Sadly, Our E Are Only On The Prize

I had occasion a couple of years back to golf with Dan O’Brien.

As world-record holder in the decathlon, O’Brien is considered the world’s greatest athlete.

Although O’Brien is a very promising golfer, as one might expect of someone with his physical talents and coordination, I was somehow able to hang on and beat him by a stroke or two.

As we changed out of our spikes, I suggested that “Well, that’s certainly the only event I could beat you in, Dan.”

Mike Keller, one of Dan’s coaches, leaped in at that point. “I don’t know,” Keller said. “What do you run the 1,500 in?”

It was a pretty funny line, considering that it’s obvious to all that it would take me a full workday to cover 1,500 meters.

But the exchange was a bit prophetic, in light of O’Brien’s recent difficulties with the 1,500.

At the USA Track and Field/Mobil meet in June, O’Brien impressively claimed another national title, but missed his world record when he needed 5:16.42 to negotiate the 1,500.

“He finished the 1,500 meters with all the forcefulness of an arthritic weekend jogger,” was how one national writer put it.

At the Goodwill Games last week, O’Brien was once again on pace to break his world record of 8,891 points before running a 5:10.94 in the 1,500.

The stories on that one suggested that O’Brien “loafed home.”

The man so dominated this event that he could have captured the gold medal even without competing in the 1,500 - for which he gained a paltry 499 points.

His 8,715 points at the Goodwills and his 8,707 at the Mobil meet were the third- and fourth-best marks in history by an American - the eighth and 10th-best in the world.

But the response is that O’Brien runs like an arthritic loafer.

Which leads to the point of this discourse: What in the world have we come to expect of our athletes?

How is it that anything short of a world record, or Roger Maris’ homerun mark, or Joe DiMaggio’s hitting streak is considered a failure?

In O’Brien’s case, as it was explained to me by his other coach, Rick Sloan, the problems involve preparing for nine explosive power events followed by the lone endurance event.

Training excessively for the distance race, in all likelihood, would diminish the skills present for the other nine.

“That’s why the sadistic SOB put it at the end,” Sloan said of the problems created by the 1,500.

Another troubling public reaction this summer has been the response to Michael Jordan’s attempt at playing baseball.

It seems as if several times a week, columns move on the wire suggesting that Jordan is out of his bald head for dropping basketball and playing in the minor leagues.

A Sports Illustrated cover ran this summer urging Jordan to “Give it up.”

This seems entirely wrong-headed to me.

The easiest thing Jordan could have done was continue to dominate the game of basketball - which he could do on cruise-control - instead of trying to play a game in which he suffers through embarrassing moments and some degree of public humiliation.

The fact that he has continued to play in the minors has revealed more about Michael Jordan’s character than anything he did in the NBA.

Isn’t a person’s makeup most staunchly tested when they do something that DOESN’T come easily?

The man has shown he is willing to risk failure to grow. And in the face of that failure, to continue to the end rather than taking the easy way out.

To me, the fallibility has made Jordan exponentially more likable. But I am in the minority, it appears.

Perhaps it is the increased scrutiny by those of us in the media that is to blame for our escalating expectations.

Or maybe it’s the proliferation of call-in sports shows, where the only expertise required to knock an athlete is the ability to operate a telephone.

Whatever, we’ve reached a point where excellence, sadly, is simply not good enough.

And where achievement alone is valued above effort.

A point where we seriously need to recalibrate the devices by which we measure athletic success.