered why McIlroy is, if unintentionally, a leader of remaining with the PGA Tour.

“Because in my opinion,” he said, “it’s the right thing to do. The PGA Tour was created by people and tour players who came before people like Jack Nicklaus and Arnold Palmer. They created something and worked for something. And the PGA Tour has certainly given me a lot of opportunities.”

And like the other sporting star in town now, Steph Curry, Rory McIlroy has taken advantage.