Johnny Damon and Six Other Red Sox-Turned Yankees

The recent coverage of Johnny Damon and Manny Ramirez signing with the AL East team that was otherwise raided by their two chief rivals this off-season got me to thinking. Damon, once considered the equivalent of Jesus in Boston, but later nicknamed Judas, has an interesting distinction in common with six other players in baseball history.

Of course, I'm not the first person to mention this, but Damon is one of seven players who played in and won World Series with both the Red Sox and the Yankees. Now, let me clarify this, because if you try to Google the answer to this question, you'll probably find a list quite a bit longer than I'm suggesting. I'm talking about players who actually played in a World Series won by the Yankees and a World Series won by the Red Sox.

So, I'll start off with a little hint by telling you of one person this rules out. Ramiro Mendoza was with the Yankees for all four of their World Series victories between 1996 and 2000—although he actually only pitched in two of them—and he was a member of the 2004 World Champion Red Sox. He even pitched in the ALCS for the Sox that year, against the Yankees, but he did not pitch in the Series. I honestly don't know if he was dropped from the roster or if he simply didn't pitch, but he's not one of the answers to this question.

In addition to Damon, can you name the other six? Of course you can, with a little internet research, but let's see how many we can come up with without looking them up first. Oh, and, when you do finally decide to look them up, I suggest you peruse the rosters of Red Sox World Series champions rather than those of the Yankees. It will probably take you about 78% less time.

One last interesting tidbit about this short list of players...every one of them won their first World Series with the Red Sox.

Summer of '04 Trivia

Each of the seven posts in the Summer of '04 series was named after a song. Each of these songs has a connection to the city the post was about, some being more obvious than others (e.g. "Look Out Cleveland," "Detroit Rock City," "Meet Me in St. Louis, Louis").

For each song, name the artist who is best known for performing it, and for the two songs for which it's not obvious ("The Long Cut" and "The Sheltering Sky"), identify the connection between the artist and the city the post was about. Also, one of the songs ("Pittsburgh Town") was written by an artist who is more famous than the song's best known performer. So, for that one, I'm looking for both performer and composer. In all, this makes it a 10-part question.

As a reminder, here is the list of posts/songs again:

1. Look Out Cleveland
2. Cleveland Rocks
3. Detroit Rock City
4. Meet Me in St. Louis, Louis
5. The Long Cut
6. The Sheltering Sky
7. Pittsburgh Town

Of course, there's one particular reader of this blog who's the clear cut favorite to be the first to answer the question correctly. I'm certainly not discouraging him from proving me right, but I look forward to seeing if anyone else has what it takes to beat him to the punch. 

3000 Hits for One Team

A lot has been made of the fact that Derek Jeter recently broke the Yankees' all-time career hits record with less than 3,000 total hits. Many folks seem astounded that the mark is so low, especially considering we're talking about the most successful franchise in baseball history.

Should we be surprised that no player in the history of the Yankees has reached 3,000 hits? Well, first let's clarify something. When we're talking about a franchise record, we're speaking in terms of statistics accumulated while playing with that team only. So, while there are 27 players in the history of the game with 3,000 or more hits, just 13 of these have that many during their time spent with one team. These 13 players represent 12 different clubs, with only one team able to boast two players who have reached the milestone. Jeter will most likely become the 14th on this list sometime during the 2011 season.

There are eight franchises (Boston/Milwaukee/Atlanta Braves, Chicago Cubs, Cincinnati Reds, Brooklyn/Los Angeles Dodgers, Philadelphia Phillies, Pittsburgh Pirates, New York/San Francisco Giants, St. Louis Cardinals) older than the Yankees. Additionally, the Yanks are one of eight franchises whose history begins in the year 1901, with the Baltimore Orioles, Boston Red Sox, Chicago White Sox, Cleveland Indians, Detroit Tigers, Minnesota Twins (originally the Washington Senators) and Philadelphia/Kansas City/Oakland Athletics being the others. So, with 15 teams who've been around at least as long as the Bronx Bombers, is it that big a surprise that, in the near future, they'll be the 13th team to have a player reach the milestone? A little surprising, maybe, but not as shocking as some would lead you to believe.

Since I've done the research, I'm going to throw it out there as a trivia question. Can you name the 13 players and the teams with whom they racked up 3,000 hits? One more clarification is in order, though. These aren't necessarily players who played for just one team for their entire careers. A few of them played for more than one, but still managed to accumulate 3,000 with one particular club.

Also, since we know this is the type of question that can be answered with some pretty simple internet research—although it would probably take a while to come up with all 13 names—let’s do this as a group effort. Think about it for a few minutes, throw out a few names that come to mind, and I'll let you know which ones are right. Then, let someone else rattle off a few answers of their own. I'm confident that, between my three or four regular readers, you can come up with them all.

Down in Mazzola Town

[Note: this is a much less graphic description of the events following Saturday's Yankees-Tigers game. For a more detailed account, I encourage you to check out Lee's Steez.]

My first visit to the new Yankee Stadium with Lee Mazzola was an eventful one. We've been going to a game or two a year at the stadium since 2001. The original plan to go to a Yanks-Sox game annually in each city was hatched when I stayed at his place to run in the 2000 New York City Marathon, I believe.

The Boston part of that tradition only lasted two years, but probably saw more truly memorable moments—Mike Mussina's near-perfect game, our subsequent and unwarranted banishment from a Fenway area tavern, the unexpected premature birth of El-squared's daughter—than the games in New York. Lee has also visited Fenway two more times since, once with Mz. Mazz as my wedding gift to them, and another time when an unfortunate coincidence resulted in him wearing a green Yankees hat on the same night that the Red Sox donned their uniforms of the same color as a tribute to Red Auerbach.

Yesterday was also the first time I’ve sat in Lee’s new seats. I always liked his seats at the old stadium—in the upper deck but almost directly behind home plate, and only a few seats from the aisle—and his new seats aren't bad either. They are the second-to-last row in the stadium, a little further down the third base line, and right in the middle of a long row of seats, but considering the travesty that is the pricing structure at the new park, they’re a relative bargain. As Lee and I were talking about at the game, if he can move down to the lower part of the section for the same price next year, this would make them on par with the old ones.

A bet regarding who sings the line "Subdivisions" on the Rush song of the same name carried over from prior to the game at the Mazzola household to the sports bar afterwards. Both Mz. Mazz and I said it was Alex Lifeson, while Lee contended it was Neil Peart. We tried several different sources, but received conflicting reports. Although Lifeson sings the line in the video and in live shows, several sources say it was Toronto newscaster Mark Dailey on the original recording that appears on 1982's Signals, although Dailey claims that's an urban myth. In the end, we still don't know the answer, and I'm not sure if we ever will.

All beer snobbery is out the window when I go to a Yankees game with Mazz, but my decision to switch to Guinness for my third and fourth beers—one for which I have to credit Lee's influence—turned out to be a wise move. I have to admit that I didn't think I was in the mood to drink Guinness on such a hot day, but it hit the spot so much better than Bud Light did.

The game itself was a good one. In fact, it was the second pitchers' duel I've witnessed in just as many games at a park that already is developing a reputation for being a hitters' haven. C.C. Sabathia labored somewhat, throwing 116 pitches in seven innings, but managed to escape every threat without giving up a run. Justin Verlander matched him zero-for-zero until giving up two runs in the bottom of the 7th, on an Alex Rodriguez home run and a Melky Cabrera infield single that scored Robinson Cano. With Phil Hughes unavailable after his two-inning, six-strikeout performance on Friday night, Alfredo Aceves gave up a solo homer to Marcus Thames in the 8th. But, that was all the offense the Tigers could muster as Mariano Rivera closed out the 9th of a 2-1 Yankees victory.

Of course, it was the post-game that was the most memorable part of the day, as Lee had a minor medical emergency. I say minor because it wasn't a life-or-death situation, but judging by his description of the pain and discomfort he experienced, I hardly think he considered it minor. But, as I already said, I'll let you read what Lee has to say about that.

While Mz. Mazz left with Lee for a late-night rendezvous with his dedicated physician—who I must say deserves no less than to be considered a credit to his profession—I stayed behind with Lee Jr. I was, of course, a little nervous about taking care of the little guy, but far from as concerned as I was for his dad. Amazingly enough, Lee seemed like a new man when he and Mz. Mazz returned in less than two hours, and LJ was fast asleep in his crib.

World Series Wish List

As the season winds down, and is reduced to 10 teams realistically vying for 8 playoff spots, I thought it would be interesting to discuss what I consider to be the five potential World Series matchups with the most compelling storylines. Before I begin, though, let me just say, for the benefit of one particular fellow Yankees fan, that I'm not actually rooting for any of these scenarios that involve the Red Sox. I'm just acknowledging that they would make for some interesting post-season drama.

1. Chicago Cubs vs. Tampa Bay Rays
   What could be more interesting than a matchup of the two teams that, for very different reasons, might be thought of as the least likely to reach, let alone win, the World Series? Obviously, the Cubs are far from a dark horse, but everyone knows their story. That is, this year marks the 100th anniversary of the last time they won it all, the longest streak of futility among major league franchises. The Rays, of course, are the only current team never to even make the playoffs. In fact, prior to this season, their best record was their 2004 mark of 70-91 (.435). This is only their 11th year of existence, but the Arizona Diamondbacks, the team that entered the league in the same year as Tampa Bay, have already won a World Series. Even worse, as far as the Rays are concerned, their counterparts in the sunshine state, the Florida Marlins, have been crowned champions of baseball twice in their brief 15 year existence.



2. Los Angeles Dodgers vs. Boston Red Sox
   This matchup would feature Joe Torre in his first post-season matchup versus the Red Sox since 2004, getting the chance to enact a certain measure of revenge. Manny Ramirez and Nomar Garciaparra, the two malcontents run out of town, make their return to Fenway Park in games that couldn't possibly be more meaningful. Derek Lowe gets a chance to prove Boston management wrong for not bringing him back after winning three series clinching games in the 2004 post-season. Casey Blake gets another shot at the Sox after his Indians blew a 3-games-to-1 lead to them in last year's ALCS. Alright, so that part isn't such a big deal, but I happen to be a pretty big Blake fan, for some reason.



3. Chicago Cubs vs. Chicago White Sox
   What could be better than a Windy City World Series? The only time these two teams met in the Series, it was 1906, a season in which the Cubs posted a .763 winning percentage, at 116-36. The White Sox batted .230 as a team that year, and went into the Series as a huge underdog, but defeated the Cubs 4 games to 2. The Cubs went on to dominate the Detroit Tigers in the two Series that followed, but haven't won it all since, losing 7 Fall Classics between 1910 and their last appearance in 1945. Could the 100th anniversary of the Cubs last World Series victory be the year that they finally get this monkey off their back, and could they do it against their crosstown rivals? Or, could the South Siders contribute to the misery of Cubs fans by winning their second Series in four years at the expense of their North Side brethren?



4. New York Mets vs. Boston Red Sox
   Possibly the greatest postseason in my lifetime was 1986. The Astros-Mets NLCS matchup was riveting, with Mike Scott almost single-handedly pitching his team past the highly favored Mets, the team that, along with the 1975 Reds, won more games than any National League team since the 1906 Cubs. The ALCS was highlighted by Dave Henderson's heroics and the Red Sox overcoming a 3-games-to-1 deficit to defeat the California Angels. Of course, everyone knows what happened in Game 6 of the World Series that year. That is, what Vin Scully referred to as "...a delirious 10th inning". As a Yankees fan and typical New Yorker, I rooted for the Red Sox in that Series, but it was more because I was rooting against the Mets. Now, as a Yankees fan living in Boston, I'd be pulling for the Mets, which probably means that the Sox will win in some memorably dramatic fashion.



5. Milwaukee Brewers vs. Minnesota Twins
   What would we call this, the I-94 Series? I know what the networks would be calling it: a ratings disaster. Why would I prefer this over an all-Los Angeles matchup between the Dodgers and Angels? Well, first of all, I don't need to tell you that the Angels don't actually play in Los Angeles, but let me answer that question with a question. Do either of these teams even sell out their home ballparks? I suppose they do, and actually I know that the Twins don't, but a Southern California series couldn't possibly compare to an all-New York or all-Chicago series. So, it really doesn't have any appeal to me. Twins-Brewers, though, would be a showdown for the ages. Also, it would be the third season in my lifetime (and this decade) that I visited the home parks of both World Series entrants. Can anyone venture a guess as to what the other two years were?

Of course, I left out the obvious one. But, do I really need to explain why Cubs-Red Sox would be an exciting matchup? Also, my apologies to the Angels and Phillies. It's not that I don't consider these teams interesting, it's just that I don't see any compelling drama in any Series involving either of them. That said, the Angels are still my pick to win it all.

How Many Ways to Balk? : The Sequel

Since I never updated this, here are the 14 ways to balk that I came up with in my August 21 post:

The pitcher...

1. Hesitates, or stops, in his delivery to home plate.
2. While in contact with the rubber, fakes a pickoff throw to first base.
3. Steps on the mound without the ball.
4. While in contact with the rubber, fakes or throws to an unoccupied base.
5. Moves from the windup to the set position without stepping off the rubber.
6. While in the set position, fails to come to a complete stop before delivering to the plate.
7. Fails to step directly toward the base when making a pickoff throw.
8. Fails to step directly toward the plate when delivering a pitch.
9. Delivers to the plate while the catcher is not in the catcher's box.
10. Hesitates or stops in the process of coming to the set position.
11. Drops the ball while in contact with the rubber.
12. While in the set position, breaks his hands while not in the process of delivering to the plate, and without stepping off the rubber.
13. While in contact with the rubber, makes any movement associated with his delivery to the plate without completing such movement (i.e. delivering a pitch).
14. Delivers to the plate while not in contact with the rubber.

Here's what the rule book says:

8.05 If there is a runner, or runners, it is a balk when—

(a) The pitcher, while touching his plate, makes any motion naturally associated with his pitch and fails to make such delivery;

I covered this in #1 and #13, so maybe that was redundant after all.

(b) The pitcher, while touching his plate, feints a throw to first base and fails to complete the throw;

I covered this in #2.

(c) The pitcher, while touching his plate, fails to step directly toward a base before throwing to that base;

This is covered by #7.

(d) The pitcher, while touching his plate, throws, or feints a throw to an unoccupied base, except for the purpose of making a play;

This is covered by #4, although I left out the "except for the purpose of making a play" part. This allows the pitcher to throw to second, for instance, when the runner from first breaks before he delivers a pitch.

(e) The pitcher makes an illegal pitch;
Rule 8.05(e) Comment: A quick pitch is an illegal pitch. Umpires will judge a quick pitch as one delivered before the batter is reasonably set in the batter’s box. With runners on base the penalty is a balk; with no runners on base, it is a ball. The quick pitch is dangerous and should not be permitted.

I missed this one entirely.

(f) The pitcher delivers the ball to the batter while he is not facing the batter;

This is sort of covered by #8, but not entirely. This has me a bit confused. I'm positive that, if the pitcher steps towards first, then delivers to home plate, it's a balk. It's possible that (c) also includes a delivery to the plate as well as a throw to a base, but I still think that's pretty vague.

(g) The pitcher makes any motion naturally associated with his pitch while he is not touching the pitcher’s plate;

#14 partially covers this, but not entirely.

(h) The pitcher unnecessarily delays the game;

Another one I missed entirely.

(i) The pitcher, without having the ball, stands on or astride the pitcher’s plate or while off the plate, he feints a pitch;

Partially covered by #3.

(j) The pitcher, after coming to a legal pitching position, removes one hand from the ball other than in an actual pitch, or in throwing to a base;

Covered by #12.

(k) The pitcher, while touching his plate, accidentally or intentionally drops the ball;

Covered by #11.

(l) The pitcher, while giving an intentional base on balls, pitches when the catcher is not in the catcher’s box;

#9, although I left out the fact that it's only a balk when it's in the act of issuing an intentional walk.

(m) The pitcher delivers the pitch from Set Position without coming to a stop.

Covered by #6.

8.05 (a) through (m) totals 13 ways to balk. This is why, I believe, one of the participants of the original conversation (at the Metrodome) that inspired this list referred to there being 13 different ways to balk. The only ways on my list that aren't covered in section 8.05 are #5 and #10. #5 is actually covered in section 8.01, which addresses the windup position, and states:

"From the Windup Position, the pitcher may...disengage the rubber. In disengaging the rubber the pitcher must step off with his pivot foot and not his free foot first. He may not go into a set or stretch position—if he does it is a balk."

#10 is definitely also a balk. However, it is essentially covered by 8.05(a) and, therefore, it was probably redundant for me to consider it a separate infraction. So, I'll count #5 as the 14th way, but not add #10 to the list. There are three additional ways, covered by the rule book, for the pitcher to balk:

• 7.07 states that it's a balk when, with a runner on third base and trying to score by means of a squeeze play or a steal, the catcher or any other fielder steps on, or in front of home base without possession of the ball, or touches the batter or his bat. The batter is awarded first base due to interference, but the rule book also considers this a balk.
• 8.02(a) covers illegal pitches, such as when the pitcher applies a foreign substance to, or defaces, the ball. An illegal pitch is considered a balk when there is a runner or runners on base.
• 8.01(d) refers to when a pitched ball slips out of the pitcher's hand during his delivery. The rule book is not entirely clear, but the approved ruling is that it's considered a balk, with runners on base, if the ball does not travel half the distance towards home plate or cross a foul line.
So, I'm considering this a total of 17 ways to balk. As you can see, though, there is still a lot of gray area, at least in terms of how many distinctly different ways there are. Not that anyone really cared, but I'm sure this explanation did very little to clarify my original balk discussion. This also speaks to how clearly the baseball rule book is written. That is, not very.

18th & Vine

The neighborhood of Kansas City commonly know as 18th and Vine is considered by some to be the birthplace of jazz, or at least a newer style of jazz born in the 1930s. It is also in this neighborhood, at the Paseo YMCA, that Rube Foster and other future executives of the Negro National League met to discuss the organization of the league in 1920. This quaint little section, located just east of downtown, is now the home of two fine museums, each celebrating their respective, and uniquely American, traditions.


The Negro Leagues Baseball Museum was founded in 1990 to preserve the history of African-American baseball. Negro League baseball existed prior to the formation of the Negro National League in 1920, but it was Foster's vision to create the league that is now considered the first lasting professional league for African-American players. Unfortunately, health problems resulting from a gas leak that nearly asphyxiated him took his life in 1930, and that first league folded the following year. However, a new Negro National League was formed in 1933, followed by the Negro American League in 1937, and African-American baseball flourished until Major League Baseball became fully integrated in the late 1950s. Rube Foster, honored primarily for his accomplishments as the chief pioneer of the Negro Leagues, but also for his playing and managerial careers, was inducted into the National Baseball Hall of Fame in 1981.

The museum is an impressive tribute to this rich history, which dates back to the mid-19th century, well before the official organization of the Negro National League. In addition to the standard baseball artifacts, many of the exhibits include the artwork of the period, so unfortunately, the taking of photographs is not permitted. However, it costs just $8 for admission to both the Negro Leagues Museum and the neighboring American Jazz Museum, so I highly recommend a visit if you ever have the opportunity. One of my favorite aspects of the Negro Leagues Museum is a time line of events of the Civil Rights movement that places the history of African-American baseball in its historical perspective.

A few other interesting facts I learned there:

• J.L. Wilkinson, the original owner of the Kansas City Monarchs, was the only white member of Rube Foster's trusted inner circle. In 1930, his Monarchs became the first professional team to play night baseball. He was elected to the Hall of Fame, with 16 other Negro League and pre-Negro League greats, in 2006.


• Buck O'Neil, the first African-American coach in Major League Baseball history, and honorary Chairman of the Board of the museum until his death in 2006, was never allowed to set foot on a Major League field.


• King Solomon White, also inducted into the Hall of Fame in 2006, wrote the first definitive history of African-American baseball, titled Sol White's History of Colored Baseball, in 1907.


• The nearby Paseo YMCA (shown below with "God Bless Buck" graffiti on the boarded-up door), the original Negro National League meeting place, is the future home of the John "Buck" O'Neil Education and Research Center.

Finally, I'll finish with a trivia question: Of course, everyone knows that, in 1947, the Brooklyn Dodgers, with Jackie Robinson, became the first major league team to integrate; and most everyone knows that, later that year, the Cleveland Indians became the first integrated American League team, by signing Larry Doby. What may not be common knowledge, though, is who was the third team to integrate (also in 1947) and who was the player?

How Many Ways to Balk?

When I included the "Baseball Lesson of the Day" at the end of my Miller Park post, I had intended it would be something I'd do for each park visit. After all, there would probably be some interesting scenario at each game to provide such subject matter. Well, for yesterday's game there was, but it was a little too much to write about in one paragraph. So, I've decided to write about it separately.

There were two guys sitting next to me at the Metrodome (a young man and his grandfather, I presume) who got into a discussion about how many ways there are for a pitcher to balk. My initial reaction was to think that there are infinite ways, but I suppose that was being too technical. I guess they actually can be broken down into categories. So, not really knowing the answer to this question, here goes, from the top of my head (you'll have to take my word, I didn't look this up).

The pitcher...

1. Hesitates, or stops, in his delivery to home plate.


2. While in contact with the rubber, fakes a pickoff throw to first base.


3. Steps on the mound without the ball.


4. While in contact with the rubber, fakes or throws to an unoccupied base.


5. Moves from the windup to the set position without stepping off the rubber.


6. While in the set position, fails to come to a complete stop before delivering to the plate.


7. Fails to step directly toward the base when making a pickoff throw.


8. Fails to step directly toward the plate when delivering a pitch.


9. Delivers to the plate while the catcher is not in the catcher's box.


10. Hesitates or stops in the process of coming to the set position.


11. Drops the ball while in contact with the rubber.


12. While in the set position, breaks his hands while not in the process of delivering to the plate, and without stepping off the rubber.


13. While in contact with the rubber, makes any movement associated with his delivery to the plate without completing such movement (i.e. delivering a pitch).


14. Delivers to the plate while not in contact with the rubber.

As you can see, there is quite a bit of gray area here. For instance, is #13 really just another way of describing #1. Kind of, but not exactly. #11 and #12 are pretty close as well. Regardless, these are the ways I could come up with so far. I'm not even going to discuss the infractions that can be a balk under certain circumstances, just the standard scenarios. I'll look this up eventually and update this with the complete list.

Cheating at Pub Trivia

So, the other night, I received this phone call. I won't mention who it was from, but I'll call him Mr. G from New York. It was immediately obvious that he meant business when he asked me what Ryan Adams' former band was. Of course, it was Whiskeytown, but Mr. G's response was to ask another question:

What Americana band did an album about Lynyrd Skynyrd?

Well, Southern Rock Opera wasn't about Lynyrd Skynyrd, per se, but I was pretty certain what he was driving at. The answer was the Drive-By Truckers, as their 2002 double-disc pays tribute to many things Southern, including the three great Alabama icons (George Wallace, Bear Bryant, Ronnie Van Zant), the supposed feud between Skynyrd and Neil Young, and makes numerous references to "the duality of the Southern thing".

Anyway, it was pretty obvious to me, considering the curtness of the phone call and the background noise, that Mr. G was cheating at pub trivia. And, of course, the answer I supplied him with was correct. This makes me now 2-for-2 in such circumstances. The previous question was quite easy:

What Rolling Stones song includes the lyrics, "I met a gin-soaked bar-room queen in Memphis"?

C'mon...seriously? At least Mr. G's question was a little challenging. The answer, of course, is "Honky Tonk Woman". I believe Mr. G got caught, while the Stones culprit, I'll call her the former Ms. H from Boston, got away with the deed.

Now, I've played trivia with the aforementioned former Ms. H, at the same bar she called me from that night, and have witnessed some pretty sketchy circumstances...mostly people looking at their cell phones, not necessarily making calls. I suspect that the guy who runs this particular trivia night isn't fully aware that you can use your cellular phone for more than just making actual phone calls. After all, he's not the brightest bulb in the room, although I have to admit it's hard to consider anyone intelligent who says "cod" when he means "card", and probably used to wear one of those "Nomah" t-shirts.

So, I guess the moral of this story is, if you're going to cheat at pub trivia, send a text message...or be a cute girl. Sorry, Mr. G.

21st Century Schizoid Ale

A new subject comes from out of left field. I've never discussed my home brewing endeavors here because, frankly, I hadn't brewed in years until recently. After getting back in the swing of things by producing a mediocre batch we decided to call AfroDan's Inaugural Ale, my new apprentice and I set out to brew possibly my most ambitious recipe ever.

Aptly named 21st Century Schizoid Ale due to the use of some experimental brewing methods in an attempt to produce a beer that is the hybrid of several styles, this is easily the second best batch I've ever made. It's going to be hard to ever top my 1995 tour de force, Mr. Pither's Imperial Stout, just as it's extremely difficult to make this comparison 13 years later, but this one comes close. Although we were aiming a little higher, this brew fermented out to an ABV of 8.5%. While it definitely tastes like a strong ale, it goes down rather nicely, with just enough hop bitterness to prevent it from tasting too malty sweet, but not so much that it scares away the novices. I wouldn't recommend drinking more than a couple, though, on a summer day where temperatures reach the high '90s. Our decision to brew it this time of the year could certainly be called into question, but we're quite happy with it regardless.

As for its moniker, of course it is named after King Crimson's signature song, "21st Century Schizoid Man", so yesterday's festivities were also a celebration of Robert Fripp's crew as well as other things prog. My trivia question proved to be a little more than anyone in attendance could handle, but it stirred up some interesting drunken musical discussion, as well as a brief attempt at a game called Six Degrees of John Wetton. In case you're interested, here's the question:

Name as many members of the 1969-1974 era Crimson lineup as you can (two points each), with a bonus point for naming one other band that each member played in.

Because the definition of band member never seems to be as cut and dried as you would think, there were a total of 15 correct answers, with two others that were somewhat debatable, but that I decided I would accept. I think two guests combined for a total of 11 points (four members plus additional bands for three of them). Not very impressive.

Not surprisingly, if you know me well enough, there's a commemorative mix. Interestingly enough, or not, I almost committed an Apostrophe Catastrophe on the cd sleeve. After typing "Lark's Tongues in Aspic", I realized that, unless a lark can have more than one tongue, it has to be Larks' Tongues in Aspic. I have to say thank you to my frequent softball teammate, Becky, for her vigilance against bad punctuation. Otherwise, I may not have been as careful in my own editing.

So, if you'd like a copy of the 21st Century Schizoid Mix, leave me a comment or send me an email. I apologize in advance that I won't be able to mail you one of the beers.

Trivia Answers

Congratulations to Lee Mazzola for correctly answering the thorn-in-my-side trivia question. He wins a Collector's Edition first printing of the double-disc Fab 40 Companion, which is still in production as I write this.

Here are the answers:

1. Bill Bruford was the original drummer of Yes and the long-standing drummer of King Crimson, joining the band in 1972 and enduring several hiatuses and reincarnations until 1997. He was born on May 17, 1949, 18 years to the day prior to me.

2. Greg Lake was the lead singer and bass player of King Crimson on their first two albums, In the Court of the Crimson King (1969) and In the Wake of Poseidon (1970), before leaving the band to form Emerson, Lake & Palmer with Keith Emerson and Carl Palmer.

3. Gram Parsons was born and raised in Florida, but after graduating from high school in 1965, he enrolled at Harvard, in Cambridge, where I lived for 5+ years. He joined The Byrds in 1968, and stayed only long enough to record Sweetheart of the Rodeo, before leaving to achieve success with the Flying Burrito Brothers and as a solo artist. He suffered a drug and alcohol related death in 1973.

4. Jud Ehrbar is the youngest of this group (born in 1970), was one of the founding members of Space Needle, and later became the drummer of Varnaline for their self-titled album and Sweet Life, as well as contributing to Songs in a Northern Key.

5. Anders Parker is the founding member of Varnaline, and later joined Space Needle for The Moray Eels Eat the Space Needle and the subsequent tour. He attended Arlington High School on the outskirts of Poughkeepsie, New York, graduating in 1986, one year after I did.

6. Jay Farrar was a founding member and co-leader of Uncle Tupelo, and after their dissolution, went on to form Son Volt. He also recorded a collaboration with Anders Parker in 2006, using the moniker Gob Iron.

7. Mike Heidorn was the original drummer of Uncle Tupelo, appearing on their first three albums before leaving prior to the recording of their swan song, Anodyne. He went on to become the original drummer of Son Volt, but is not part of their current lineup.

8. Jeff Tweedy was also a founding member and co-leader of Uncle Tupelo, and went on to greater post-Tupelo success than Jay Farrar by taking that entire band, sans Farrar, with him to form Wilco.

9. Ken Coomer joined Uncle Tupelo for their final album, Anodyne, and was the original drummer of Wilco, although no longer with the band.

10. John Stirratt played on the final Uncle Tupelo album, Anodyne, though his status as an official member of the band is debatable. Several sources say he was, while others say he and Max Johnston were just hired guns for that album. I emailed John at his web site, and his answer was "no we weren't full members at that time, and Max had played with them longer than me at that point...". He then became the original bass player and only remaining original member, other than Jeff Tweedy, of Wilco. His twin sister, Laurie Stirratt, was the bass player for Blue Mountain for their entire existence.

11. Max Johnston, as with John Stirratt, played on the final Uncle Tupelo album as a part-time member, according to Stirratt, and was part of the original Wilco lineup. He was their multi-instrumentalist for the A.M. and Being There albums, before leaving the band to become a full-time member of The Gourds. His older sister is singer-songwriter Michelle Shocked.

Trivia Hint #6a

In my five previous hints, I've covered all nine of the indisputable answers. My last hint(s) is(are) regarding the two disputable answers.

The two disputable answers were definitely official members of one of their two bands, but not necessarily the other. It depends on your sources actually.

Both of these guys have sisters in the music business. One of them has an older sister who is more successful and well known than he is. The other has a twin sister who would have to be considered less successful than her brother, although he isn't exactly a household name.

Oh yeah...and, obviously, both are men. In fact, all 11 answers are male...not surprisingly.

Trivia Hint #5

I've given you hints regarding 7 of the 11 answers so far. I'm going to cover the remaining four in two more hints, for those of you who are still reading this, despite my decreased output of late.

Here goes...the final two indisputable answers also share both of their bands in common. Are you sensing a pattern here? Also, they share similar roles in both bands as the two answers that were the subject of hint #4. Am I making sense here?

Alright, I'll get even more obvious. Each of these pairs includes a guy who was the drummer of both bands shared in common. I don't need to give a further hint about the other two.

I'm not sure if that cleared anything up. Good luck.

Trivia Hint #4

I guess you could call this past week-plus another period of writer's block, although maybe it's more that I just haven't felt like writing at all. I'll get back on track, though I suppose the fact that it's over a month since my 40th birthday means it's starting to lose its luster.

Actually, the funny thing is (well, not really that funny) I started writing this because I wasn't going to give in to the usual dread that accompanies milestone birthdays. I was really doing a good job of that, or so I thought. However, in the time that has passed since I started this project, I met someone knew, started getting used to having her around, even if it was only a couple days a week, maybe even falling for her. This short-lived relationship has since come to an end, and over the past week I've found myself falling into the trap I was trying to avoid.

Well, fuck all that. I guess I'm going to have to have a good listen to Son Volt's "Drown" and move on. The ironic part, though, is that in a lot of ways, this recent attempt at romance reminds me too much of the initial circumstance that led to that song becoming an anthem of sorts. Whether or not this song still has the same effect on me, one thing I know for sure is that I'm not falling into the same extended funk that I did back in '96.

On to the trivia hint...the sixth and seventh answers to the question also share both of their bands in common. One of them also shares a band, not discussed at all in this blog, in common with one of the first five answers. That is, one of those for which I've already given a hint.

Trivia Hint #3

The fourth and fifth answers to the trivia question share both of their bands in common. Additionally, one of them attended the same high school as I, and the other holds the distinction of being the youngest of the 11, and is the only one born in the 70's.

Trivia Hint #2

The third answer to the trivia question is the only one of the 11 who is no longer alive. He and I also share a former city of residence, although he lived there very briefly and before I was born.

Trivia Hint #1

While I suffer through a bout of writer's block, I'm going to introduce the first of a series of hints to the trivia answers:

The first two of the 11 answers share one of their two bands in common, and although they both are credited with appearing on many of the same compilations, they never played together in that band. Also, one of these two shares a birthday with me, although he's a bit older.

By first two, I mean the first two revealed in my chronological list.

Trivia Part 4

Note: This post has been edited since it was first published on 5/24.

Well, this trivia question has turned into quite the fiasco. When I noticed my initial omission of four "lesser" members of two different bands on the list, in my haste to quickly acknowledge the error, I neglected to thoroughly research the status of all four of them.

As it turns out, despite the fact that various sources, including the inconsistently reliable Wikipedia, call them full-timers, I have come to believe that two of them might have only been part-timers. That is, they were full-time members of one band on the list, but only part-time members of a second. I actually emailed one of the guys through his web site, and he confirmed my suspicion. Despite this, I still think this falls into a gray area that is dependent upon the definition of an official member.

For the question, I did define an official member as someone who was considered a full member of the band for at least one album. These two guys come close, but apparently fall short of meeting this criterion. So, here's the deal. I’m still going to ask you to name all 11 to win the trivia contest, but I’m going to give a hint regarding the two debatable answers. Both are/were indisputably members of one band, but for the other band they played with, their involvement consisted of playing on the vast majority of songs on one album and touring to support said album.

I apologize for my lack of exhaustible research on this one. I could probably defend the excuse that this falls into the category of a gray area if not for the fact that I call myself a librarian. Anyway, I look forward to your efforts to answer this now very confusing question, and I'll explain further once we have a winner.

Trivia Part 3

Since I'm curious who's working on the answer to the trivia question, I'm going to offer up what amounts to be a bit of a hint. Anyone who sends me the number of answers they have so far will get a response indicating whether they are right or wrong. Numbers only, no actual guesses. I'll tell you if you have the number right, which may or may not help your cause. Remember, there are 11 answers in total.

Trivia Part 2

Before I continue, I've got to admit to a pretty significant error I made in my trivia question. There are, in fact, 11 different double-duty members of the Fab 40. It's pretty incredulous that I could make such a major mistake, although there is a pretty simple explanation. I'll get to that later.

I still think there's really no gray area regarding what constitutes a legitimate member of a band, but I'm going to clarify, just to be on the safe side. A "legitimate" member is defined as someone who is an official member of the band for at least one album. Simple enough? Well, I know there's potential for debate, but I think it's pretty clear with the artists in question.

I'm also going to make a slight modification to the rules. You can guess anytime you want, even prior to all of the bands involving these members being revealed, but you only get one guess. So, if you guess prematurely and you're wrong, you can't guess again. Considering there are 11 answers, I would suggest waiting it out a bit.